Don’t let the Singapore agreement pass without a fight. Make it as difficult as possible politically for progress to be made on the other deals in the wings, let alone ratified:

• The possibility of Singapore-like agreements with other countries, such as the one already proposed with Hong Kong.
• The CER/ASEAN Free Trade Agreement deal (where New Zealand is represented by Bill Birch!) which would expand the Singapore agreement to all of ASEAN and Australia.
• Extraordinarily dangerous investment agreements with Chile and Argentina that were signed by Nationals’s Lockwood Smith in 1999. They require only Cabinet approval to go into effect. The Chile one has expropriation provisions very like the MAI and NAFTA, and a 15 year term. Mixed with the Singapore agreement, it could be doubly dangerous. Similar ones are in place with China and Hong Kong.
• A review under CER that could lead to further deregulation.
• A declared intent to pursue full free trade agreements with Chile and the US.
• The WTO negotiations continue and the full round will revive at some time.
• APEC is there in the background, and underpinned the Singapore agreement.
• The threat of abandoning our currency.

Democratise the process used to approve such arrangements. The process for the Singapore agreement was an improvement, but was still a farce. We will have wider support on this than on the substantive issue. Essential ingredients include:

• Prior to negotiations, an independent National Interest Analysis of the proposal
• During negotiations, real consultation, not just one way assurances to invited parties, informed by periodic releases of negotiating drafts of agreements. Without drafts we must take the word of officials and politicians with vested interests in a successful outcome. That was shown to be completely unreliable in this case.
• Another independent National Interest Analysis after completion of negotiations, release of the final text, and normally several months for public debate, submissions to a Select Committee, and binding vote by Parliament.
• The process should apply to amendments, extensions and changes in commitments to arrangements as well as to new ones. Including education and health under the Singapore Agreement’s services provisions or GATS would be of huge significance, and needs simply a change to agreement schedules.

We can work for these through the bill on treaties currently before Parliament under the name of Green MP, Keith Locke (there was also the review of Parliamentary Standing Orders, but submissions closed at the end of November).

Place a moratorium on further agreements until an independent review has been made of the effects of previous agreements and the public have had an opportunity to debate these issues and have their say. The world’s political climate has changed radically with the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the Seattle debacle and the numerous demonstrations, critical reports and studies that have followed. The aim is to begin building an environment focusing on development as an end, using trade and investment as means to that end. Fair trade cannot survive in the present environment.

Look for new groupings internationally with countries that are of similar mind, and take part in the international movement to rebuild a development agenda.

Examine the commitments that have been made in the WTO and elsewhere and ensure we do no more than is necessary legally to fulfil them. That is a survival task. Look at the possibility of withdrawing from either individual sector commitments or whole agreements.

Reconstruct some development tools. Strengthen the Overseas Investment regulations – start by putting back the $10 million threshold (from the current $50 million) and putting enforceable "bad character" laws in place to exclude undesirable corporations; restore meaningful national interest criteria; make use of the tariffs we still have the right to impose, and extend them; prepare capital and exchange controls; and more.