NZ-China trade pact: Good or Bad?

The New Zealand Government is beaming with pride after signing a historic trade pact with China, while the Tibetan crisis rages on. But not long ago, Pacific nations were criticised for their own political dealings with China. So do terms like ‘cheque book diplomacy’ apply to Kiwis too?

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao meets New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark in Beijing. PHOTO: Xinhua

Pacific nations have often been criticised for their dealings with China. The word “cheque book diplomacy” meaning a trade off of promised funding in return for political support, is often bandied around as China competes with Taiwan to spread their influence in the region. But is New Zealand guilty of the same after signing a free trade agreement with China, while the current Tibetan crisis rages on?

The New Zealand Government has side-stepped pressure from the Free Tibet human rights campaign to sign a historic free trade agreement with economic superpower China. The signing, which took place at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing and overseen by prime minister Helen Clark and trade minister Phil Goff, is the first free trade agreement China has signed with any developed nation.

New Zealand business chiefs are already licking their lips at the prospects for exporters. "It's a huge day for Kiwi business," says Business NZ chief executive Phil O'Reilly.

China’s top brass has already indicated they wanted the new trade relationship to go beyond agricultural commodities into new areas such as co-operation on climate change policies and technology to mitigate carbon exposure.

China has agreed to a sweeping programme of tariff reductions that will ultimately result in 96 per cent of New Zealand's exports to it being tariff-free.

The first tariff cuts will start on October 1, once Parliament gives its formal approval.

The agreement is expected to be worth up to NZ$350 million a year to New Zealand through tariff reductions and market openings.

Some have criticised the trade pact has come at the expense of New Zealand’s silence on the current Tibetan crisis. Clark has defended the government’s actions saying there was “no cross over” between the trade deal and the crackdown on Tibetans by China.


BACKGROUND (source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

New Zealand is the first developed country to negotiate a free trade agreement with China.

Securing preferential access to China's economy has the potential to deliver significant gains to our exporters. It is the fastest growing major economy, currently growing at 9.5 per cent per annum. China is our fourth largest trading partner, taking over $1.6 billion of New Zealand's merchandise exports and over $1 billion of services. China's middle class is now estimated to be more than 100 million people and growing - which will fuel the demand for New Zealand's agricultural products. There should also be gains to New Zealand's manufacturers and services operators.

Other countries are also lining up to negotiate preferential trade agreements with China. New Zealand's negotiations with China will keep our exporters in the 'game' and help defend existing market shares - particularly in areas where China is already New Zealand's largest international customer - such as milk powder, wool and education.


China’s relationship with several Pacific island nations has been ridiculed as cheque book diplomacy, or money for votes. Is New Zealand guilty of the same after signing a free trade agreement with China in light of the current human rights breaches in Tibet?

Agree or disagree? Share your thoughts.

NB: Email addresses are required to register but are not published on this site and will remain confidential

Post Comment

Posted Comments

National Supporter 10-04-2008 10:44:31
I tend to agree with Savali on this one, but also Melvin when it comes to the benefits. But there is no difference, just the amount of money involved. The trade deal is worth in the billions. I dont think an island nation could muster a deal in that range. In both cases, it is cheque book diplomacy no matter how you look at it. That's why Winston Peters and most other business leaders who weren't consulted are currently questioning the motives behind the deal. Helen's words to the Chinese premier is soft, hollow at best. As if the Mr Wen would listen. If Helen really meant what she said, she would back what she did to Fiji and impose sanctions. No use sitting on the fence when she feels like it.

Melvin 10-04-2008 08:34:36
There is a difference between cheque book diplomacy where China gives generous loans to the islands to this deal, where there's no suchdeals and Kiwi companies still have to work hard to take advantage of it. At least Helen Clark still brought up the subject of Tibet and suggests the Chinese government at least talk to the Dalai Lama. Didn't Fiji & Samoa congratulate China for the way they dealt with the protests? For New Zealand to have the standard of living we expect we can't afford to turn down opportunities like this. No nation is perfect and if we became to holier than thou we'd be trading amongst ourselves in a subsistence environment. And that's not what our parents and grandparents came from the islands for.

Savali Filemu 09-04-2008 11:02:40
It's good for the NZ economy and I'm not surprised at the NZ govt pulling off something like this, months away from the election. They're after votes and they're trying to woo big business on their side. it's Politics and making money, human rights only counts when it suits them. So I guess the Kiwis (and Aussies) should stop pointing their big fingers at the Pacific islands everytime they strike a deal with the Chinese. It may be money for votes, but what NZ has done is no different - just on a different scale.

1 |

Search Site


Subscribe NOW!