Joshua Riley 🇳🇿

After one select committee, National's bill has gone from a U16 ban to mass internet censorship We have a front row seat to where this ends. The UK arrests 12,000/year for social media posts. People marching in the streets against immigration policies they can't protest online. Proposed bill expansion: ⚠️A new independent internet regulator with power to create binding rules without going back to Parliament ⚠️Force platforms to hand over proprietary algorithm designs to the regulator ⚠️Regulate recommendation systems ⚠️Explore restricting VPN use ⚠️A catch-all recommendation to "consider further matters" and task them to the regulator - the blank cheque

@MattKiwiNZ The media seems disinterested. x.com/VoteSovereign/…

@VoteSovereign I feel sick after reading that. WTF is our government thinking??? How do we get this into mainstream media before it’s too late?

"The FTA only allows 5000 TEE visas" Anyone who states this either hasn't read the treaty or is hoping you won't. Uncappable ICT visas are a SEPARATE category. National+ACT's new residence visas + the FTA will create an India migration portal. This appears to be coordinated.

Sean and Henry are way with the "5000 visas" claim. That's only one FTA visa category. The sleeping giant is the Intra-Corporate Transfer (ICT) visa. They are uncappable. National+ACT created new residence visas that ensure this FTA is a mass migration pipeline. x.com/VoteSovereign/…

🥴 Paul Henry thinks Free trade deals SHOULD include immigration concessions and that Winston Peters is completely wrong about the India FTA and New Zealand should have done this deal with India ‘years and years ago’. Clown world pigslop.

@mcmillankathot1 Great question. I think party loyalty and job security can be a motivator.

@VoteSovereign What the hell is wrong with the mps in government ? They have children & families too that will suffer?

Zespri has worked in India but they've been careful: they license SunGold only in UPOV countries (Italy, Japan, Korea, France, Greece) where breeders' rights are enforceable. They haven't licensed in India - where farmers can legally propagate and sell protected varieties under the PPV&FR Act. The risk isn't Zespri voluntarily handing over SunGold. It's that Plant & Food Research - a Crown Research Institute - developed the underlying kiwifruit cultivars. The FTA's Action Plans (Article 14A) commit NZ to 'exchange of high yield varieties of seeds and planting materials' and establishing Centres of Excellence in India. If those commitments require Plant & Food material, the government faces a choice between its treaty obligations and Zespri's commercial interests. And if the US$20B investment commitment falls through, India can claw back market access (Article 9.10) while keeping everything NZ transferred. Market access is conditional. Cultivar transfer is permanent. The Bioeconomy Science Institute - running the Kiwifruit Action Plan - estimates NZ expertise could increase Indian kiwifruit production by 10x.

@VoteSovereign Turns out that Zespri have been working with India for several years now and are chuffed with the India FTA. I made a fool of myself putting your information in front of others. I'm not happy with NZ being opened to India but we need to play straight with each other.

Negligence, Chinese theft and now the India FTA: The 3 ways NZ will have lost its kiwifruit advantage. 1. NZ developed the Hayward kiwifruit cultivar and we failed to protect it. Chile built an industry on it and became a major competitor. 2. China stole SunGold cuttings in 2016. Now there are 8,000+ hectares of illegal plantings producing $1B of pirated fruit. 3. The India FTA requires NZ to hand over premium plant varieties, breeding material, and growing expertise - and help India build the IP laws to commercially grow our protected cultivars. If India decides we haven't delivered enough, they cancel our market access. If the treaty collapses entirely, India keeps everything we transferred.

@GrantRoydhouse Come back when you have a counter for this that's more than your typical "that's bs" comment x.com/VoteSovereign/…

@VoteSovereign Your " facts" appear opinion, and I believe debateable. It is an ironic " fact" NZ First ( so called) on the one hand buddies the water on FTA... THEN SEEKS TO USE IT TO DEVELOP TRADE...

That's rich Parmjeet. "watch what people do" At the first reading you called for "a debate based on facts" - then spoke 700 words without citing a single treaty provision. You dismissed immigration concerns as "fear" without referencing a single clause. The FTA contains multiple uncappable visa channels that weren't mentioned by any ACT speaker. The UK ran an equivalent programme to the FTA ICT visas and reformed it after documented exploitation. That's evidence your party failed to address. Uncappable immigration has no place in an FTA, and has nothing to do with selling sheep wool.

@outofsecrets PM retirement benefits should be contingent on remaining in NZ.

@VoteSovereign It's a capitulating fool of a weak leader and one who will join the ranks of Clark Keys & Ardern in that he will move off shore with his family once he's done

These are not the words of a New Zealand leader. This dishonours generations of Kiwis who built the country his FTA will plunder. He repeats the line at Spark Arena.

@mango5004 Some who were close to negotiations should know. Others are likely ignorant. Omissions and misleading statements will be the subject of my oral submission.

@VoteSovereign Do they not care or do they not know, or do they do this knowingly and treasonously? No doubt MPs are forced to vote as directed by their Party.

It's time for accountability. 93 MPs voted yes. Not one mentioned uncappable visas or cultivar transfer. No one questioned the economic model that ignored its own immigration channels. Our submission on the India FTA enabling legislation - before the House votes a second time.

Nothing from that post is incorrect. I can't help you if you admiration for Stanford clouds reason. But surely you know she is the Immigration Minister and as such has direct responsibility for the uncappable ICT visas in the India FTA. As the Minister for Education she is actievly working on a much more draconian version of the social media ban Catherine Wedd put forward. If you want specifics I can provide them, but I won't entertain personal attacks because your favouritre MP doesn't have the track record you imagined.

@VoteSovereign @2ETEKA Joshua, I’ve been following you for a month and I am super impressed by your intellectual analysis. Why have you dropped your standards for such an important debate? Any average person could put their wild theories out on anything; I expect more ... ?

🚩Luxon sinks Inter-National to worst level since 2021. Govt ahead only by one seat thanks to NZ First continuing its steady climb. The polling period was 2-9th July so misses Luxon’s Modi worship humiliation ritual which has turned even more voters off National. They should have always dumped Luxon and gone to an early election when they had the chance. Iran kicking off again, inflation & interest rates raising so in 4 months time the economy is going to be worse. “National has slumped to its lowest level of support since Christopher Luxon became leader, while TOP has surged to within a whisker of Parliament in the latest RNZ-Reid Research poll. New Zealand First has also continued its upward climb, registering its strongest result in the Reid Research series in nine years” Michael Laws yesterday stated that the strong rumour around Wellington is National knows he’s terminal so will dump Te Gimp 2 months out from the election for Ardern MK11 Erica Stanford. Labour: 34% National: 28.7% NZ First: 11.5% Greens: 10.3% ACT: 7.8% Opportunity: 4.7% TPM: 2.3%

@UKRiotsUKRiots @2ETEKA x.com/VoteSovereign/…

@UKRiotsUKRiots @2ETEKA Depends on how you like representation served x.com/VoteSovereign/…

@2ETEKA Bishop tried the China FTA comparison but forgot that China trade heavily benefits from dairy - which India refused to allow.

🚩This is damning for Luxon, National, Act & Labour. The FTA is as bad as they are denying it is. Footage most people haven’t seen from the India FTA select committee,reveals that FTA has duplicitous clauses that determines the NZ $ 33 Billion of direct investment into India IS an obligation. Hats off to National MP & Chair of the committee Tim van de Molen for identifying the sub clause and its implications, and for pushing back on the bureaucrats & a Labour MP. First time i’ve ever commended a Greens MP, however Lawerence Xu Nan correctly states that the FTA will only add 0.1% ($500m) of GDP by 2046, which is 1/40th of the NZ $33 billion of investment from NZ we are expected to ‘promote’ into India. Vangelous Vitalis (dep. Sec Trade & economic) replies that treasury traditionally understates the GDP growth in the modelling, but they expect it to be much larger than 0.1% “just like it was with china” The problem with Vitalis reply, is that 15 years after signing the China FTA, exports to China while larger than forecast, they were just 2.5 times larger than the original forecast. So for NZ to break even on the NZ $33 billion committed to India, Treasury’s forecasted exports would need to be 66 times bigger.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ We need to beat the forecast by SIXTY SIX TIMES. Mind blowing. This brings us to the $33 billion dollar question - highlighted by Tim Van de Molen. In article 9.10. It allows India to take remedial measures (reapply tarrifs) until NZ meets its obligations to promote $33 BN into India. Vitalis points to clause 9.2, which frames this as only an “aim” — a point Van de Molen accepts. However, he remains very concerned by 9.10(3), which states that if India believes insufficient progress has been made on one-way investment, all concessions can be withdrawn until NZ (specifically) delivers $20 billion US ($33 Billion) in investment.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Three times van de Molen (a farmer) circles back t sub clause 3, Vitalis brings in his legal representative, and then Labours Vanushi Walters (a NGO Lawyer) infers Tim is reading it wrong, before concerning he is right and then says “oh it’s just poor drafting” - the whole issue is left unresolved, after Nationals Tim Costley (edited out) interrupts like a dumbo to bring up student numbers and Winston Peters - side tracking the discussion before van de Molen once again circled back to the issue before Walters again changes topic to some frivolous issue. Tim van de Molen has his head on his shoulders and is in the wrong party. Luxon has been conned by India - and it’s us who will pay the price.

@TomofNZ1 "The agreement facilitates licensing and commercialisation of protected cultivars" The FTA makes market access conditional on transfer. India doesn't want to buy our fruit, they want to grow it themselves. The IP risk should have killed this idea.

Yeah, India’s PVR regime and enforcement risks are fair concern. But that’s a commercial risk, not evidence that the FTA requires NZ to surrender cultivar IP. The agreement facilitates licensing and commercialisation of protected cultivars, it doesn’t mean assignment of ownership. The real question is whether the expected royalties and market access justify the IP risks. That’s presumably why the FTA also commits to improving India’s plant variety rights and IP framework

@Dysart123 This is especially true for the treaty process. auckland.ac.nz/assets/law/Doc…

@VoteSovereign The NZ doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is problematic to say the least.

Laws that the government are currently forcing on NZ Unchecked police surveillance powers Full government access to all digital messaging services Social media user identification Full tracking of every vehicle in NZ At a minimum these should be decided with referendums

@dellgirl67 Glad you could make use of it!

@VoteSovereign Many thanks for your hard yards on this issue of sovereignty Josh. Have borrowed your very important points in support of declining this bill.

India's PPV Act explicitly allows farmers to save and sell seeds of even protected varieties. Ownership without control over propagation is useless. If we help change their PVR Act it is still only India domestic law which they are free to change again as they wish. They rejected UPOV - the international plant variety protection regime - and are not bound by it.

True that India has little regard for IP rights as of today and to prosecute is very challenging. NZ-India need to get this sorted first and I believe that is well recognised. Your last point though “they keep the IP”. Really? In this case Plant Variety Rights (IP) is legally owned, India cannot just take ownership

@be46990499 They are reducing safeguards instead. Last year they removed the requirement for NZQA assessment for many Indian degrees.

@VoteSovereign What safeguards are in place to prevent a flood of fake credentials; doctors, nurses, electrical & civil engineers writing exams with answer sheets provided? What penalties are in place against employers for not vetting effectively? Playing with fire. youtube.com/watch?v=7Y1YIy…

No transfer of cultivars and skills means no access to their markets. That is coercion to transfer IP just to sell into India that these companies would not do otherwise. That is not a part of any trade agreement prior to this FTA. India is ranked one of the worst IP offenders in the world. If the FTA falls through, or tariffs are clawed back due to our inability to invest an improbable FDI amount into India, they keep the IP and we lose everything - the investment along with our competitive advantage.

Have read it. Are you sure it’s accurate? The FTA does not require compulsory surrender of cultivar ownership. It’s by agreement and subject to relevant IP protection in India and NZ. Thats like any commercial licensing agreement where a company has chosen to out licence its IP to another party. Firstly, NZ-India must create conditions in which protected cultivars can be licensed, grown, and protected in India, and then NZ will receive a royalty income stream in return. That’s leveraging our IP and is generally how it’s done.

@TomofNZ1 See Section 3 of our submission above.

@VoteSovereign What is the concern regarding cultivar transfer?