This treaty been publicly listed on the under negotiation treaty page on NZ Gov website for years [1] (Internet Archive link as its now obviously moved to a different page). This includes the guiding principles/objectives for NZ, key outcome targets, various status updates and the ability for the public to make submissions regarding the treaty. This is more than enough to understand the context and purpose of the treaty -- the actual text is generally not publicly available until it has been agreed (there would be little point, there are near continuous changes as the negotiations occur).

I'm not from NZ, but once the treaty text has been concluded the ratification process looks similar to Australia and involves fairly extensive public review (NZ process detailed [2]). You're welcome to read the couple hundred pages national interest analysis, economic analysis and cabinet papers on the treaty as well [3].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200122083058/https://www.mfat.... [2] https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/About-us-Corporate/Treaties-... [3] https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free...

Totally. Wtf. TPPA was headlines for years, now this is signed and I've never heard of it. And I follow the news pretty closely. (kiwi here)

I'm an Ozzie. When the TPAA died it was pretty clear the Chinese were rubbing their hands in glee. Trump had handed them the Trump card in trade negotiations, as it were. This is from 2017:

https://rymndp.wordpress.com/2017/01/26/us-withdrawal-on-tra...

It's funny how it's all turned out. Trump ditched the TPAA, and along with it all those onerous copyright laws everybody hated. So we got a nicely watered down version. China steps into the void. But now on the day the RCEP they championed is signed, China ups the ante on the trade war it's having with Australia. They've banned just our wine imports, and threatening iron ore is next.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/markets/r/ar-BB1b2NMT

The trigger for this trade war? Our prime minister called for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19, right after Trump intimated it was bio-engineered by China and they were engaged in a cover up. Right now China is engaged in what looks to be genocide against their Muslim population, the Uighurs, egregious breaking of agreements with the UK over Hong Hong, threats to Taiwan, destabilising "Island Building" in the South China Sea, and we choose to take a principled stand over a ... conspiracy theory.

I don't know what it feels like in NZ, but we Ozzies feel like we are living in interesting times.

> Right now China is engaged in what looks to be genocide against their Muslim population, the Uighurs

Enlighten me, please.

You have a government which seems to try to out-Trump Trump on China, not recognising that the US-China policies are about to do a 180 and you guys will be left holding the bag - the bag of having pissed off your biggest export market.

There will be no 180 so long as china’s reckless belligerence in the region continues. In a time when china could have consolidated its soft power, it ends up pissing off nearly every neighbor and starts a land war with India. The Quad is likely to be more influential in the region than this trade agreement.

Utter suprise here too. Media has done an amazing job of keeping quiet about this one.

We got Murdoch owning 90% of the news and the other 10% too scared to piss him off.

What's your excuse?

- Straya

...

More seriously though, my guess is this is normally the thing that would hit the news cycle a month or two out but because of covid and every media outlet in the world cashing in on the last few rounds of trump derangement I'm not surprised it was missed.

"We". FUD.

Something an individual doesn't know doesn't mean it's done in secret.

No it's quite literally done behind closed doors and we have no say in it. The last time a deal was proposed this way, it only came out when it was leaked - as it weakened our IP laws to that so they're comparable with the USA.

If we're able to be sued by US patent trolls or Apple for round corners, there's not a single company in this country that could afford to fight it. Singing happy birthday was never an issue in this part of the world.

No thanks.

This is how negotiations work everywhere for any kind of deal. Think of some successful past legislation you support - I guarantee that it was negotiated behind closed doors.

Negotiation requires fluidly proposing alternatives in a give-and-take that ultimately leads to an agreement. When the items being given or taken are policies supported or opposed by members of the public, it would be self-sabotage for one half of the negotiation to expose its deliberations to public debate.

Imagine you’re a couple making an offer to buy a house. Do you think it would be smart to expose all your internal discussions about the purchase to the seller along with the offer? Do you think you’d ever succeed at buying a home at a good price if you always made such a disclosure?

I think this argument that a treaty was secretly negotiated is better understood as a general-purpose process argument that can be applied against any treaty or law, not as a meaningful criticism of any in particular. It’s just how the sausage is made.

wtf are you talking about? most laws are proposed, debated in public with riders attached, provisions added/removed, etc. in public.

If FTAs were too and if citizens groups were to have a say we'd be putting provisions for putting tariffs on if environmental and worker provisions are not respected rather than a semi private court process where corporations can sue governments for lost profits.

There’s a public process when provisions are added to the laws, but the discussions where each side figures out whether their proposal is going to pass happens in private before the actual votes.

You do have a say, after the negotiations are complete. If you don't like it, call your representatives, vote, etc. If they have to go back and renegotiate, then that is what it is.

There has been many rounds of talks since 2014 when ASEAN countries proposed this. There must be some exposures during the past 6 years. The agreement now needs each country's domestic approval, so you can still have a say in it. The agreement is not in effect yet.

> it weakened our IP laws to that so they're comparable with the USA.

This statement literally makes no sense to me. Care to elaborate? As it stands, I have to admit that your statement suggests to me that you haven't the vaguest idea about U.S. versus NZ IP laws and perhaps have also gotten the idea of strong vs. weak IP laws entirely backwards. Enlighten me, please.