This is untidy and does not enhance New Zealand’s reputation with the world’s most populous nation.
You would have to question if it is really only political pride that is stopping Prime Minister Christopher Luxon from picking up the phone to Labour leader Chris Hipkins and saying, “Chris, I really need your support to get the India free-trade deal over the line”?
If so, it is now way past time to swallow it.
Hipkins has reason to be sore.
The current political angst, which is providing racially tinged headlines to the point where India’s key players must wonder why they bothered negotiating with New Zealand in the first place, is not really about the actual deal.
That is imperfect. Just like most deals New Zealand has signed.
But our two major political parties have historically been the “adults in the room” when it comes to trade, and have each played significant roles in evolving free-trade agreements (FTAs) into the comprehensive economic partnerships of today, including with the “movement of people” which so exercises smaller parties.
Fundamentally, this row comes down to political respect and experience.
To put it bluntly, if Hipkins were still Prime Minister I doubt he would have any compunction in calling Luxon and saying, “I need your support to get this deal in place”.
But he would have had sufficient political nous to do it sooner – not after the deal was concluded. Particularly given that New Zealand First was always expected to deny National a majority to pass the FTA legislation.
Just like the party did back in the day when Labour had to turn to National for support to pass its legislation for the ground-breaking China free-trade deal.
The problem is that Luxon did not do Labour the courtesy of briefing Hipkins and former Trade Minister Damien O’Connor (currently Labour’s trade spokesman) well ahead of the conclusion of the FTA negotiations on December 22, 2025, and seeking feedback when there was an opportunity to take that on board.
There was, however, a “phone around” just ahead of the Beehive announcement.
Officials also were not allowed to confidentially brief Labour’s key players well ahead of the talks’ conclusion.
But key players from the dairy sector, which is not a major winner this time round, were briefed and agreed not to publicly oppose the deal.
Here’s another truth.
When Hipkins was Prime Minister for a brief nine months in 2023, he talked up the invitation Narendra Modi extended to him to visit India and talk about a bilateral FTA.
This was during what was described as a “fast but furious” visit to Papua New Guinea (just 23 hours in Port Moresby, the PNG capital), where he had a chance for his first meeting with the Indian Prime Minister.
During the election campaign, the Herald reported that after securing trade deals with Britain and the European Union, Hipkins’ next priority would be to lead a prime ministerial delegation to India within the first 100 days of a new Government.
Labour had faced allegations it was ignoring India, now the world’s most populous country, since before the Covid-19 pandemic.
Former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern never visited the country.
The last prime ministerial visit was by Sir John Key in 2016. But O’Connor did go with a large trade mission to the country before the election.
Both Chrises were always going to pursue a deal.
It’s just that with the virtue of prime ministerial incumbency, Luxon got there first, and Hipkins needs to ensure that political pique is not a factor in his opposition.
There are two issues which persist.
The US$20 billion aspirational target for New Zealand investment in India – that is an absurdity. But look at it another way. The door is being opened wide far faster to our companies to invest than occurred with China.
There is an opportunity, for instance, for educational firms (including universities) to set up operations in India.
The deal will evolve and it will be no bad thing if it spurs our tech firms – which are our third-largest export sector – to make forays into the India market and to become more productive and competitive.
Agri exporters are also looking at the role they can play in investing in India’s less-developed rural industries.
The other issue is “movement of people”.
Frankly, this is not that markedly different from the China FTA. New Zealand Governments will still retain the right to set standards.
The deal was done super-fast.
But both India and New Zealand face election realities.
Indian Trade and Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal had been clear that the window to negotiate the deal would close in late 2025.
He needs to talk up some wins on his side or he will face opposition from those who say, “Why deal with a pipsqueak?”
In my view, it is way past time to stop the over-moralising and grow up.
If we can’t demonstrate that we are serious – that we can separate long-term strategy from short-term bipartisan ruffles – India has plenty of other suitors.
Catch up on the debates that dominated the week by signing up to our Opinion newsletter – a weekly round-up of our best commentary.
