Rather than undertake real reform, the Abbott government has relied heavily on so-called “free trade agreements” to prove it has an economic vision. But there is growing evidence that it has has rushed to sign such such agreements, often at the expense of good trade outcomes for Australia.
Indeed, Abbott’s obsession with signing up to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, apparently at any cost, seems less about rational policy than blind ideology. The government has sought to portray opposition to the TPP as xenophobic and anti-free trade — but that position is looking shakier by the minute.
Last week the chairman of the Productivity Commission, Peter Harris, proposed that his organisation undertake a formal assessment of the TPP’s costs and benefits before Australia signs it. It would be a small price to pay for having an independent assessment of exactly what good — and what harm — the TPP will do to Australia. Remember, this is an agreement that will enable foreign companies to use foreign courts to sabotage public policy here via investor-state dispute settlement. It’s a big deal.
But in keeping with the obsessive secrecy of DFAT’s negotiations, the government is deeply resistant to any scrutiny of the deal.
Why? If DFAT’s bureaucrats and Andrew Robb haven’t done anything to damage our national interests in negotiating the treaty, they should welcome the scrutiny. If they’ve done nothing wrong, they will have nothing to hide.
…..but then there is that ridiculous phrase ‘commercial in confidence’ which gives all business and government virtual ‘carte blanch’ to do as they see fit for their own benefit.
From what little we now know about the TPP, it is an abomination.
Surely there must be some way we can stop this ideological government from harming Australia’s interests further?
Why don’t these all-embracing deals have to be voted on by the parliament before they are signed?
Why must we believe what this government tells us about the TPP, when many of us wouldn’t trust their word on anything?
It escapes me how a country can sign up to a trade treaty without the parliament getting a look at it.
Commercial in confidence is a lie, and ISDS is a gift to multi-nationals, you know, those guys who pay a pittance of tax and get to export our money to low tax regimes.
I can’t see how that could be good for us. As for the FTA with the USA, we just bend over and take whatever is offered, all for the price of a picfac with the leader of the free world.
“If they’ve done nothing wrong, they will have nothing to hide.”
Isn’t this this same line that governments wanting access to metadata and online activities say? The same line that Crikey have often opposed.
Regardless what one might think of the TPP and free trade deals in general aren’t all negotiations done best behind closed doors and not in the open? I don’t recall the Iran negotiations done with journalists in the room.
If anyone needs an example of the iniquity of ISDS,consider Philip Morris/plain packaging.
Or the upcoming Shenhua coal mine should they be in the slightest discomfitted by silly little things like citizens objecting or piffling sovereignty.