New Aust trade policy fails to mention PACER Plus as a priority
Updated
Australia may be going cold on the proposed PACER Plus trade agreement with the Pacific Islands
Australia's Trade Policy Statement launched by Trade Minister, Craig Emerson, today signals a change of focus for Australia's trade negotiations and sets out a list of trade priorities, which does not include PACER plus.
Presenter: Jemima Garrett, Pacific Economic and Business reporter
Speaker: Patricia Ranald, Convenor of Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network
- Listen:
- Windows Media
RANALD: The most interesting thing for PACER Plus is it is not mentioned in the document, the government is actually prioritising its regional and bilateral trade agreements, and PACER Plus is not on the list of priorities.
GARRETT: Now there is quite a long list of priorities, what does appear on the list?
RANALD: Well the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement, which is an agreement being negotiated between the US, New Zealand, Australia and six other countries in the Asia Pacific is there, but not PACER Plus. And then there are a series of bilateral agreements with South Korea, Japan, China, Indonesia, etc.
GARRETT: So where does this leave PACER Plus exactly?
RANALD: Well as we understand it from talking to the government, the PACER Plus negotiations are under review. We have put to the government in the past that PACER Plus is really not about trade, and in fact previous government ministers have said in the past that Australia doesn't expect to get trade benefits from PACER Plus. That it's really about development. And we have said to the government well if it's about development it shouldn't be a trade agreement, it should be about development relationships or other relationships. You don't have to force that into a trade agreement framework. So we hope that the review includes some attention being paid to that argument.
GARRETT: So with PACER Plus under review does that mean it's likely to be moved from being a trade deal to being some other kind of deal, or is there a risk that it will be dropped altogether?
RANALD: Well it's not clear at this stage but the government is saying that it doesn't want to have trade agreements for the sake of having them, and it will only enter into trade agreements which are of direct benefit to Australia. Now previous trade ministers have said that PACER Plus is not about trade benefits for Australia, it's about development of the Pacific Islands. And we think that the trade agreement framework isn't suitable for that kind of perspective because especially the sort of template of trade agreements that's been pursued in the past doesn't necessarily assist development at all. These are very small economies and very vulnerable, and simply getting them to remove all trade barriers doesn't necessarily assist development. So we hope that that is the perspective that's being considered.
GARRETT: So from what you're saying it sounds as if you think a whole better deal could come out of this?
RANALD: I wouldn't go so far as to say that. I guess I'm saying that we hope that the perspective that we've put about the impact on trade on Pacific Islands is being considered, and that genuine development opportunities are being considered.
GARRETT: Australia has put enormous effort into winning over Pacific countries. PACER Plus has the support of Pacific Island Forum leaders, and some countries like Samoa and Papua New Guinea are very keen on it. Will these countries be invited to make contributions to the review of PACER Plus?
RANALD: I really don't know what form the review has taken, so I can't really comment on that. But I also know that some governments in the Pacific have been reluctant to enter into a sort of comprehensive free trade agreement type package. So what we're hoping is that a development perspective will be considered in this review.
If you want to view the Australian government's Trade policy statement, the link is: http://www.dfat.gov.au/publications/trade/trading-our-way-to-more-jobs-and-prosperity.pdf
