With Trade Minister Andrew Robb claiming that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement could be concluded “in a matter of weeks”, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) chief executive, Kate Carnell, has today called for greater transparency in negotiations whilst questioning the effectiveness of DFAT’s consultations on the TPP. From ABC News:
On Thursday businesses and other stakeholders in the United States were reportedly given the green light to view the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiating text.
Rumours of the content of the TPP abound, but this process, overseen by the US Trade Representative, gives stakeholders a chance to see the text and give feedback to their country’s negotiators. It’s a standard process in the United States, and one that Australia should consider emulating.
…citizens have a right to know what their governments are negotiating on their behalf…
Too many trade deals have failed to live up to the hype. The improved prosperity many of these deals purport to bring is only achieved if exporters actually take up the opportunities created. If businesses find these deals too complex, too inconsistent with other arrangements or too prescriptive, their enthusiasm for new markets will be greatly tempered…
The latest annual trade survey conducted by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry reveals the extent of the problem. The 227 businesses surveyed identified “complexity of rules and red tape for international trade” as their third biggest trade issue (behind overall competitiveness and a high exchange rate). Asked about 10 trade deals to which Australia is a party, the most common response was “I don’t understand it at all and don’t use it”. Clearly there’s room for improvement.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade recently stated that it had engaged in more than 1000 stakeholder briefings and consultations on the TPP between May 2011 and mid-2015. This was surprising for the many people in the business community who feel shut out of the process. Even if the quantity of stakeholders consulted is correct, the lack of detail on the proposed text would make it difficult for them to offer useful input…
The free trade agreements Australia has recently signed with Japan, South Korea and China could have benefited from this more thorough consultation. It is important they are assessed for their national welfare benefits before they are ratified. A decade on from the signing of the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement, it is clear that deal could have achieved higher take-up from Australian businesses if they had a chance to influence proceedings.
Australia appears on the cusp of signing the TPP and the South-East Asia-focused Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Before the negotiators reach for the flags and the chunky pens, they should take the time to ask their businesses whether the deals deliver the outcomes they are seeking. We need deals that support trade, not trophy cabinets.
That reads like a damning assessment of the TPP and completely contradicts Andrew Robb’s and DFAT’s claims of widespread community consultation.
Without the proper input from business and community groups, the TPP will very likely end up as another dog of a deal, just like the Australia-US FTA did a decade before.
Sadly, our politicians continually fail to learn from their mistakes in negotiating trade agreements. And until they do, they are destined to repeat them.
