Scrap AUSFTA
It has now been a number of years since the Australia United States Free Trade Agreement was singed. At the time when negotiations were being carried out, the Australian government tried to make the deal behind the back of the Australian people. It was not even presented before parliament. Such was the fear of the reaction should the word get around.
The word did get out and this led to a broad based campaign of exposure. It was not popular at all. Opponents predicted that the agreement would lead in the end to a restriction of government services, an increase of agricultural imports (at the expense of formers and rural communities), a fall in the degree of Australian content in the electronic media and art, a further deregulation of finance, pressure on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and a relaxation of Australia’s quarantine standards, to name a few.
Overall, there was a prediction that the agreement would work towards strengthening an unequal relationship with the United States, because Australia would be pressured into compliance, while the other party could and would openly violate its commitments at will. One example of this coming true has been the noticeable rise in agricultural imports into Australia, while the United States continues to maintain a protective practice to its own agriculture. The point is that Australia dies not have the means to address this.
Supporters of the Agreement have argued that Australia won a number of exemptions. These are important concessions, made as a result of growing community opposition. They are also limited, because of the built in ratchet condition. This means that the exemptions are only temporary. They must be pulled back in time. This brings us to the present point of time. A case in point is the pressure brought on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. The US is keen to have this removed as far as possible to assist American pharmaceutical companies to export drugs to Australia. The existence of cheaper generic brands is regarded as a barrier to free competition. Another principal if the agreement is that government intervention in the market should be reduced.
Another place where the effect has been considerable is in regard to local content in the electronic media. While on paper there remains a degree of local content regulation, although this has been watered down considerably and remains only temporary, there is no local content for new technologies. It does not apply to new digital TV channels. A similar thing will happen with radio. Government support across the arts is in question. What we are already getting is a wholesale Americanisation of Australian culture and it stands to get worse. There is no similar opening of the floodgates for Australian culture to flow into the United States.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. Australia is due to make further concessions on a broad range of fronts. The United States will soon raise the pressure on the Australian government to deliver.
The point is that the Australia United states Free Trade Agreement was never in the interests of Australia. It puts us at a disadvantage. Trade with others is a good thing, but it must always be on the basis of an equal partnership. This is not what the Australia United states Free Trade Agreement is about. It needs to be put to an end.
