AFTINET Bulletin No. 164
February 2010
1. Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement - UPDATE
2. Catching Counterfeiters – Not Likely
3. WTO Update
4. FTA’s UPDATE
5. General Trade News
6. Coming Events
7. New Resources available on our website
1 Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement - UPDATE
The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is a proposed new
regional free trade agreement which builds on an existing Free Trade
Agreement between New Zealand, Chile, Singapore and Brunei Darussalam.
The negotiations now include the United States, Australia, Peru and
Vietnam. The US has also extended invitations to Japan and Malaysia,
though neither has taken up this invitation, with Malaysia saying it
will wait and see what happens at the first meeting.
Official negotiations begin in Melbourne on 15th March 2010. Four negotiation meetings are planned during 2010.
You may remember the campaign in 2003-4 about the US-Australia Free
Trade Agreement. The US government and companies identified the
following Australian health, social and environmental polices as
barriers to trade that they wanted to remove or change:
- Price controls under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme,
which ensure affordable access to medicines and kept Australian
medicine prices three to ten times below US prices
- Labelling of genetically engineered food
- Australian content rules in audio-visual media like film and television
- The Foreign Investment Review Board
- Quarantine regulations
- Local content requirements for government purchasing
The US government also wanted an investor-state disputes process, which
would have given US companies the right to sue Australian governments
for damages on the grounds that environmental or other public interest
laws could harm their investments. US companies have used this process
in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to sue Canadian and
Mexican governments for millions of dollars and to force them to change
environmental protection laws which were different from US laws.
Our biggest victory was the exclusion of the investor-state complaints
process, which means that US companies did not gain extra rights to sue
Australian governments. The Australia-US FTA is the only US free trade
agreement which does not include this process. We also prevented
changes to genetically engineered food regulation, and limited the
changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
The agreement also had very weak labour and environment clauses, which
were not legally based on International Labour Organisation standards,
but committed each government only to implement its own laws, with no
penalties.
All of these issues are now back on the agenda, because the Australian
government has agreed to negotiate with the US, Chile, Peru, Brunei,
Singapore New Zealand and Vietnam to develop a multilateral free trade
agreement based on the bilateral FTAs the US has with five of these
countries.
This means that all of the issues we kept out of the US–Australia FTA
will be up for negotiation again. We know from submissions made by US
business groups that they want to use the negotiations to obtain more
changes in all of the areas listed above. And there will be strong
pressure for Australia to accept an investor-state complaints process,
because four of the other bilateral FTAs include this process.
We are asking our member organisations to sign on to 8 principles for
the TPPA negotiations to be sent to Trade Minister Simon Crean, as part
of the campaign. We have set a deadline for organisations to sign-on by
10th March 2010 to allow us to get this to the Minister and release it
to the media.
We are setting up an email/letter campaign to run from our website for individual members to get involved.
Our website has been updated with current information about the TPPA. A number of links and documents are available.
Please regularly check the AFTINET website for updates on this campaign.
2 Catching Counterfeiters – Not Likely
This article has been written for AFTINET by Dr Luigi Palombi, Centre
for the Governance of Knowledge and Development, Research School of
Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
Have you ever bought a fake ‘Rolex’ or ‘Gucci’ handbag? You knew it was
fake when you bought it. “So what?” you thought. You wanted the cachet
without having to pay the astronomical price for the genuine article.
Well, you might have to think twice if the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement (ACTA) becomes a reality.
You see, ACTA is a proposed international trade agreement which is
about protecting intellectual property rights. Which seems completely
fair and reasonable. Simply put, if the theft of physical property is a
criminal offence then why should intellectual property theft be treated
differently? - a point which the film and television copyright owners
make in the introductory sequence of DVDs hired or sold in Australia.
And it’s a message that politicians are waking up to. Simon Crean, our
trade minister, said that Australia is seeking to “combat the high
levels of trade in counterfeit and pirated goods worldwide”. According
to an OECD report the estimated worldwide value of this trade in 2005
was US$200 billion.
Across the Tasman, the New Zealand government has joined Australia and
a cohort of countries that are seeking to bring IP pirates to justice.
ACTA’s key sponsor is the United States, but the European Union and
Japan are closely involved, as are Canada, Mexico, Singapore, Republic
of Korea and Morocco.
Supporters include The Anti-Counterfeiting Group Campaigning Against
the Trade in Fakes, an English association which “represents the
interests of UK and multinational companies”. It says fake products now
extend to “almost everything you can think of, from car parts to
pharmaceuticals, toys to mobile phones”. The group says they are also
dangerous: “fake spirits can contain high levels of methanol ...
counterfeit perfume can often burn your skin or leave you with a nasty
rash ... and a women died in Scotland after drinking fake vodka”. Fair
enough, these disreputable products are a problem.
Yet there is growing disquiet about ACTA. Reputable people and
organisations are beginning to speak up. Anna George, a former DFAT
diplomat, says: “the question is not whether counterfeit goods have
terrible consequences - we know fake pharmaceuticals (mostly in
developing countries), fake aircraft parts, fake Botox and the like are
of acute concern - but this is not the key rationale, especially when
ACTA includes copyright issues attached to the internet and
trademarks”. And her retort to those that use these obvious dangers as
the cause célèbre is that most countries already have “a whole range of
border security ... to deal with such events”. Indeed most consumer
protection agencies will act quickly to ban the sale of goods which
pose such obvious risks to consumer safety.
A collation of associations which include the Australian Library and
Information Association, the Australian Digital Alliance, Choice and
the Internet Industry Association are concerned that ACTA is like
taking a sledge-hammer to a nut especially when it threatens the
“legitimate commercial, social, innovative and creative activities, the
rights of consumers or the free flow of information”. You see ACTA is
subject to secrecy obligations. Why hide the details if the objective
is truly altruistic? And for those of you who might not remember, the
trigger for what became the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), one of the pillars of the WTO,
was the counterfeit bogie.
3 WTO Update
The various WTO working groups have been meeting constantly since the
December 2009 Geneva Ministerial meeting with further rounds of
discussions scheduled over the coming weeks. Little progress has been
made and arguments are still happening around the March 2010 stocktake
of the Doha Development Round of negotiations, ordered by Ministers in
December.
Trade Ministers met in the margins of the World Economic Forum held
from 27-31 January 2010 in Davos, Switzerland, where they continued
discussions on a range of outstanding issues. No movement occurred at
Davos – with the US still without an endorsed ambassador to the WTO.
The Director General of the WTO, Pascal Lamy, maintains that conclusion
of the Doha round of negotiations depends on political will – making it
more important than ever that we continue our focus on keeping the
Australian Government to its promises about trade justice.
Whilst the December 2009 Ministerial meeting reiterated the desire to
complete the Doha round in 2010, this looks extremely unlikely for a
number of reasons including:
- Elections, which will delay any movement, are to occur in
several key countries including the US, Brazil, Japan, UK and
significant EU changes are being bedded in.
- The next ministerial meeting was scheduled for the end of 2011, making it evident that the round will not conclude in 2010.
- The
G33 and G20 groups of developing nations are refusing to capitulate to
the demands of the US and EU to open up their markets further. With
Brazil, India, China and South Africa leading the way, the developing
nations are very clear that the Trade in Services demands of the
developed nations, the US in particular, are unrealistic and it is
unreasonable to expect that the round could be concluded by additional
unilateral concessions from developing countries.
- Ongoing
monitoring of the positions of the key developing countries Brazil,
South Africa, India and China (now called the BASIC group) is required.
India and Brazil have both indicated some movement is possible but that
the development focus needs to be central. No further movement is
expected.
- A number of industrialised countries, most notably
the US, Australia and the EU, are now openly saying that bi-lateral and
regional free trade agreements are the way to implement the neo-liberal
free trade agenda. The industrialised countries have taken this stance
in an attempt to gain momentum for their WTO demands by creating a
sufficient number of bi-lateral and regional free trade agreements.
4 FTA Updates
PACER Plus
In February we joined our Pacific friends at the Pacific Network on
Globalisation (PANG) in supporting Pacific Island Governments demands
to delay the initially 2010 meeting of officials to negotiate the PACER
Plus Free Trade Agreement.
The demands came as the newly appointed Chief Trade Advisor, Dr Chris
Noonan, refused to sign his contract and went public with his concerns
about the contract he was offered and the interference of the Pacific
Islands Forum Secretariat, a body dominated by ex-pat advisors.
The demands have been successful and the initial meeting has been
postponed. Advice was received on 22nd February 2010 that Dr Noonan’s
contract has now been revised to reflect the independence of his office
and he has now signed.
Dr Noonan’s preparedness to take on the PIF Secretariat bodes well for
his new role. We and PANG will closely monitor to ensure that Dr Noonan
lives up to expectations and independently advises the Pacific Island
Countries on PACER Plus.
A number of significant issues remain and are of concern. These include
the consultative process, the apparent one sided nature of the
potential outcomes, the removal of the rights of governments to ensure
equitable access to essential services, capacity constraints both in
terms of personnel available and the number of agreements the Pacific
Island Governments are currently negotiating. These are but a few of
the concerns about this agreement and we need to maintain our vigilance
and work with our Pacific Island colleagues to ensure a fair and
equitable outcome.
Australia-Japan FTA
There should be no movement or developments until after the Japanese
Upper House elections are held in mid-2010, followed by Australian
elections. After this period it will depend on the election results –
however agriculture will still cause significant difficulties,
regardless of the election results. We will monitor developments –
including those which will crop up outside of any direct talks around
the FTA.
Australia-China FTA
The FTA negotiations are unlikely to go far, if anywhere this year. The
14th round will commence on 22nd March 2010 in Canberra. Significant
differences between the two countries continue in the areas of
agriculture, investment, and service liberalisation, as well as the
Australian Government’s commitments to Australian Industry plans such
as the Textile Industry Plan and Automotive Industry Plan.
Republic of Korea
The fourth round of negotiations is scheduled to take place in Seoul in
March 2010. The big delaying issues are trade in services, the auto
industry and agricultural trade. If Australia is prepared to sell out
agriculture then this FTA will move, but it is unlikely, particularly
in an election year, that this would happen.
Australia-Malaysia FTA
The next meeting is scheduled for Kuala Lumpur in April 2010. There are
still significant differences between the two sides, focused on
agriculture and services (in particular Banks). The problems are
significant enough for DFAT to announce they intend to hold extensive
consultation with all stakeholders during 2010 – sending a message that
it is not expected to move very far this year
Australia-India FTA
The Feasibility Study is still in discussion between the two
governments, and there is not enough information at this stage to
speculate as to the issue stopping its release. We will monitor
developments and keep a close eye on the feasibility study and are
ready to respond to it. There are significant tensions between the two
countries, not the least is the current violence to students issue and
uranium sales.
Australia-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) FTA
No movement since the last round of talks held in Muscat, Oman on 31st
May to 2nd June 2009. At this stage no meetings are scheduled. However
a Gulf-Australia Business Council was launched on 10th December 2009.
There is pressure from the agricultural sector on DFAT to conclude the
agreement as NZ have concluded one – but the auto industry appears to
be more important than agriculture to DFAT in this FTA, with movement
being held up waiting for Saudi Arabia’s decision on whether it will
commence an auto industry. We will monitor this FTA, in particular
Saudi Arabia’s decision on whether to start an Auto industry.
Australia/Mexico Joint Experts Group Report
No prospect of an FTA in the near future. Australia released its Joint
Experts Group report on strengthening bilateral relations with Mexico
in July 2009. We need to continue to monitor developments in this
relationship, particularly the approach of using the Joint Trade and
Investment Commission in a “comprehensive” manner.
5 General Trade News
Productivity Commission – Call for Submissions on Trade Agreements
As mentioned in our previous bulletin, the Australian Government
requested that the Productivity Commission (PC) undertake a study into
the impact of bilateral and regional free trade agreements on trade and
investment barriers, and on Australia's trade and economic performance,
including their contribution to efforts to boost Australia's engagement
in the evolving regional economic architecture.
AFTINET has completed its submission, which is available on our website:
http://aftinet.org.au/cms/submissions/aftinet-submissions
Or, it can be downloaded by clicking on the following link:
http://aftinet.org.au/cms/sites/default/files/AFTINET PC Submission Final.pdf
6 Coming Events
In our next bulletin more details will be published for this year’s AFTINET Dinner.
Date and Time: 15th April 2010. Get there at 6:30pm for a 7:00pm start.
The dinner will be held at the Erciyes Restaurant – 409 Cleveland Street Surry Hills. (A few blocks from Central Station)
The dinner will cost $60.00 per person. Get in early and book now through the AFTINET Office.
Put it into your diary now.
Keep an eye out for the official invitation – it will be a celebration of our 10th Anniversary.
7 New Resources available on the web or at our website
