LIPSON:Well joining me now in the studio is the Shadow Trade minister, Senator Penny Wong. Thanks for your time today.
WONG:Good to be with you.
LIPSON:There were doubters on your side of Parliament when Tony Abbott said that he would sign a Free Trade Agreement with China within 12 months, now he has set the same goal for India, can he do it?
WONG:Obviously in relation to India, we have a very strong historical, cultural, people to people relationship, but we can do better I think in terms of our economic relationship. This is why the Labor Government in fact commenced negotiations for a free trade agreement with India. So we think that is a positive. What I would like to see however, is steps towards a regional trade agreement; I think that would be in Australias interests.
LIPSON:You said that the announcement of a 12 month deadline for a Free Trade agreement with China weakened Australias negotiating position. Do you believe setting a similar deadline with India does the same?
WONG:Personnally, I think when it comes to trade agreements you shouldnt set artificial deadlines. If both parties want to get an agreement, and a good agreement, thats a good thing, but you dont want to set an artificial deadline. Certainly the China Free Trade Agreement was 10 years in the making. That has been negotiated under both the Howard Government as well as Labor Governments under both Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard and now under Tony Abbott.
LIPSON:On the China deal, in October you said that a China Free Trade Agreement must deliver markedly improved access for Australian exporters, and create job opportunities for Australians. Has the deal met your benchmark then?
WONG:Ill make this point first, the Government hasnt released the text to you or I or any Australians, they have released some glossy pamphlets, thats nice, but I think Australians are entitled to a little more transparency. We certainly see some very welcome increases in market access for some of our key agricultural commodities, as well as access to our services sector, which is an area of real growth, growth potential for Australia.
However, we do have some concerns, we want to look at the detail and we certainly want to go beyond what the glossy pamphlets say when considering the benefits of this agreement.
LIPSON:Under this agreement China can bring in its own workers, for jobs that are worth more than $150 million, the unions say that this will kill Australian jobs. Whats your view?
WONG:We said very clearly prior to the announcement being made, that a Free Trade Agreement with China needed to increase Australian jobs not replace Australian jobs. The principle should be that if there are jobs created in Australia, that Australians willing and able to do those jobs, should get those jobs. Now what we want to test in this agreement is whether or not those safeguards are in place. The problem weve got is we have got things in the agreement, and one of them is that Australia will guarantee access to contractual service providers from China. Another is increased labour flexibility for certain projects [over] $150 million.
Now I have seen Andrew Robb on your program and on others talk about labour market testing. I know that Prime Minister Abbott said judge Ministers on whats written down, not on what they say. We want to see the text of the agreement to ensure there are safeguards, making sure that Australians who are willing and able to get these jobs can get them, these safeguards are in place.
LIPSON:What about ISDS provisions? That could see a Chinese company for example, possibly even a Chinese state owned company, sue the Australian Government over policy changes that impact on their profits. What are your concerns there if any?
WONG:We have had a long standing position that we dont agree with ISDS clauses, Investor-State Dispute Settlement clauses in trade agreements, we said that when it came to the Korean agreement, the point you make is really the point in question. We dont think foreign companies of whatever ilk should be given greater legal rights than Australian companies.
LIPSON:So should that have been a deal breaker then? Because that is in this agreement.
WONG:If we had been in Government, it wouldnt be in there. And we said that about Korea as well. We dont think these are sensible clauses; even the High Court Chief Justice has raised concerns about them. Were disappointed that the Government included them.
LIPSON:Agreements though of course are all about trade-offs, and this deal, as you pointed out has been 10 years in the making. Most of that time, Labor was in power. Did Labor let the perfect become the enemy of the good? Why werent you able to secure this?
WONG:As I said this is a deal that is 10 years in the making, and I would hope just as I have acknowledged the contribution of Andrew Robb, that he would, that he and the Government could be gracious enough on something like this, to acknowledge the very substantial contribution, particularly of Craig Emerson, but also of Simon Crean in this agreement.
For example, the World Trade Organisation, the Bali agreement that was announced in December last year, a lot of that work was done by Craig Emerson. These agreements often take longer than the life of any one Government, and thats how we approach them.
LIPSON:Senator Penny Wong, thanks for your time.
WONG:Good to be with you.
ENDS