Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Bill 2009 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Bill 2009. I note, as the previous member noted, that the rush with this bill is more to do with the minister and his appearance at the East Asia Summit than it is to do with dealing with legislation in an orderly fashion. I must say at the outset that I am aware that the purpose of this bill is to amend the Customs Act 1901 to define ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement originating goods and to amend the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to provide preferential tariffs for ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement originating goods.

We all know that the concept of an ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement was floated by the Hawke and Keating governments in the nineties. Discussions commenced under Minister Vaile in 1999, with negotiations starting in 2004 and continuing under Mr Truss, and the agreement was signed by Minister Crean in February this year. The proposed amendments in the bills are relevant to parts of the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement.

I am really disappointed that the government is pushing this legislation through with very little notice, particularly when it has such a negative impact on horticulture in this country. The ASEAN-Australian-New Zealand FTA was signed months ago, on 27 February, by the minister and his counterpart ministers from ASEAN countries and New Zealand and yet it has got to this point, on this day, when it has to be rushed through. The agreement was tabled in parliament in March and referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. That committee recommended that binding treaty action be taken in its report tabled on 22 June.

But horticulture groups noted, in relation to the Chinese free trade agreement, that Chinese horticulture exports to ASEAN are subject to near zero tariffs across the board. That has a major impact for growers right around Australia, and particularly the horticultural growers in my electorate of Forrest. Of course this zero tariff has resulted in exceptional growth, as noted in the committee’s report, in Chinese horticultural exports to places like Australia. Basically they have grown by 132 per cent in the four years to 2007-08. When I think about the growers in my electorate, this is having, and will continue to have, a major impact on them.

I note from the parliamentary committee report that, from the point of view of the Horticultural Market Access Committee, in a situation where China enjoys zero tariffs and Australia does not, and will not, Australia’s competitive position will suffer for many years. It certainly means that the growers in my electorate will suffer, and it is disappointing that in negotiating this outcome we have not got a better result. We should have had a better result for our horticultural producers, and you of all people would know that, Mr Deputy Speaker Washer.

I notice that according to the HMAC, and I quote:

It is a very sensitive issue for vegetable growers because basically we have lost a lot of our markets in South-East Asia to Chinese competition. When you are trying to talk to vegetable growers about becoming export orientated, they see China getting unfair advantages in, say, these free trade agreements vis-a-vis Australia. The expectation out of all this was that Australian vegetable growers would at least be able to compete on an equal footing with Chinese vegetable growers in these markets. That is where the disappointment comes.

No matter what form of agriculture, horticulture or viticulture we are engaged in, this is a common thread for all of us in those sectors. All we have ever asked for is a level playing field; and what we have never received is that level playing field. We have basically agreed to these types of free trade agreements and expected and hoped that the rest of the world would come along and deliver that free trade environment for our growers and create a level playing field. Well, the results—as we know from the dairy industry and from other agricultural industries—are entirely different. We compete on a significantly non-level playing field on a regular basis.

I note that Australia’s horticultural exports totalled $4.5 million while China’s horticultural exports totalled $403 million, so it is a David and Goliath situation for our growers in Western Australia and around Australia no matter what type of horticulture they are engaged in. I imagine that it has been insisted that these bills be passed not only by the House today but also by the Senate tomorrow just to enable the Minister for Trade to attend the East Asia Summit on 25 October, where he anticipates that New Zealand and four of the ASEAN countries will have completed their internal arrangements thus enabling the FTA to come into force on 1 January. The signatories are required to advise of progress within their internal arrangements and I imagine this is what is driving the minister. But we can certainly understand why those in the horticultural sector are very concerned about this issue.

I note that the committee recommended:

… that the Australian Government pursue all possible bilateral and multilateral avenues to secure improved tariff outcomes for the horticulture industry.

I would question what the minister has done and will do from here on this basis. The committee also recommended:

… that, in the absence of other measures designed to improve free trade, a free trade agreement negotiated by Australia should not include a tariff outcome on a tariff line that is worse than the existing tariff on that tariff line.

That is another issue in this particular agreement. The committee also recommended:

… that in future free trade agreements, Australia should negotiate for the binding tariff rate to be the lower of either the rate at the time of binding, or the Most Favoured Nation tariff rate at the time the free trade agreement comes into force.

One of the other recommendations is:

… that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade prepare a report for the Committee examining mechanisms to allow negotiators to directly consult with industry representatives during the negotiation process.

This would give groups like horticultural groups the opportunity to have input, to represent their views and to ensure that in developing a free trade agreement their issues are recognised and responded to, and that is a recommendation from the committee. Recommendation 5 is:

… that the Australian Government include consideration of environment protection, protection of human rights and labour standards in all future negotiation mandates for free trade agreements.

I note that the committee supported the establishment of this particular agreement.

As I said, there are a number of challenges, not only that of this free trade agreement, affecting horticultural growers. I speak about those in my electorate, and I have a number of them. These growers also have very serious concerns with the labour award modernisation process that has been advanced. This does and will have an impact on the horticultural industry. As I said earlier, Mr Deputy Speaker Washer, you of all people know that fruit and vegetables do not necessarily grow, ripen or need to be harvested during what we would consider normal working hours, and this is a real concern not only for those growing these products but for those who are packing them.

We know that the growth in Chinese horticultural exports has put even greater pressure on the Australian horticultural industry. The industry is very concerned about the introduction of additional biosecurity threats and burdens that our growers simply cannot compete with. We have seen what the government has done in removing $37 million from AQIS and the fact that 135 people have gone from AQIS as well. When we consider the biosecurity issues in relation to imported products, particularly vegetables and fruit, we understand the physical threats to the Australian industry.

I note that the joint standing committee report that I have referred to was tabled on 24 June and the government has not responded to it. It has had ample time to introduce and pass the legislation in an orderly fashion. In spite of this, I understand that this free trade agreement will provide greater access to the Australian market for goods originating from ASEAN countries and New Zealand and, most importantly, will provide greater access for Australian goods to the markets of the ASEAN countries and New Zealand. As was noted in the national interest analysis of the agreement, as a group ASEAN and New Zealand constitute a larger trading partner for Australia than any single country. The ASEAN member countries and New Zealand together account for 21 per cent of Australia’s total trade in goods and services. The total trade in goods and services between Australia and ASEAN and New Zealand combined was $103 billion in 2007-08.

The coalition believes that the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement will also support economic integration in the region and enhance Australia’s participation in the region’s evolving economic architecture through commitments in a range of areas, including trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property, temporary movement of persons, electronic commerce and economic cooperation. It really is to Australia’s advantage in these areas to take the proposed treaty action.

It will provide greater certainty for Australian exporters and investors, achieved through the country specific commitments on tariffs and market access for services as well as the ASEAN-Australian-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement’s provisions to enhance the transparency and predictability of regulatory regimes, including through consultation and cooperation mechanisms. Could I finish this speech by again reinforcing that the impacts of this agreement on those in the horticultural industry right around Australia will be significant, and they will be significant in my electorate. We certainly need the minister to be focused on those matters.

See this speech in context