Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'd like to thank the member for Griffith for her contribution. There's much merit in what she says—that this government would prefer multilateral agreements to bilateral agreements. However, we live in a world where it is very difficult to get the World Trade Organization to agree on a particular outcome. Indeed, farmers in India have been holding up an agreement with the World Trade Organization for nearly two decades now. ISDSs are also very important measures by which people can find ways to enforce free trade agreements. There are certainly process improvements and enhancements that we can make—there's no doubt about that—but to throw the baby out with the bathwater would be a regressive step. As I'm sure the member for Griffith agrees, it is important that we live in a world of law, not a world where might is right.

Free trade is the cornerstone of the Liberal tradition in Australia. It allows Australians to have access to a wide range of goods and services that would otherwise be unattainable for the average consumer. It allows Australians to project their business and professional expertise across borders. In short, it allows Australians to thrive, unencumbered by the constraints of protectionism that those opposite would introduce if they were given the chance. There has been no greater force in pulling people out of poverty than free trade. There has been no greater deterrent to war and conflict than free trade. It was the postwar regime of free trade and open markets that saw European nations rise from the rubble of war and re-emerge as competitive and developed economies. It is free trade that will help to sustain our economy into the future and ensure that Australians have the means to succeed in a free and democratic society.

This government has a mandate to secure the economic future of our country. As part of this commitment, we must modernise and adapt our trade agreements to better suit the dynamically changing demands of the global marketplace and to facilitate trade and business between our nations with greater efficiency. After all, it is this commitment that has helped to fuel over 26 years of uninterrupted economic growth. It was a Liberal government that implemented the Singapore-Australia Free Trade Agreement in 2003, marking a new chapter in an economic relationship that has since proven to be of immeasurable benefit to both Australia and Singapore. Allowing Australian businesses to finally access the countless export opportunities in Singapore has elevated that country to becoming one of our largest trading partners. Australian businesses have chosen to invest heavily in the Singaporean economy. Likewise, our businesses have been on the receiving end of considerable Singaporean investment, totalling over $31 billion of foreign direct investment in 2016 alone.

This bill will build on our existing economic partnership and create new opportunities for Australians and their businesses to thrive overseas. It will allow them to expand their footprint into South-East Asia, whilst cutting the red tape that has so often hindered entrepreneurial ambitions in the past. Singapore is not only a key economic hub in its own right; it is also a gateway into the rapidly expanding economies of Asia. With a burgeoning middle class that is set to more than double over the next decade, Asia should be of great interest to any Australian business seeking to increase its export opportunities. With existing infrastructure to support the expansion of our businesses into a lucrative market, Singapore is an ideal starting point for such ventures.

By addressing and mitigating behind-the-border barriers to trade, this bill will allow Australian businesses of any size to tap into increasing consumer demand in Asia, boosting our global competitiveness. We are increasing the threshold at which outbound investment into Singapore requires approval, from the previous $252 million, by four times. That means much faster investments requiring less hurdles. Ultimately, it means greater productivity and efficiency for our businesses, and more highly paid jobs and opportunities for all Australians. Another change we are implementing to the same end is simplifying the certification-of-origin process, meaning more time for Australians to spend doing business instead of in their business. Professional services contribute one-third of our total exports to Singapore, so this bill includes provisions to ensure that Australians are better able to offer their services in Singapore, with more and wider-spread recognition of Australian accreditation in fields like law, medicine and health. For Australians, this means they can now much more easily transition into life in Singapore, earn competitive wages and compete for lucrative private-sector and government contracts.

Those opposite constantly lament the cost of living in this country, yet, at the same time, they oppose our trade agreements at every corner. The one solution to rising prices has, time and time again, been proven to be free trade, but there they stand, steadfast in their opposition to measures that will actually help those they claim to represent. This is yet another example of Labor kowtowing to the demands of union leaders whose aims are motivated by the quaint idea that protectionism doesn't make our low-income earners less well off. This is nothing new. We have seen it before in many of our attempts to integrate with the global economy. We have seen it in our negotiations with China, we have seen it with our negotiations with Japan, we have seen it with our negotiations with South Korea, and I assure you that we will see it again here. After all, we know the Leader of the Opposition does not believe in the proven benefits of free trade. As he said himself, 'There is no such thing as fair trade.' If ever there was proof that those opposite don't believe in the future of Australia, here it is.

There are people in my own electorate of Mackellar that have experienced the other side, the dark side in which trade does not exist and free markets do not exist—and, guess what: neither do free people. They hail from countries like China, Cambodia, Vietnam, the former Soviet bloc and, sadly, many others. Having experienced what living under communism was like—or, dare I say, even economic socialism—they fled to Australia for this very reason. Take China, for example: plagued by a historic tradition of protectionism and insulation from global markets, its people were suffering from wide-reaching poverty, mass starvation and a stagnant economy. Once faced with a large, rural, poor population isolated from vital services and deprived of access to goods, economic liberalisation has pulled hundreds of millions out of poverty whilst allowing for equitable access to consumer goods and services. Through liberalisation of its economy, the quality of life increased exponentially for the average Chinese person, as has the opportunity for their businesses and investments around the world. China's integration into the global economy and the impact that this has had on its citizens is a testament to the nature of free trade, not as an economic policy benefitting only big business, but as a proactive approach to improving the lives of every citizen.

Their story is personal to me. It is reflected in my own. As I talked about in this very chamber during my first address to parliament, my grandparents fled the oppressive communist regime of the Soviet bloc. Economic isolationism was not just a term found in economic books; to them, it was a stark reality. It led to a suppression of free enterprise, competition and new ideas, but, importantly, it brought to the fore an incessant need for a pervasive state to control its own people. Coming to Australia was a dream come true. Finally they were in a society in which they could flourish, in which their ideas were given free reign and where ambition and hard work were rewarded. That is what free trade does: it gives people the power to decide over their own destinies.

Even in less extreme forms, excessive economic regulation hinders growth. It stifles the very creativity and need for self-expression in all human beings and it hurts the people whom it is meant to help. We celebrate value in all truly free and democratic countries. Free trade is the silver bullet to global poverty, achieving what countless charity drives and government aid packages could not. Free trade and economic liberalisation have improved living standards, created jobs and pulled the global community closer together. I use this metaphor from Thomas Friedman all the time, but it never gets old:

No two countries with a McDonald's have ever gone to war with each other.

Tightening our economic bonds with one another in this globalised world increases our threshold for going to war with those very nations. It makes war a more costly exercise and therefore a less likely one. In a world in which we find more and more similarities with one another, predominantly through building trade relationships, we are pushed and incentivised to work together to cooperate, but to build rather than destroy.

If history has taught us anything, it is that there is nothing to be gained from economic isolationism. Protectionism and excessive economic regulation has long been the mainstay of authoritarian governments whose main aim has always been to control their citizens rather than see them prosper.

See this speech in context