Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure) Share this | Hansard source

I will begin by commending the contributions from the members for Macquarie and Bass both to this debate and on their work on the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. Those two members, alongside the member for Fremantle and the other Labor members, have done a sterling job trying to hold the government to account to inject some transparency and objectivity into the debate around TPP-11. So I commend them for their fine work.

I am, on the surface—unless someone convinces me otherwise—firmly opposed to TPP-11. I'm firmly opposed to it, because it undermines Australia's sovereignty. It gives away too much of Australians' sovereign powers for very little in return. Unfortunately, this is the case history when it comes to this government and trade agreements. They sell away Australia's rights, Australia's freedoms and Australia's legislative authority in return for trade access. In some cases that may be justified, but my strong view is that, when it comes to the TPP-11, it most definitely is not. This trade agreement is not about trade. The name is a misnomer. It is deceptive. This is an agreement about deregulating Australia's economy and undermining the sovereignty of this parliament. That is why I am opposed to the TPP-11.

The first reason I'm opposed to it goes to investor-state dispute settlement clauses. These are a cancer in trade agreements. These clauses undermine the sovereignty of duly elected parliaments to legislate for the welfare of their own people. That is what ISDS does. It grants rights and powers to foreign corporations that Australian companies don't have, that the Australian people don't have. You only have to look at the case that Philip Morris waged against the federal government around plain-packaging laws, where they had the hide to use an arcane clause in the Hong Kong trade agreement to undermine a great Labor government initiative to do plain packaging of tobacco, which is having a real impact in reducing smoking rates and therefore saving Australian lives. ISDS undermines that. ISDS potentially would cause more Australian deaths by cancer.

This agreement has ISDS clauses in it. It has clauses that undermine our sovereignty, and it goes completely against the tide of what is happening in other nations. Even the United States, that supposed bastion of free trade, is seeking in its NAFTA renegotiations to remove ISDS. The incredibly progressive and visionary New Zealand Labour government has successfully removed ISDS clauses from four existing free trade agreements. And there's a recent case in the EU courts which found that any trade agreement that has ISDS must go through each national parliament for approval because ISDS involves the removal of sovereignty. That is why it should not be in this trade agreement. That is why I was so proud at the last Labor Party national conference to move an amendment to the platform, committing Labor to never negotiate a trade agreement with ISDS in it and, furthermore, when in government, to remove ISDS clauses through renegotiation. So that's the first reason that I am opposed to the TPP.

The second reason goes to immigration policy. This agreement, sadly, like the China FTA, reduces the sovereignty of the Australian parliament to regulate our immigration system. The great irony of this government is that it's supposedly strong on border protection, but it signs up to and negotiates trade agreements that deregulate our immigration system.

This was demonstrated in a testimony from the department to JSCOT in a hearing earlier this year, where, under expert cross-examination by the member for Macquarie and other Labor members, they admitted that this agreement will prohibit labour market testing for six countries under the TPP. We will not be able to perform labour market testing against six countries' applications for visas, particularly Brunei, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru and Vietnam. This doesn't apply to a few narrow ranges of categories; it applies to 400 occupations under the TSS visa, which replaced the old 457 visa. This agreement removes our right to test whether Australians can fill those jobs; it places an obligation on us to treat visa holders from those six nations equally to Australian workers when it comes to filling those jobs. That is unacceptable.

If this was the only clause in the agreement that I opposed, it would be sufficient for me to oppose the TPP and vote against it in the Labor Party caucus room. Unlike those on the other side, I stand up for the sovereignty of our immigration system. I stand up for the right of Australian governments to implement labour market testing. What is so radical about saying that we should establish whether an Australian worker can fill a job before we open it up to foreigners? That is not radical. It is not racist; it is just sensible policy saying that Australian jobs should be filled by Australian workers when they can. If they can't, if there's a genuine short-term skills shortage, let someone come in under a TSS. But, until that has been established, we should not be going down this slippery path, and for that reason I oppose this agreement.

The next one that I'm greatly concerned about, which has been put aside unless the US re-enters the TPP, goes to the treatment of pharmaceuticals, and in particular biologics. Despite the government's protestations, this part of the TPP, if enacted, would extend the patent protection for biologics from five years to eight years. They do it in a sneaky way, but it remains there. That will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars, to the PBS. It will reduce the ability to spend money on pharmaceuticals that sick Australians need access to, so the biologics clause is of great concern as well.

In conclusion, this agreement, the TPP-11, is not about trade access, it's not about reducing tariff barriers. It is about diminishing the sovereignty of the Commonwealth parliament. It is about deregulating our immigration system. It is about deregulating the broader global economy through the ISDS. It is about attacking our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. I will not support it for those reasons. Clear and simple: anything that diminishes our sovereignty, I will not support. I stand opposed to the TPP-11.

See this speech in context