Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—This ministerial statement relates to the nomination of a new Director-General of the World Intellectual Property Organisation. The Rudd Labor government places a high priority on engaging with the United Nations system and pursuing a multilateral approach to addressing the many challenges confronting the international community. Labor governments have always understood the importance of engaging constructively with the global community to work together in the pursuit of a more stable, secure and prosperous world. It was, after all, the Curtin Labor government that worked so hard to ensure that Australia was a founding member of the United Nations in 1945, and Australia therefore had the opportunity to influence the shape of the post World War II order. Since that time, successive Australian Labor governments have always recognised that the United Nations provides us with a means to influence events which go directly to our interests but which we are not be able to pursue by working in isolation. It is for these reasons that Australia has been well served by the UN’s contribution to helping shape the world order. And it is for these reasons that Australia is seeking a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council for the 2013-14 term.

Australia’s renewed commitment to and engagement with the UN is paralleled by our renewed commitment to and engagement with the multilateral system of trade negotiations via the World Trade Organisation. As I have said in this House before, a successful outcome to the WTO Doha Round offers Australia the best opportunity for significantly improved export market access for Australian business with substantial flow-on benefits to our broader community. A good outcome to Doha also offers the world’s developing countries the prospect of a significant growth dividend which will assist in reducing poverty and raising living standards.

It is against this backdrop that I am pleased to announce that after careful deliberation the Coordination Committee of the World Intellectual Property Organisation, WIPO, earlier this week selected an Australian, Dr Francis Gurry, as the nominee for the position of Director-General of WIPO. Dr Gurry was selected from a competitive international field of fourteen candidates. Dr Gurry’s nomination will be submitted to the General Assemblies of WIPO for final confirmation in September this year. The Australian government welcomes the support from WIPO member states across all regions for the nomination of Dr Gurry, currently a Deputy Director-General of WIPO and the most senior Australian in the United Nations system. The nomination of Dr Gurry for WIPO Director-General serves as a further demonstration of the new Australian government’s strong commitment to greater engagement with the United Nations system. It also reflects the importance the government places on building a strong, balanced and accessible international intellectual property system, as well as the importance it places on WIPO’s development mandate. Dr Gurry was a strong candidate with excellent credentials for the position. Earlier this year the Rudd government decided formally to nominate Dr Gurry and actively support his candidature. We understood the significance of the position and we appreciated the credentials he brought to this candidature.

Dr Gurry has outstanding qualifications for the position. He has over 20 years experience in WIPO across all major sectors of its mandate. He has a proven track record in leading and implementing major improvements to the international intellectual property system in the international sense. Dr Gurry’s vision for WIPO underlines that the two key roles of the organisation, first, as a service provider to the global economy and, second, as a UN agency with a development mandate, are compatible and complementary.

The government was able to support Dr Gurry’s candidature with a strong political and diplomatic campaign, and we are therefore very pleased with this result. Once confirmed, Dr Gurry will be the third Australian who has served as head of a United Nations agency, after James Ingram, Executive Director of the World Food Program from 1982 to 1992, and Richard E. Butler, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunications Union from 1983 to 1989.

WIPO is a specialised agency of the United Nations. It is dedicated to developing a balanced and accessible international intellectual property system which rewards creativity, stimulates innovation while safeguarding the public interest, and contributes to economic development. WIPO recognises that intellectual property is an important tool for the economic, social and cultural development of all countries, including developing countries.

WIPO is responsible for promoting the progressive development and harmonisation of intellectual property legislation, standards and procedures among the member states. It delivers important global, intellectual property protection services. It encourages the use of intellectual property for economic development. It also plays a crucial role in promoting better understanding of intellectual property, and provides an important forum for debate on intellectual property issues.

Australia values greatly the work WIPO undertakes globally to support creativity, to stimulate innovation and to drive development. Australia has a comprehensive IP system and makes a strong contribution to both the policy and technical aspects of WIPO’s work. Intellectual property is, of course, crucial to the further development and growth of world trade.

I have spoken here before about the new and broader ‘twin pillars’ approach to trade policy to which this government is committed. What this means is that trade policy cannot be just concerned with reform at the border—the market access issues. As important as that is, it increasingly has to also be about reform behind the border. There is no point in increasing market access if we are not competitive enough to take advantage of it. So, increasingly, it is the ‘second pillar’, or the ‘behind the border’ issues, that will dictate a country’s capacity to compete on the international stage.

Also, with the very fast growth of services and investment flows, trade is increasingly moving away from the traditional ‘produce and ship’ model. Investment, for example, is becoming important as a means for driving trade. Our exporters are increasingly becoming integrated into global supply chains. This, in turn, means that trade policy must increasingly focus on helping exporters in all of their international activities, whether they be trade or investment. So we need to be able to work in an integrated way to assist the internationalisation of Australian industry, developing and growing exporters as much as developing our exports. We announced in the budget earlier this week the reintegration of Invest Australia into Austrade for this very purpose, along with the Global Opportunities program.

Intellectual property is a crucially important part of the government’s ‘twin pillars’ agenda. Given the increasing role of services and investment flows, the international architecture of regulation in this area becomes increasingly important. Effective and transparent intellectual property laws are crucial to encouraging two-way investment flows. WIPO, as the key international agency dealing with intellectual property issues, has a vital role to play in this agenda. Effective leadership, therefore, of this organisation is critical. We are therefore very pleased with Dr Gurry’s nomination.

Consistent with our re-engagement at the multilateral level, we have pursued an increased level of activism on the ‘first pillar’ of the government’s trade agenda. The government’s top trade negotiating priority is securing a successful conclusion to the WTO Doha Round. The government have re-energised Australia’s role in multilateral trade negotiations in recent months. We have dealt ourselves back into the centre of efforts to conclude the Doha Round. This, too, has been a whole-of-government approach.

I participated in the Davos meeting of trade ministers in January this year. This meeting gave new political impetus to efforts to conclude the round. The Prime Minister reinforced this growing political will at leaders levels with his visits recently, particularly to Washington and to Brussels. All ministers are currently advocating and cajoling for this successful Doha outcome.

I am using every opportunity to urge countries to show political will and flexibility to conclude the round this year. I have been on the phone most days talking to other trade ministers from around the world, and I am encouraged at the political commitment that is evident to conclude the Doha Round deal this year. I am pleased to report that we are making progress. We now have in place the main elements of:

• a framework for dealing with ‘sensitive products’ in agriculture,
• a framework for reducing domestic support in agriculture,
• a framework for dealing with non-agricultural tariffs, and
• a framework—through the signalling exercise—for improving services market access.

What we do not have yet is a detailed framework on developing country market access—and it is incumbent on all WTO members to make progress on this issue urgently.

Revised negotiating texts on agriculture and industrial goods are expected within the next few days in Geneva. If these texts can capture the level of convergence that has been achieved in recent weeks and months, they will give a boost to the prospects of concluding the round this year. I am urging my colleagues to engage as soon as possible, and I am pressing for ministers to meet in Geneva in June to discuss the outlines of a deal.

Labor has always understood the importance of achieving multilateral trade outcomes that are supported by regional trade liberalisation via APEC—’WTO plus’—and comprehensive FTAs—’WTO plus plus’.

In our view, the previous government squandered the opportunity provided by Australia’s unique position as chair of the Cairns Group to be front and centre of the Doha Round, allowing Australia to be squeezed out of the talks by other groupings.

These trade negotiations are difficult, particularly at the multilateral level, with so many players involved. But we are not going to make progress unless we are prepared to put in the hard yards. And it is the new Labor government that is prepared to do the hard work.

A successful outcome to Doha is important because world trade has grown three times as fast as world output. It is the world market that offers the greatest opportunities and which will sustain the Australian economy beyond the resources boom.

After each global trade round there has been a surge in world trade. That rate of growth has now slowed. A Doha outcome is needed to provide new impetus to world trade.

Labor is re-energising Australia’s commitment to the multilateral sphere as evidenced by both the developments I have reported on today. We are recalibrating the focus of trade policy, through a stepped-up level of activism at the World Trade Organisation. We are extremely pleased with the nomination of Dr Gurry to lead the World Intellectual Property Organisation. It is a great credit and recognition of Dr Gurry’s capacities, and I wish him well with the confirmation of his nomination later this year, and I look forward to working with him in his new role.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to move a motion to enable the member for Mallee to speak for 15 minutes.

Leave granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent Mr Forrest speaking for a period not exceeding 15 minutes.

Question agreed to.

John Forrest (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am grateful for an opportunity to join with the Minister for Trade to, on behalf of the opposition, congratulate Dr Francis Gurry on being selected by the Coordination Committee of the World Intellectual Property Organisation as the nominee for the position of director general. It is another good example of Australia punching above its weight in the international arena.

It is pleasing to see an Australian contributing in this international and important organisation. Australians have a proud history of playing a prominent role in the world community. Dr Gurry’s resume shows he has an extensive engagement with the international community—and the trade minister has made reference to that—extending back through the past two decades. I agree with the trade minister that Dr Gurry has excellent qualifications for his new position. I am sure his specialist knowledge in that role will be in this nation’s favour.

In his statement the Minister for Trade goes beyond commenting about Dr Gurry’s appointment, and I would like to make a few remarks to address some of the comments he has additionally made.

Australian exporters too have a significant contribution to make to the global market, despite what I see as the best efforts of this government to create, at the moment, enormous uncertainty for them. Coming from a constituency like Mallee, whose principal employment and whole engagement in life is related to export activity, I am quite qualified to make these comments.

The question has to be asked: just how serious is this new government when it comes to trade? Just how serious is this new government when it comes to supporting Australian exporting firms and providing them with a level of certainty to plan for their future and the future of their employees?

Just two days ago the Treasurer stood at the dispatch box and, seemingly without a twinge of empathy for exporters and investors, delivered a budget that slashed any hopes of securing much needed certainty for the sector. It is a budget that did absolutely nothing to dispel the fears of the traders and investors who have been subjected to chaos and confusion since this government came to office. We have a trade minister who seems to take a slightly different position every time I hear him speak. He seems to want to rewrite history. This nation has always punched above its weight in this sector. It is so important to this nation. And despite the colour of governments in the last 30 years there has always been an enormous activity and interest in this subject. It does not serve the minister well to attempt to rewrite history and describe the efforts of the immediate past government as not meeting the task. He has already described, in reference to the Doha Round, how difficult the situation is and he knows, as much as he is confident of outcomes, just how difficult it is going to be, filled with all the political uncertainties of an election in the United States—but I do wish him well, and I welcome that activity.

I am in this parliament because I remember what happened to my exporters in the mid-80s under a previous Labor government when they were subjected to the unravelling of their border protection—tariffs—without any assistance whatsoever to cope with achieving greater efficiencies. They are extremely impatient for reform in the multilateral area—extremely impatient. That is why the former government, in a two-pillar approach as the minister has described, was increasingly active in bilateral arrangements. I would like the minister to understand that there needs to be a parallel approach here because the exporters that I represent, and Mallee is so typical of much of rural Australia, are extremely impatient after decades of promises about trade liberalisation and the removal of those very unfair export subsidies they are required to compete with.

We have had a slight mish-mash of announcements from the new government—statements about trade policy, trade policy reviews, the EMDG scheme, Doha and free trade agreements. We have had calls for reviews and for reports, ad hod statements, policy on the run and an ever-changing narrative on where this government stands on negotiating agreements. Aside from the trade minister’s contradictory remarks pertaining to, of all things, trade, one thing that strikes me about the member for Hotham is his unrelenting willingness to pass the buck on this issue and blame the previous government. The record shows it is different to that. He is now the government, he is now the minister and he is responsible for all the things he has committed to do in his statement here tonight. He should energise that progress but not leave behind those bilaterals as they are incredibly important to citrus growers and table grape growers. To completely abandon that activity is not a very strong approach; it is a pillar approach.

Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am waiting for the evidence.

John Forrest (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am coming to the evidence. It is in the budget papers. So far the trade minister has proved to be too fragile to stand up to the government razor gang. He challenges me by interjection. He needs to protect the interests of those Australian exporting firms who, over the last two decades, have developed an export culture and saw enormous opportunities in Japan and China; yet the budget confirms that funding and resources allocation to those two needy, accessible markets, provided we can crash through the biosecurity arrangements, have now been abandoned.

Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tell us about pillars.

John Forrest (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know a lot about pillars, I am a civil engineer. Pillars are very important pieces of structural integrity and you can adorn them with esoteric decorations. You can have the Doric or the Corinthian at the base and at the apex. But pillars are absolutely useless without good, solid foundations; they would simply collapse. I want to see foundation. I use this opportunity to persuade the trade minister not to abandon the bilaterals. He can energise the multilateral and pull off Doha if he can, but do not abandon those bilateral arrangements. They are extremely important, given the progress the former government made, particularly in China, Japan and even Korea. We now have citrus fruits going into China—a challenge the people said would never happen—and it has now revitalised the citrus industry.

We all know that this government does not care about seniors and carers—we saw that in response to the previous ministerial statement—but I confirm tonight that exporters have been disregarded as well in this budget. I would go so far as to say that they have been betrayed by a bandaid budget that has not looked at the bigger picture and the significance of trade to this nation. We are going to be subjected to a lengthy review process. The government has not been prepared in this budget to provide at least a temporary footing for Australian exporting businesses to operate, and we have to wait and wait—and we continue to wait. Australia has punched above its weight. For the trade minister to come in here and allege and attempt to rewrite history about the record of the former government’s activity reflects poorly on him.

I will give a few examples of the inconsistency of the new government on this subject. On free trade agreements in February, the trade minister announced that bilateral agreements were a low priority. More recently, in March, in this chamber he said they were back in the mix. I issued a public statement that said I was pleased to see that. In 2006 the now Prime Minister described the Doha Round of world trade talks as ‘dead as a dodo’. Earlier this year in Europe, as the Prime Minister, he then told the world he had changed his mind and Doha was now doable and the way forward. Of course, the message lasted only as long as the media conference and the flight to the next destination and then the focus was back on free trade agreements with China and India. By slashing staff numbers within the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, confirmed in the budget papers, this game of musical chairs continues. The Prime Minister has looked the leaders of the USA and Europe in the eye and told them he wants to engage with them, but he has proved just how shallow his words are by taking the axe to staff numbers in our international offices. To make things even worse is the fact that the government has been gunning to slash job numbers for ages.

Labor has been trumpeting its plan to fold Invest Australia into Austrade. Indeed, the minister’s statement here tonight confirms that and shows a complete lack of understanding about Invest Australia’s role in generating increased investment and therefore jobs here in Australia. Over the five years to June 2007, Invest Australia played a very important and significant role in attracting and facilitating 387 projects to Australia. These projects were valued at $56 billion with the potential to generate $12.6 billion in export earnings and the potential to create an additional 28,000 jobs. The value of this budget shows how committed this government is to employment when it acknowledges the slashing of 134,000 jobs! It beggars belief. Nonetheless, for the Australian export businesses and investors that the trade minister is supposed to be representing, he has repeated tonight that these numbers count. We will be holding him to the statement he has made here tonight about re-energising Australia’s role in the Doha Round. We just hope that he will put insurance in place and make sure that we do not lose the opportunity to continue to progress those bilaterals.

On behalf of the opposition, I wish Dr Gurry all the best in his new role and I am certain he will continue Australia’s strong tradition as an active participant in the international arena.