Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Expansion) Bill 2024. The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership—let's just call it 'the agreement'—eliminates 98 per cent of tariffs in the trans-Pacific zone. That materially affects the lives of about 580 million people, and now, on 15 December 2024, the United Kingdom will become a member of this partnership.

The agreement first came into force on 30 December 2018. Getting countries to agree on the broader issues of trade is, of course, immensely important to us all. Trade is, after all, what makes the world go round, and the world is a complicated place where people have different interests and perspectives and their interests, perspectives and leaderships change, sometimes very rapidly and in unexpected directions. Successful trade between nations depends on a long-term perspective and quick wits. In fact, that's true of all kinds of trade. Trading partners need to find ways to agree so that they can derive mutual benefits.

In July 2023 the United Kingdom signed an ascension protocol. The UK had applied for membership in 2021 after its withdrawal from the EU in 2020. It had already begun exploring membership in 2018, holding informal discussions. These discussions raised important points, problems and possibilities. At the time, the UK already exported almost 98 billion pounds worth of goods to the agreement member countries. It was already economically involved with them. This bill amends the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to allow the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership to enter into force between Australia and the United Kingdom.

With the timely passage of this bill, we will be able to ratify the protocol to ensure that businesses and consumers can immediately benefit from the UK's ascension. With the inclusion of the UK, the agreement will have that material effect on the supply chain across countries as diverse as Brunei, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Malaysia, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, as well as, of course, Australia and New Zealand. It is a group of nations who have chosen to agree on important matters that affect them all. Together, we carry significant global economic weight, with more than half a billion people and a combined GDP of US$14.6 trillion.

Any state or separate customs territory can actually join us, provided it commits itself to agreement with our collective standards, rules and objectives, and they are impressive. The agreement speaks of creating new opportunities for workers and businesses and contributing to raising living standards. It speaks of reducing poverty and promoting sustainable growth, and it recognises differences in levels of development and diversity of economies. It means what it says and doesn't shy away from the sensitive subjects or possible areas of disagreement. It specifically affirms, for instance, that state owned enterprise can play a legitimate role in the diverse economies, but it adds that fair and open trade and investment should not be undermined by the provision of unfair advantages to them. There is no attempt to impose a one-size-fits-all model. The agreement supports the growth and development of micro, small and medium-sized businesses. Healthy economies not only have a space for them all; they are responsive to the possibilities of innovation such businesses present.

The agreement also promotes high levels of environmental protection and declares its support for the protection and enforcement of labour rights and the improvement of working conditions. It promotes transparency, good governance and the rule of law. One of the first requirements and duties of good governance is the elimination of bribery and corruption in trade and investment. Where trade and investment are rigged, economies stand on unsound foundations. Good governance does not mean the enforcement of one set of cultural conceptions over another.

The agreement states that trade and investment can expand opportunities to enrich cultural identity and diversity at home and abroad. We can share fundamental principles of essential values and the ideas of human rights without expressing them in exactly the same way. The rule of law does not stand in opposition to diversity. It can and should protect it.

The agreement has an objective of contributing to the harmonious development and expansion of world trade. It sees that as a means of providing a catalyst to broader regional and international cooperation, and I believe that's true. If we develop and expand world trade harmoniously we are on the way to understanding how to live together with all our differences. And if we can live together we can cooperate in facing the problems we share.

A little over 50 years ago the Whitlam government helped open up the Australian economy to the world. In its 1973 budget, that government implemented a 25 per cent cut in tariffs across the board. All subsequent Australian governments have benefited from the insights of that government and the decisiveness of that leader. Their eyes were set firmly on a better future for Australia—and so are ours.

The framers of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership also believed in addressing the future. They spoke of addressing future trade and investment challenges and opportunities and expanding their partnership by encouraging the ascension of other states or separate customs territories in order to further enhance regional economic integration. Prospective members are advised they must have a track record of complying with international trade agreements and they need the consensus support of the existing membership.

The UK will indeed become a member on 15 December this year. Passing this bill expeditiously will give Australian business the opportunity to be among the first to benefit from its inclusion. We already have a bilateral free trade agreement with the UK, and that agreement brings us strong and positive market outcomes. To this, we will be adding significant supply chain benefits. Australian manufacturers will be able to use components made in the UK in their production processes and then export the finished goods to other agreement members at preferential tariff rates. There is a great range of choice for Australian manufacturing in its production processes and greater opportunities for export. Greater ranges of choice and greater opportunities are fundamental to national wellbeing and to sustainable futures.

The Albanese Labor government wants greater ranges of choice and greater opportunities for Australians of all ages, from early childhood to the oldest of all our people. We want it regardless of career paths and choices and people's individual gifts and talents. We want it regardless of location. One part of Australia should not be privileged over another. We want it for all Australians whether they are born here or choose to make Australia their home. Smart, intelligent trade relationships are fundamental to the future for all of us.

The amendments in this bill are needed to finalise Australia's ratification of the protocol on the ascension of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. The bill will insert preferential customs duty rates into the Customs Tariff Act 1995. Those rates will only apply to originating goods from the UK. The bill will also insert a method for identifying such goods and provisions to restore general rates of duty for certain goods when and if the UK has in place a safeguard provision applying to equivalent Australian goods. In other words, we're ensuring that this is a mature agreement between independent nations which respects each other's positions and interests. It's smart, it's intelligent and it works for us all. I commend the bill to this House.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Expansion) Bill. The coalition are absolutely delighted with the accession of the United Kingdom to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

I will note today in the House we saw former British Prime Minister Liz Truss. She was the trade minister for the UK when she and the member for Wannon, Mr Dan Tehan, negotiated the UK-Australia Free Trade Agreement, which has been of great benefit to this country. The UK is a great trading nation. It has a long history of trading around the world and a strong track record of compliance with the trade commitments that all CPTPP members must abide by.

The CPTPP is a plurilateral free trade agreement—that's a word I haven't come across previously, but I'm sure Hansard will confirm that it is actually a word—between Australia, Brunei, Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam. This is one of the world's most comprehensive and ambitious free trade agreements, eliminating 98 per cent of tariffs in a trade zone that represents a combined GDP of US$14.6 trillion and a population of 580 million people. The original agreement was signed on 8 March 2018, and entered into force for Australia on 30 December 2018.

The United Kingdom is the first non-original member and European country to join the CPTPP and is now set to become the 12th member, and the agreement is expected to enter into force in the second half of 2024—I believe December is the target month. Their addition builds on the foundations of the Australia-UK Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force on 31 May 2023. The UK are a welcome addition to a network of countries committed to free and rules based trade. The accession of the UK will most benefit countries that do not have their own FTA agreement with the UK and there are strategic benefits of the UK's greater engagement in the Indo-Pacific. JSCOT received only three submissions to its inquiry, and they were all supportive.

I want to touch on the coalition's record on trade. While acknowledging that most of the free trade agreements have been bipartisan, it was certainly the coalition that negotiated the bulk of our free trade agreements. We're very proud of our record backing Australian businesses to sell their goods and services to the world. We have long led an ambitious trade agenda. Of 16 free trade agreements signed, 13 of them were entered into force under the coalition government. One in five Australian jobs is trade related and, on average, export businesses employ more staff, pay higher wages and achieve higher productivity compared to non-exporters. Between 2013 and 2022, the Liberal-National government finalised 11 trade agreements, including the FTA with the UK and the Australia-India Economic Cooperation and Trade Agreement.

We implemented nine trade agreements in government, lifting the share of trade covered by FTAs from 27 per cent in 2013 to over 70 per cent by 2022—and this figure lifted to almost 80 per cent when India and the UK FTAs were ratified in 2023. We ratified the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world's largest free trade agreement. The 15 RCEP signatory states account for around 30 per cent of the world's population and GDP. We signed FTAs with Korea, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Peru and Indonesia as well as regional agreements across the Indo-Pacific and a comprehensive agreement for the trans-Pacific partnership, which we're discussing here today. We've actively supported our exporters to diversify export markets to create jobs and economic activity in regional, rural and remote communities, many of which are in my electorate of O'Connor. The rules based multilateral trade system underpins the global economy and bonds country-to-country relations.

Moving on from the customs tariff amendment bill that we're discussing here today, I want to touch on the Australia-United Arab Emirates comprehensive economic partnership agreement, which Minister Farrell is in the process of finalising. It's scheduled to be signed off in mid-October and scheduled to come into force in mid-2025. Of course, it has bipartisan support, and the coalition congratulates Minister Farrell and the government on bringing this deal to a close. We also thank our good friends in the United Arab Emirates for their cooperation and assistance in finalising this deal. It is worth $9.96 billion in two-way trade, which is very significant. The main beneficiaries will be alumina producers and farmers from my electorate in Western Australia. That is a great result and, as I say, I applaud Minister Farrell for his work. There is also $20.6 billion in two-way investment—that's from the year 2023—which is a very significant investment between our two countries. I have less applause for the progress on the Australia-Gulf Cooperation Council free trade agreement which has stalled and has not moved in any particular direction recently. That includes the countries of Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Kuwait is important. I visited Kuwait in May of this year and had some very interesting conversations. I visited the Al Mawashi feedlot, abattoirs and showrooms, and was hosted by the CEO, Osama Boodai. Mr Boodai showed me their state-of-the-art facilities—their feedlot and abattoir—all ESCAS compliant of course. As the largest importer of Australian live sheep they were very concerned, of course, at the trade implications of the impending—at that stage—government ban and the future of the industry.

Of course, it's not just sheep that the Kuwaitis import from Australia. We visited Kuwait flour mills; Australian grain dominates. There's not a loaf of bread or any flour based product in Kuwait that doesn't contain Australian grain. The bulk of that grain comes out of Western Australia, most probably out of my electorate of O'Connor. So, there were great concerns. The Undersecretary of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Mr Ziad Abdullah Alnajem, met with me and expressed his concern about the current government's policy in relation to the import of live sheep for Kuwait. It's a major issue for their country in terms of food security. Of course, they were very concerned about that.

While I was in Kuwait I was able to pass on a letter signed by the two largest farm organisations in Western Australia—the Western Australian Farmers Federation and the Pastoralists and Graziers Association of Western Australia—to the Kuwaiti government saying that they did not support the Australian government's position on live exports and that, as the representatives of the Western Australian livestock industry, they were keen to continue what had been a long and prosperous relationship between our two countries. Of course, that message was well received by the Kuwaitis. However, subsequent to that visit, legislation was passed in this place to restrict that trade, a very important trade to the farmers of Western Australia.

On that note I will conclude that some progress has been made and the government has achieved some positive outcomes, particularly in relation to the UAE free-trade agreement, live exports and the greater Gulf Cooperation Council. Most of the countries I listed previously are currently importers of live sheep from Western Australia. Of course, Saudi Arabia, which is the largest live sheep export market in the world, earlier this year started to receive Australian sheep for the first time since 2011. So there is enormous opportunity which is potentially going begging in those Gulf countries. The relationships that we have built up, particularly with Kuwait, over many years of that trade stand us in very good stead, as I said. They almost exclusively import Australian wheat for their breadmaking and Australian barley to feed their livestock. These important trade relationships are being put at risk by the current government.

If the coalition is successful at the next election to be held in May 2025, we have made it very clear we will be reinstating that trade. I know that the shadow minister, who is with us here today, will be leading the charge to visit those Middle Eastern countries, reinstate that trade and rebuild our trade relationships.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to commend the member for O'Connor for his contribution, particularly the part at the end about live sheep export. Serving on the Standing Committee on Agriculture, I have seen the work he has done advocating for his local community. A true fighter for his industry and his community, I want to commend the member for O'Connor. Trade is such an important part of our country and all of our industries. Agriculture is a large part of my community in Casey and trade is key to that.

Australia has a population of around 27 million people. We are a small market in the world. There is a lot of conversation about that small market. When you look at supermarkets and at the 67 per cent market concentration between Woolworths and Coles, there is a lot we need to do. The risk of divestiture is a key part of holding the supermarkets to account, but the government is not prepared to take strong action. Another opportunity we must exploit is trade and that's why this agreement is such great news, because, by having strong free trade agreements, we open up the world. We give suppliers, farmers and businesses an opportunity to diversify and move away from that reliance on the majors. But one of the key elements of trade that makes Australia such a great producer for the world is the clean, green products that we grow and produce here, and a key element of that is our biosecurity regime.

One issue that many communities in Victoria have is the risk of fruit fly. As I said, we are well-known for our high-quality foods, we are well-known for being pest free, but we are at risk Queensland fruit fly coming into our community. Just recently, the Victorian Labor government made a decision to abandon the fruit and vegetable industries across our state, putting many families and many farms at risk not only in the short term but also in the long term. The reason that they have put the program at risk is that they have decided to defund the program that was to manage and control Queensland fruit fly until June 2025.

Queensland fruit fly is a major pest of concern for our trading partners, particularly those where there are specific biosecurity protocols. Queensland fruit fly, like all other pests and diseases, needs to be effectively managed at the source. If we are not able to do that, if we are not able to control the fruit fly at the source, if it gets into regions like the Yarra Valley and out into Shepparton and other parts of Victoria, it will put those export opportunities at risk. It would diminish the value of free trade agreements and would diminish the value of adding the UK to a free trade agreement. We need to protect it, and that is why I'm calling on the Victorian government and the federal government to work with industry to ensure the future management and control of the Queensland fruit fly, to ensure our horticulture industry continues to grow and export our world-class produce.

Make no mistake: this is a test for the federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Is the minister going to step in and support the fruit industries of Victoria to ensure they stay fruit-fly free? Is she going to hold the Victorian Labor government to account? Is she going to look to fill the funding gap that now exists to ensure that our agricultural industries can take advantage of these agreements? This is a test for the minister. Many on our side will be watching what action this minister takes closely. Will she proactively step in, or will she leave it to the Victorian Labor government, who have failed the agricultural communities of Casey and of Victoria? We will hold her to account to see whether she really understands the agricultural industry and the importance of agriculture in our community.

The importance in Casey is more than just the economic importance. I'm proud to say that my family made their lives in Australia when they came from Italy in 1953, establishing a farm in Silvan, in the electorate of Casey. I wouldn't be here today. I wouldn't have the opportunities I have, not just as the member for Casey but as a person, without farming. My uncle Sam recently sold the farm and got out. He's retired, although farmers never retire. His new house looks just like a farm. He spent decades as the president of the Victorian Strawberry Growers Association and the national strawberry growers association. He understands and my community understands that this isn't just about farming and economics. This is about community, and this is about family. Many Italian families created a life for themselves in the Yarra Valley, particularly through strawberry growing but also many other produce markets.

Last week we gathered at St Patrick's in Lilydale to pay tribute to one of those leaders in our industry, who tragically passed away. He passed away after a life well lived. We paid tribute to Antonio Molluso. Antonio Molluso was born on 1 January 1934. Like my family, he arrived in Australia in 1953. He passed away on 16 September 2024. While there was some sadness as we paid tribute to Antonio, it was a celebration of a life well lived and a life that continues on through his children and through his grandchildren who I have the honour of knowing and working with. One grandchild in particular, Paul Molluso, works in my office. The Molluso family have made a significant contribution to the community of Casey—the farming community and the wider community. I want to pay my respects to Antonio Molluso for everything that he has given to our community in Casey and everything he has given to his family and the farmers of our area.

As we gather this weekend on Friday and Saturday at the Wandin Silvan Field Days, I know many people that were at Antonio's funeral will also be there. We will make sure we pay tribute to him. This Friday and Saturday are the 55th annual Wandin Silvan Field Days. We'll be at the Wandin East Recreation Reserve, which is a wonderful event for locals and farmers to come together. For many in the strawberry industry and the wider fruit industries, it's the last weekend while they're still working that they can have a bit of downtime with their friends before the season actually starts and it's seven days a week 24 hours a day, because strawberries and other fruits don't care if it's Christmas Day. When they need to be picked, they need to be picked. It's an opportunity to get together. We'll also look at farming machinery, technology and industry developments. There's something there for the whole family as well. My kids love coming down. I'll be there with my team to talk to locals, so, if you are there, please come and say hello. I look forward to catching up with many of the farmers of our community, because it is a crucial part of the electorate of Casey and it is a crucial part of my family and many other families in Casey.

That's why we're delighted that the United Kingdom has joined the CPTPP, because the UK is a great trading nation within the rules based multilateral trade system and it has a strong track record of compliance, as have all other CPTPP members. This free trade agreement will spread and open new opportunities in the UK for Australian farmers, Australian businesses and Australian food producers, and it builds on the foundation of the Australia-UK Free Trade Agreement, which started on 31 May 2023 but was entered into and established under the coalition.

The coalition has a strong, proud record of backing Australian businesses to allow them to sell their goods and services all over the world, and we've long had an ambitious trade agenda. Of Australia's 16 free trade agreements, 13 were entered into under the coalition, and we know as a trading nation how important that is. As I said at the start, we're a small market, with one in five Australian jobs being trade related. On average, businesses that export their products employ more staff, pay higher wages and achieve higher productivity than non-exporters, and they also have the amazing opportunity to diversify away from the small market and the duopoly in the supermarket business. For many small market players, exporting allows them to build diversification into their business and secure their financial future.

Between 2013 and 2022, the coalition finalised 11 free trade agreements, including the FTA with the UK and the economic cooperation and trade agreement with India. The other nine agreements lifted the share of trade covered by FTAs from 27 per cent in 2013 to over 70 per cent. If you include India and the UK, that takes us to 80 per cent, and it's a tribute to that government that it was able to achieve long-lasting economic opportunities for Australia. It shows Australia's standing in the world. If you look at these free trade agreements, at the AUKUS agreement, at the Quad and at the many other global agreements established and maintained under the coalition, it shows the standing that Australia has in the world. We ratified the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world's largest free trade agreement. The 15 signatories account for around 30 per cent of the world's population and GDP. As I've said, we've actively supported our exporters to diversify export markets and create jobs and economic activity in regional, rural and remote communities.

While I've spoken about the importance of trade and free trade agreements, let's be very, very clear: we should never enter into a free trade agreement for the sake of saying we have done so. The conditions that we agree to have to be in Australia's interests and the interests of our farmers and our businesses. I talk not exclusively but specifically about geographic indicators, and I'm going to talk specifically about the issue of Prosecco. I had many in my community and many in the King Valley reach out to me, devastated and outraged about the threat that they were under from Prosecco being included in the European free trade agreement. We as an opposition, and I personally, lobbied the minister for trade not to do that agreement if it included GIs, geographic indicators, that would not only cause challenges to our industry but also create a precedent that would continue to cascade for generations to come. I want to pay tribute, in a genuine and bipartisan way, to the minister for trade for standing strong in those negotiations to make sure we didn't sign that agreement, because it wasn't in the best interests of our country. It wasn't in the best interests of the wineries of the Yarra Valley or the King Valley or any winery across our country, or any agricultural product within our country, because of the precedent it would set.

So, while we must always look to expand our trade opportunities as a country, we should only ever do so on the proviso that it is in our best interests. We cannot afford to sell our farmers out for the sake of a free trade agreement. We didn't do it at this time, and every day that I am in this House and in this role, when free-trade agreements come up, I will continue to make sure that the issue of geographic indicators is given the scrutiny it deserves, because they can have such significant ramifications in the short and long term for our community.

I am glad we have added the UK to this agreement. Trade is the lifeblood of so many businesses in our country. We need to continue to do more, and I'll make sure I'm always backing greater trade opportunities for Australia and for Casey, as long as it's on our terms and we benefit.

James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Government Waste Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I join my colleague the member for Casey and other coalition speakers in welcoming the Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Expansion) Bill 2024, indicating our support for it and, I suppose, also welcoming the United Kingdom to the world of having sovereignty over their own trade policy, because, indeed, it has only become an option for them in the last few years, since they left the European Common Market, to make decisions like entering the TPP framework.

Teddy Heath's decision in 1973, from memory, to enter the European Common Market was a really dark day for the Commonwealth of Nations and particularly for this great country and the economic relationship that we had with the United Kingdom. Many Australians, and particularly Australian businesses, saw that decision of the United Kingdom as one that saw them turning their backs on Commonwealth nations like Australia that had had a very deeply intertwined economic relationship with the UK until that point. My grandfather was the general manager of Mount Isa Mines, and in the fifties, sixties and seventies Australian companies, particularly mining companies, transacted all their sales through London. The London Metal Exchange was where Australians sold copper to the Japanese and so on and so forth. We were very interlinked with London, and, whilst we are happy to have the economic independence that we have today, it was disappointing to see the UK market closed off to so many Australian producers through the UK's decision to enter the European Common Market.

What that has been for decades is a complete protection racket for poor-quality producers against efficient producers like Australia. For decades and decades, Australian produce, particularly agricultural produce, struggled to compete in the European market, including in the United Kingdom, because it wasn't a level playing field. The protectionism, the tariff situation, the subsidy situation and the rationing of production—all of the various instruments that were available under that Common Agricultural Policy to all members of the European Economic Community, which became the EU and still operates to this day as a common market—conspired against Australian producers. Then, of course, we had the situation where trade wars would start to occur between North America and Europe, and it was a race to see who could protect their industries the most. Australia often got deeply caught in the crossfire of that and was majorly impacted by that crossfire.

To be fair, governments of the Labor persuasion, like the Hawke government, really called that out quite effectively, with things like the formation of the Cairns Group—which Australia led, of course, which is why it is called the Cairns Group—a group of like-minded nations that wanted to see trade liberalisation and see things like the TPP come to fruition but, more importantly than that, see the World Trade Organization come into its establishment. That happened with the Uruguay Round from 1986 to 1993 and the signing of the GATT in 1994. In 1995, the WTO finally came into existence, superseding the GATT 1947 regime, which had been relatively ineffective in achieving what everyone, particularly Australia, wanted it to, which was a fair and even playing field for the free trade of goods.

This country has never been frightened of competing out there in a free, deregulated global marketplace. In fact, we know, as a nation of—I think we're about to tick up to 27 million people in population. We are a comparatively small country with great abundance and the ability to produce certain commodities, in particular, in dramatic surplus to our domestic needs. That means that we need export markets and the opportunity to sell what we produce here not just to ourselves but to any nation around the world that wants to trade with us. We've agreed that the reciprocity of that means us equally not protecting industries in our country that might struggle to compete on a level playing field with others.

The breakdown of that protected trade tariff structure that commenced in the 1980s caused some collateral damage and some challenges to certain sectors in this country, and I worked in one of them myself, in the textile sector. We lost an enormous amount of textile manufacturing here in this country. As soon as the tariff walls fell, that obviously meant that countries with a comparative advantage in textile manufacturing—which in particular, regrettably, is the cost of labour—were able to easily compete and provide the same goods at a lower cost than Australian manufacturing. But we recognised—in particular, the Hawke and Keating government recognised—that the trade-off was going to increase the wealth of this country. Whilst we wouldn't sew together as many T-shirts as we had in the past and we might not, unfortunately, have the scale in our economy to maintain an unprotected whitegoods sector, for example—we've even lost the car industry in the decades since—the economic dividend of free trade would still mean that Australians would be wealthier. That has proved to be absolutely 100 per cent true. The economy that we are in right now, the strength of our economy and the abundance that we have in this nation are thanks to free trade and not being fearful of competition but embracing it.

This legislation that we have before us provides an opportunity for us to make the changes in our domestic legislation that we need to to accommodate United Kingdom joining the TPP. Some might wonder at the United Kingdom joining a Pacific trade forum, but it's always been the principle of the TPP that, where people seek to join it and where they are prepared to sign up to the framework that the TPP has in place, absolutely anyone is welcome. It's regrettable, frankly, that there aren't more people in the TPP than there currently are. It's regrettable that there are parts of the world, particularly our great friend the United States—in their politics, both Democrats and Republicans have really shifted quite a bit from what their attitudes to free and open markets were in the years and decades gone by. Both sides of politics in the United States have gone down a path of embracing increased protectionism. We in this country, thankfully, have not had the same intent or inclination from our political discourse—quite the reverse. There hopefully is consensus amongst the major parties in our national politics that free trade and open markets have been an overwhelmingly good thing for Australian industry, Australian jobs and Australian wealth, in particular in our resources sector and our agricultural sector.

We are one of the few nations on the planet to have a trade surplus with China. It is quite remarkable. There are hardly any countries that can say they have a trade surplus with China, and we have an enormous one with China. That's in an environment where we import a lot of product from China. So immense and so significant are our exports to China that they dramatically outweigh what we buy from China, and that's an overwhelmingly good thing. We've had strong trade surpluses for a long time now, particularly under the previous coalition government, that have endured, so far, under this government. Trade surpluses clearly, obviously and patently provide a dramatic uplift of wealth to our nation because we're selling more product to other markets than we're purchasing into our economy from other markets. The wealth of this nation is dramatically served by us embracing and achieving the dividend of free open markets.

This bill welcomes the United Kingdom into the TPP. It doesn't have a dramatic impact on our economic relationship with the United Kingdom because we have a free trade agreement directly with them, but it brings them into this community and this vehicle, the TPP. That is a big opportunity to continue to have its membership expanded. It would be great to have other genuine membership candidates come into the TPP—membership candidates that understand, respect and want to embrace the principles of the TPP.

It would also be good—I might indulge in my final few remarks—to see the World Trade Organization process and the next round of negotiations have some life breathed back into them. It is very disappointing that we haven't had any significant progress when it comes to the WTO rules and framework and further liberalisation of the multilateral system since the Uruguay Round. There's not been that significant progress we hoped would have happened in the intervening 30 years since the WTO came into existence with the successful conclusion of Uruguay. There have been some unsuccessful rounds and unsuccessful attempts to see further liberalisation of trade.

We in Australia are consistent and have a very strong record of always seeking and embracing opportunities in good faith to engage in trade liberalisation. We know it's good for the wealth of this nation. We know that free trade, open markets and open economies also provide a great collateral benefit of peace. When we're trading with each other and when we're integrated from an economic point of view, there is dramatically less incentive for conflict. So many conflicts were caused because of protected markets and a lack of free and open interaction economically between nations, and we know that trade liberalisation will achieve the reverse impact there.

I welcome the entry of the United Kingdom. I commend them for joining the TPP. I hope there are other opportunities for similar bills to be brought to us when other good-faith negotiations or applications to be in the TPP progress to this stage. With those comments, I commend the bill to the House.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I echo the fine words by the member for Sturt, who, as he explained, is very much across these issues and the importance generally of trade. I'm glad that we also have in the chamber, as I rise to speak on the Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Expansion) Bill 2024, the member for Hinkler, who was the assistant trade minister between 19 July 2016 and 20 December 2017, following on from the former member for Moncrieff, Steven Ciobo. In his time he worked hard on negotiations for ACCEP and he was involved heavily in what was a year of tourism with China, our largest trading partner. He did a lot of negotiation in the Pacific, such as in Tonga and elsewhere, and I commend him for the work he did in that trade role. Of course, we had the former member for Cowper, Luke Hartsuyker, follow on in that role, along with the current member for Parkes as an assistant trade minister. I also want to acknowledge the efforts, whilst we were in coalition government between 2013 and 2022, of former member for Goldstein Andrew Robb. I've mentioned the former member for Moncrieff, Steven Ciobo, and I also want to mention Senator Simon Birmingham and the current member for Wannon in particular.

Trade is important. When we concluded our terms in office, 71.3 per cent of trade and exports were covered by free trade agreements. When we took office in 2013, that number was around a quarter, 25 per cent. When we left office, it was nearly three-quarters. What does that mean? If you believe in the concept that around one in five jobs in Australia are dependent on trade—it's probably more likely one in four—it underpins the Australian economy. I know the Treasurer, the member for Rankin, in his budget last year couldn't bring himself to talk about coal and iron ore and those wonderful mining exports. He just talked about 'the things we sell overseas', but it's critical that we acknowledge that what those exports have done is to help us to reach a budget surplus twice. The high price that is being paid globally for iron ore and coal, in particular, has helped us reach budget surplus twice. It has very little to do with the member for Rankin and Labor's policies but a lot to do with what we do in regional areas.

I note that today the former British Prime Minister—albeit briefly—Liz Truss was on the floor of the parliament, and I certainly went over and welcomed her. I actually felt sorry for her. While she was Prime Minister, I think she got the raw end of the pineapple, which is very much an Australian colloquialism. She came in at a difficult time and received no help from some of her colleagues. She worked with the then trade minister, the member for Wannon, Dan Tehan, to work through trade relations with Australia before she took over the high office at No. 10 Downing Street.

It's important to note that while in office we undertook 1,230 major transport projects which supported 100,000 jobs—100,000 jobs which were also underpinned largely by trade. If you have the right infrastructure, like road networks, rail support systems and seaports—and obviously we invested heavily in airports as well—you can boost trade. Any self-respecting member, and certainly every regional member, knows that only too well, because it's regional areas which before, during and after COVID—not that we're out of the woods yet by any means—have supported our trade, our balance of payments, and this is what this bill is about.

When you think about the more than 1,200 mobile black spot base stations funded by the former coalition government, these are also critical for trade. The reason they're critical for trade is that, particularly with the deregulation of the wheat industry, so many of our farmers are now reliant on making their own trade deals and their own market deals, so they need good mobile phone coverage, and they've got it. We're certainly working on improving access for our farmers to markets all around the world.

The opposition is supportive of this particular legislation. We understand that this involves a plurilateral free trade arrangement between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam. The agreement was signed on 8 March 2018, back when we were in government, and entered into force for Australia on 30 December 2018.

Our relations in the Pacific and our wider trade agreements have never been more critical than right now. As coalition members, as members who understand trade, as members who fostered trade, as members who want to see more trade with more partners, we appreciate this agreement is one of the world's most comprehensive and ambitious trade agreements. It eliminates all but two per cent of tariffs in the trade zone, which represents a combined GDP of US$14.6 trillion and a population of 580 million people. That is a lot of people.

We are absolutely delighted with the accession of the United Kingdom to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the CPTPP. The UK, as the member for Sturt outlined, has long been, has always been, a great trading nation. It started back in the late 1700s. With the rules based multilateral trade system obviously having a big say on this, the UK possesses a strong track record of compliance with trade commitments that all CPTPP members must have in place. The UK is the first non-original member and European country to join the CPTPP and is now set to become the 12th member, and we welcome that.

Australia once traded on the back of our sheep, our wool, our sheepmeat. We very much were largely riding on our luck; our fortune rode on the back of a sheep. That is not the case anymore; although our sheep farmers are very important to us, and, certainly as the member for Riverina, I know that full well. While I talk about sheep, I am disappointed about the ban of the live sheep export trade because I think that it sends a very bad message to the Gulf states, to the Middle East, about trade. It does. The phasing out of that trade up to 2028 is a bad move and it will be reversed when next we get into government, and hopefully that will be if not later this year—a certain feeling in the air today—then maybe next year. I hear the little laugh from the member for Hasluck there. You can sense there's something in the offing. I think Labor are clearing the decks, and hopefully the voters will clear the decks at the next election.

But as I say, the UK's addition builds on the foundations of the Australia-United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force on 31 May 2023. I want to pay special tribute to the member for Wannon for the negotiations that he did with Ms Truss and others to bring about stronger trade relations with the UK. When I say 'stronger', they've always been strong, but he enhanced them. He further developed them.

This arrangement that this bill helps us to enter into and that puts Australia's seal on it will enhance the UK's engagement in the Indo Pacific in support of shared prosperity, security and regional stability. The transpacific area is very volatile at the moment. It is very important that we get the geopolitical balance right, and we are. When we talk about the Pacific, I would like to think Australia speaks as one. I have been to Pacific areas with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Wong, with the Minister for International Development and the Pacific, and certainly with Senator Birmingham to ensure that the Pacific Islands know, as the Prime Minister has put many times, that we are their first nation of choice, that we are their preferred partner. I don't agree with everything the Prime Minister utters, but I do agree with him very much on that score.

The UK is a welcome addition to a network of countries committed to free and rules based trade. That phrase, 'free and rules based trade', in itself is very important, because not everybody always plays by the rules. I know we have the World Trade Organization, which is very much there as the referee or umpire, but Australia always plays by the rules. As the member for Sturt said and as the member for Hinkler knows, we produce the finest quality food and fibre, and we do expect to be treated, when we sell our wares overseas, in a free and rules based order. When we aren't, we will complain and take action, because Australia deserves no less.

As I say, we, the Liberals and Nationals, have a very proud track record of backing Australian farmers, businesses and Australian miners to be able to sell to the world, because we've always been a trading nation. We have been in the past, we are now and we will certainly be that in the future, irrespective of whatever policies are put in place by those opposite to potentially shut down a lot of our mining interests. We as a government had an ambitious trade agenda. Of Australia's 16 free trade agreements in place at the moment, 13, all but three, entered into force under coalition governments. That was due to the hard work of the member for Hinkler, who is behind me, and those others I mentioned. As I said, one in five Australian jobs is trade related. I'd almost say it's higher. On average, exporting businesses employ more staff, pay higher wages and achieve higher productivity than those which are just domestic suppliers and non-exporters.

Between 2013 and 2022, the coalition government finalised 11 trade agreements, including the FTA with the UK and the economic cooperation and trade agreement with India, and they weren't easy to do. You would think that the UK one would almost be a tick and flick, but indeed the Australia deal, when it was finalised, was described as one of Ms Truss's aides as the hardest thing she had ever got through. That's according to Wikipedia—and, of course, Wikipedia's always right! But it would be accurate on that score. I know, having spoken to the member for Wannon, that it wasn't easy or straightforward, but it was achieved, and it was achieved because of the good work of the coalition and because the world knows that we produce the best food and fibre anywhere. We implemented nine trade agreements in government, lifting the share of trade covered by such agreements from about a quarter—the figure was 27 per cent in 2013—to more than 70 per cent. When you take into account the India and UK FTAs, that takes it above 80 per cent, so we had a good track record. I'm very supportive of whatever Labor can do to build on that. Indeed, that is why this bill is important. It's important as a representation to our farmers that the government supports them. On many issues, unfortunately, the government have shown by their policies that they don't.

Debate adjourned.