Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to this piece of legislation as well. To be very clear and on the record: the Greens do not support this trade amendment legislation. We are concerned that the inclusion of things like ISDS clauses only serve to weaken Australia's ability to ensure that we—our nation; our parliament—can set rules for ourselves and for the people that we represent. We need to be able to do that without fear of being sued by foreign companies. These clauses, of course, have been effectively copied, slab by slab, from the clauses in the TPP, and, even though that trade arrangement has been put in the dustbin after the election of Donald Trump in the US, the fact that many of those clauses have simply been carbon-copied into other trade arrangements is very, very concerning. It sets a dangerous precedent for how we negotiate trade agreements going forward and what type of bar Australia is willing to set when we negotiate what we should be trading off in these negotiations.

Of course, Australia is a trading country. We always have been and always will be. The debate needs to be about whether it's good trade or not. We always hear that it's about free trade. Well, it's not that free when you start signing your government up to clauses which stop us from being able to implement laws and make changes because we're worried that a foreign company might have the right to sue. Countries right around the world are becoming more and more suss in relation to the ISDS clauses that are creeping into trade arrangements, and Australia should be learning from those concerns and from those mistakes. We should stop signing up to agreements that effectively gag democracy in this country and that stop the Australian people from being able to demand action from government and changes to laws which foreign companies can then argue are retrospective changes that might impact on their profit margins. If Australia is going to enter into negotiations, we also need to be able to have the right to implement our own laws and changes as called upon by the Australian community, the people that in this place we are meant to be representing and acting in the best interests of.

Of course, again we have seen a trade arrangement with these amendments negotiated in secret away from elements of transparency. As Senator Carr has pointed out, there hasn't been any independent economic modelling, so we are asked to simply trust that the government has got this right. I for one have very little faith that this government has considered the economic impact on everyday Australians, and future Australians, from these deals. If there isn't anything to hide, why not do it in the open, with full transparency, and allow the Australian people and businesses to see exactly what has been negotiated and what has been traded off? The lack of transparency in these trade negotiations continues to be a huge concern for the Australian Greens and many, many other Australians. We are asked just to give blind trust. Under this government—indeed, under any government, but under this government in particular—blind trust is not a smart or a wise thing to give.

We know, of course, that in this arrangement and the amendments put into the Singapore-Australia Free Trade Agreement is a trading off of the rights of local workers. The weakening of protection for local market testing is a huge concern, and we've heard from Senator Carr in relation to this already this morning. I am disappointed that Labor are prepared to stand here and list all these things that they're not happy about in relation to this trade agreement but then they're going to sit here and flick it through. They pay lip service to this issue time and time again.

Australia has to be engaged with the rest of the world. We, of course, are going to continue to be a trading nation. Let's do it properly. Let's do it right. Let's make sure it's good trade, not bad trade. Let's make sure we have full transparency and the faith of the Australian community and the international community as we go forward with this. Giving more power to corporations through ISDS clauses that allow them to sue Australia and other countries because they don't like decisions that democratic governments make is a bad idea. That isn't free trade; that's bad trade. We're simply signing ourselves up to a list of obligations and clauses that gag democracy into the future. It's a silly and tricky way of arguing that you've done something right for the economic prosperity of the nation, when actually you've just signed a blank cheque. We will always stand in opposition to trade agreements that include these insidious, undemocratic and dangerous ISDS clauses. We believe that, at a time when we know there is a problem of exploitation of vulnerable foreign workers in Australia—we've seen it in the mining industry; we've seen it in other industries—we shouldn't be weakening the protection for foreign workers in Australia, and we shouldn't be weakening the elements of local labour testing either.

These are regressive amendments in this bill. They're not going to help Australia strengthen our position. Of course trade agreements are going to have to be updated and amended from time to time. The Singapore-Australia agreement entered into force in 2003—of course it's time to update it, but let's make sure it gets better, not worse. This amendment weakens Australia's position. It lowers the bar which we are prepared to accept in future negotiations with other countries and other trading partners and sets a very dangerous precedent for insidious, undemocratic clauses, like ISDSs, that will be used as the way forward for future arrangements.

The Greens will be voting against this. We're very disappointed that the Labor Party have again fallen foul and are simply rolling over with the government on this. They say they've got concerns, but, when it comes to crunch time, they fail to stand up.