Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

Very briefly, the government will not be supporting this amendment. Australia has had ISDS arrangements in place for over 30 years. During that time, only one ISDS case has been brought before Australia in tribunal. That, indeed, is the one that Senator Steele-John referenced, in relation to Philip Morris, which I note the government successfully defended. I further note that, in terms of ISDS provisions, further safeguards have been built in to modernise ISDS provisions that would see even that case, which we successfully defended, not get as far as it did, in the future.

In contrast, the government is aware that at least five Australian companies have made ISDS claims against other governments in relation to the protection of investments that were threatened by those governments, often in the case of places that don't have the same type of respect for sovereign risk and other practices that Australian governments tend to have. Removing ISDS from these three free trade agreements, as this amendment proposes, would not remove ISDS with these countries. Instead, it would simply leave in place older provisions. The new provisions are far superior and ought to stand.