Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After 15 Dorothy Dixers from the government this week on the China free trade deal, I have some real questions for the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Investment, Senator Payne. Minister, the government has claimed this week that the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, if signed, will immediately create tens of thousands of jobs and add billions of dollars to the Australian economy. Given that trade is a major component used in the measurement of GDP, or economic growth, can the minister explain why the supposed 'rivers of gold' from ChAFTA are not factored into Treasury forecasts for economic growth?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Whish-Wilson for the question. If forecasts for the free trade agreement had been factored into Treasury's forecasts on growth, I imagine you would have criticised us for doing that before the free trade agreement was ratified. I think it has been demonstrated repeatedly in the chamber this week—not just by me but by Senator Brandis, Senator Scullion Senator Birmingham and a number of ministers in the chamber—that the potential under the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is absolutely enormous. Whether it be the Financial Services Council or the National Farmers' Federation, all peak bodies are looking with extreme interest at what they will be able to do in their sectors. More importantly, they are looking at what the damage to their sectors will be if the free trade agreement is not signed this year. We know that there will be—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Whish-Wilson, on a point of order.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I asked why this potential is not factored into Treasury forecasts for economic growth. That is what I asked. If it is real, if it is not baloney, why not put it into Treasury forecasts?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, I think the minister was only halfway through her answer. That was one portion of your question. I think the minister has been directly relevant and especially up-front with her answer. Minister.

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr President. I was speaking about the potential impact on Australian business and industry if the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is not signed this year. If it is signed this year then there is a bonus at the end of this year for our exporters and a bonus at the beginning of next year for our exporters—for businesses I spoke about in the chamber this week such as Ensitech and RBK Nutraceuticals, both of which are exporters from Western Sydney. But if we do not want to talk about Western Sydney, we can even talk about Tasmania. I know that Senator McKim this week was waxing lyrical about all of the wonderful produce exported—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. A point of order, Senator Whish-Wilson?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, with 17 seconds left to go, why are these trade deals not factored into Treasury forecasts for economic growth?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator Whish-Wilson, I think the minister did address that up-front with her answer. Minister, you have 17 seconds in which to answer the question.

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying about all of the wonderful produce from Tasmania, it is ironic indeed that Senator Whish-Wilson's Tasmanian colleague does not seem to want to provide opportunities for Tasmanian businesses to actually send that produce into the Chinese market—Australia's largest market, and growing at 20 per cent per annum.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. At Senate estimates earlier this year, I asked the deputy head of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade why the department does not share with Treasury its national interest analysis outlining the benefits of these trade deals for the Australian economy. The answer I got was that, from an economy-wide perspective, these deals would not be significant enough to alter Treasury forecasting of GDP. Does the minister not agree with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not actually think that what Senator Whish-Wilson has indicated is inconsistent with anything that I or any other member of the government has said in relation to the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement in any of the discussions in the chamber this week.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. The investor-state dispute settlement chapter in ChAFTA does not appear to have been finalised, which is unprecedented. Can the government guarantee that Australia will not be sued by Chinese companies for simply changing policy or laws in the public interest? Could, for example, the Shenhua Watermark coalmine use strategic ISDS litigation to challenge changes to future state and federal environmental laws that impact on their investment?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it is really important to be very clear about the ISDS provisions in this agreement. The ISDS provisions in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement provide a mechanism for Australian or Chinese investors to pursue international arbitration based on a claimed violation of the national treatment commitment in the investment chapter. ISDS does not protect an investor from any loss of profits from a change in government policy or regulation. ISDS also does not prevent a government from changing its policies or regulating in the public interest. Investors should understand the relevant regulatory environment before they commit to making their investments. What modern ISDS mechanisms—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Whish-Wilson, a point of order?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I did back up my question with an example, that is true. But the primary question was: can the minister guarantee that Australia will not be sued by strategic litigation with ISDS?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has been addressing the question—not necessarily that specific portion. Minister, you have the call.

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am trying to explain to Senator Whish-Wilson and to the chamber these aspects of the ISDS. I think I was saying that modern ISDS mechanisms incorporate explicit safeguards to reaffirm the right of governments to take decisions in the public interest, including in the areas of health and the environment, and reduce the chance of foreign investors bringing frivolous claims. (Time expired)