Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've not had a lot of time to look at the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. I understand they have been brought on in a bit of a rush. Clearly the government is a bit short of business again, so I'll give this lengthy consideration. It is a tragedy to see the once-great Liberal Party descend to this level of chaos and indecision so soon after they thought they'd sorted out all their problems. But they were able to find this somewhere deep in the barrel. They ducked in and produced some legislation that they had to get exempted from the cut-off to allow it to proceed. This is not controversial legislation. It's a straightforward matter. I guess you'll have to dig a lot deeper to get to the next piece of legislation. This will not take a long period of time, I expect, because Labor supports the bills.

As much of this legislation goes to development measures as it does to customs and trade matters. These measures amend the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to implement the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus, known as PACER Plus. Australia, Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Tuvalu signed this agreement last year. The agreement is a comprehensive regional economic integration agreement, consistent with World Trade Organization rules. It covers a range of goods and services, investment and established rules and commitment between the various parties to the agreement.

The agreement also, as the bill outlines, includes an aid component to help with the development of the region. Under the agreement, tariffs will be cut on 88.5 per cent of Australian exports to signatory countries, apart from New Zealand. It also means that there will be no tariffs on goods imported from signatory countries to Australia, apart from New Zealand. Under the agreement, we will also provide some $4 million to assist Pacific island nations to prepare to ratify this agreement and $19 million for them to update their customs processes. That, of course, does not even begin to compensate for the $11 billion this government has cut from the aid budget. There's a bit of irony that we should be debating bills that provide $4 million when some $11 billion has been cut from the budget.

The agreement has been scrutinised by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which has recommended that the agreement include an independent economic analysis of the merits of this agreement. That's a proposition that this chamber should fully endorse. The JSCOT has made the same recommendation for other trade bills, including some of the more contentious legislation that is to come before the chamber. The Labor Party will have more to say on this matter when those bills are introduced, but I give notice that a future Labor government will ensure that all future trade agreements are subject to independent economic analysis.

These bills provide for 'free' rates of customs duty, which, when enacted, will mean that a new schedule will be provided for excise-equivalent rates of duty on certain alcohol, tobacco and fuel products in accordance with this agreement. The amendments provide for certain concessional items listed under the Customs Tariff Act to maintain customs duty rates in line with the applicable concession items and in accordance with the agreement. Complementary amendments will be made to the Customs Act by the customs amendment bill to introduce new rules of origin for goods imported into Australia from parties to the agreement. The bill provides that these new rules will determine what eligible goods would be subject to preferential treatment of customs duty in accordance with the agreement. The bill contains no matters which we would regard as being contentious, and it is surprising that it is not being considered in the non-controversial bills section of our normal business. The Labor Party is pleased to support it.

I had a look at the details of some of the measures that have taken my interest in regard to Niue. It is a country of some importance, as the ABC told us in a recent story. Niue is a country with a population of about 1,800. I'm told that about 80 per cent of them are actually from New Zealand and that many of them participate in sporting clubs in New Zealand. Of particular note was the appearance of a mallard duck in Niue. People can't quite work out where it's come from. The ABC has given us very good coverage of the issue; there is a lot of news generated in the Pacific these days from the ABC. The duck even has a name—Trevor—and is said to have come from New Zealand. It's described as a major problem, because there are no wetlands and no ponds on Niue, so the fire brigade has to provide the necessary water conditions for Trevor the mallard duck. I understand that it's named Trevor after the Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives. It's said to be a very miserable duck, because it is so lonely. Unfortunately, there are no other ducks on Niue, so it has no partners. We're looking forward to seeing what other biosecurity issues have arisen as a result of this matter and whether or not this agreement will cover these questions in the future.

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

I rise to add the Greens contribution to this legislation. The Greens remain concerned about the power imbalances in PACER Plus negotiations. We've been concerned for quite some time that Australia and New Zealand have used their big-brother, or big-sister, influence in the region to a point where they have disenfranchised some of the smaller nations in our region and undermined their genuine ability to participate.

We know, of course, that Papua New Guinea and Fiji, the two largest Pacific island nation economies, are notably absent from this deal, and that Vanuatu and Tonga have at various times withdrawn from the process. We've been concerned that in a modern world such as this, where Australia has a responsibility to help those in our region who aren't as big, don't have democracies that are as stable and aren't able to sustain themselves economically in the way Australia is able to, we have in fact stood over them in these negotiations. We are concerned that that is now being reflected in the PACER Plus arrangement that we're debating today.

The refusal of Papua New Guinea and Fiji to sign the agreement is significant, because they represent 80 per cent of the combined GDP of Pacific island countries. If 80 per cent of the economies are not even represented in this deal, you've got to ask yourself why—why is Australia pursuing this in this manner? It raises the question of whether small Pacific nations felt unfairly pressured by Australia and New Zealand to enter the agreement. Anecdotally, of course, we have heard from representatives of these island nations that, yes, they did indeed feel put upon by Australia and New Zealand and felt the pressure immensely.

The primary impact of PACER Plus is to decrease tariffs on Australian and New Zealand exports to these Pacific countries. It's very clear that, as the big nations, we are getting the best deal out of this. Some would say that's fine, except that we live in a neighbourhood and we have a responsibility, as the wealthiest nation, the largest economy in the region, to play better and be a bit fairer in this. We know that this disproportionate pact, which benefits Australia and New Zealand, could easily just be agreed to. But what does that mean and what signal does that send to countries in the rest of the region, particularly the smaller ones, who feel they had to agree or are going to be resentful, going forward, of this and the attitude that's been presented by Australia?

Proposals by Australia and New Zealand to introduce or increase consumption taxes to offset tariff cuts will not provide adequate compensation for revenue loss. Studies have demonstrated that replacing tariffs with consumption taxes in developing nations only compensates for 30 per cent of lost revenue. Countries in the Pacific region are increasingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, and it's extraordinary that this deal does nothing to address the real-life impact on these countries of rising sea levels and the other impacts of climate change. We know that, despite a growing urgency to support Pacific island countries to combat climate change, this declaration does zilch. Despite the government signing a declaration just weeks ago identifying climate change as the greatest single threat to Pacific peoples, PACER Plus does not even include proper environmental protection measures. It's a case of 'Look over here while we do something else'; of refusing to tackle what will be, beyond any doubt, the biggest impact into the future for our Pacific island neighbours. We know that climate change needs to be tackled and we know that they need help in dealing with that, yet Australia continues to just turn the other cheek. It's not good enough at all.

Tariff cuts will disproportionately affect women in the Pacific region. Women in Pacific communities are largely employed in the industries that will be affected most by these tariff cuts, such as clothing manufacturing and small-scale agriculture. We hear a lot in this place from various NGOs and community based organisations about what Australia can do to show leadership in the region in relation to empowering women, giving them a voice and giving them independence and the ability to be economically sustainable.

This deal, because of its nature, and because it has been managed quite heavy-handedly from the Australian perspective, is going to impact on our sisters in the Pacific region and those Pacific Islands disproportionately. I think this place needs to consider that when looking at this legislation. The last thing we want is women in the Pacific to be even more disadvantaged just because Australia wanted to squeeze more money out of our poor neighbours and our poor cousins throughout the Pacific. It's not good enough. We should be doing more to support women in the Pacific, not simply allowing this to go through and think it doesn't have an effect. When we talk about clothing manufacturing or small-scale agriculture, we should be doing much more to help these women and their families and communities to become self-sustaining and economically robust. This does the exact opposite. This rips the carpet out from beneath them. It will have dire impacts on these women unless we do something to fix it.

The Greens, as I've said, remain very concerned about this. We won't be supporting it. We wish that the government would have been a little more considerate of the desires and concerns raised by our Pacific island neighbours. The fact that climate change isn't in here and the fact that it disproportionately impacts on the poorest women in our region are enough for me to say that this isn't something that Australia should be pursuing.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to speak in support of the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. The key theme of these bills is to promote an open Pacific economic integration and to advance development in the Pacific. PACER Plus is a unique framework and an important part of our trade agenda in the region. The Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations, PACER Plus, is a unique framework because it is both a development centred agreement plus a regional free trade agreement. The agreement includes a substantial development assistance package of $7.7 million to help countries to prepare to ratify the agreement, and a further $25 million in the implementation assistance after entry into force.

But I cannot go beyond making some observations in relation to what Senator Hanson-Young just said. It demonstrates, yet again, the Greens total lack of understanding and a patronising attitude in relation to our neighbours. On the issue of women, clearly, Senator Hanson-Young, you are not aware that the negotiations for PACER Plus commenced in 2009 and they concluded in Brisbane in April 2017. They have been worked through assiduously with our Pacific island neighbours. PACER Plus opened for signature in June 2017, and, to date, has been signed by 11 countries: Australia, the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. I have to say that your patronising comments in relation to these countries demonstrate, yet again, your total lack of understanding of what is happening in our neighbourhood.

On the issue of women, we have had a very successful program of Pacific women shaping Pacific development. It's been a $320 million project over 10 years and has brought considerable benefits to our Pacific island sisters. On the issue of climate change, as part of the $1 billion commitment that Australia gave as part of its commitment to the Paris agreement, $300 million over four years is for building Pacific resilience and addressing climate issues in the Pacific. That's in addition to the $200 million that went to the Green Climate Fund. So, Senator Hanson-Young, before you come in here and pontificate on matters that you know absolutely nothing about, why don't you go and check your facts before you are critical about these issues?

Let me get back to PACER Plus. PACER Plus will help drive economic prosperity and raise living standards in our region. Our foreign policy white paper points out that being open to trade and investment creates wealth and supports higher living standards. A strong rules based liberalised international trading system is in the interests of all countries, including providing opportunities for developing countries to engage more in international trade. Perhaps those opposite haven't looked, but some Pacific island countries are in the process of moving towards graduation in relation to their economic status. It is important that Australia be amongst the first countries to ratify the agreement, as early ratification would signal our clear commitment not just to PACER Plus but to this important rules based trade in the Indo-Pacific region.

PACER Plus will deliver modest economic and commercial benefits to Australia, and I'm sure that the minister will elaborate on some of these benefits to Australia—modest though they are, commensurate with the size of participating Pacific island economies. In particular Australian producers of goods, suppliers of services and investors will benefit from more liberal and secure market access in the Pacific. By promoting growth and development, and strengthening reform processes in the Pacific, PACER Plus will expand commercial opportunities for Australian countries in the region to trade with their Pacific neighbours. Pacific island countries will have eliminated tariffs on the vast majority, 91.5 per cent, of their tariff lines, covering the bulk, 88.5 per cent, of Australia's exports. Based on 2016 data this represents a total value of $360 million when PACER Plus is fully implemented.

Australia's largest services exports to the Pacific are tourism and travel services, transport services and financial services, including insurance. Our Pacific island country signatories have made commitments in each of these sectors, many for the first time. Australian service suppliers will benefit for the first time from commitments from non-WTO members such as the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue and Tuvalu. The 'most favoured nation' provisions in the agreement will help safeguard access for Australian producers of goods, suppliers of services and investors in the event that Pacific island countries apply more favourable treatment for the producers, suppliers and investors of nonparties, such as under free trade agreements.

Our foreign policy white paper identified the following:

Economic integration within the region and with Australia and New Zealand is vital to the economic prospects of the Pacific. Growth is constrained for most countries because of a combination of remoteness from markets, limited land and resource bases, the dispersal of people over many islands and environmental fragility.

The underlying impetus for negotiating PACER Plus and its goals of regional economic integration align with the narrative in our foreign policy white paper. The formation of an interconnected Pacific market which includes Australia and New Zealand will enable Pacific island countries to create a larger market not only for its consumers but also for its producers.

PACER Plus will not only cover trade in goods but also extend to trade in services, in investment, in labour mobility and in development assistance. For many countries in our region this will be the first WTO-compliant free trade agreement. When in force it will stand as a valuable example of the region's collective effort to work together towards greater economic integration. By establishing a common framework through which to transact each element of the participating country's economic relationships, PACER Plus supports the long-term economic development of Pacific island countries through closer integration with Australia and New Zealand, with each other and with the global economy. We recognise that it is important that, for trade to thrive, trade liberalisation has to be accompanied by a supportive policy environment, and that includes sound economic management, reforms and effective service delivery. We have committed to assist our Pacific island neighbours with transition, and we've taken careful consideration of issues like implementation time lines.

The region continues to experience significant economic, social and environmental challenges, and, having been minister from February 2016 until recently, I saw this firsthand. I had the opportunity to visit many parts of the Pacific. Indeed, I made over 35 trips to the Pacific during this time, and I saw for myself that distance and weak infrastructure make international trade expensive, but small domestic markets and narrow production bases mean that countries rely on it for income and consumption. And whilst the agreement provides a regional framework for trade and economic integration, dedicated assistance to each of these countries will be vital to address the barriers that those countries are facing and, of course, to unlock the potential of the Pacific and its ability to partake in the benefits.

An important component of this is the readiness package. We and New Zealand have provided assistance for readiness activities. To help signatories, we are supporting processes like legislative drafting to assist the signatories to review and update their relevant national laws and regulation as well as customs modernisation, harmonisation, implementation of up-to-date tariff codes and transposition of schedules so that each signatory will be able to implement the latest version of the internationally recognised system known as the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. There will be training on notification requirements, including helping governments and private sectors in those Pacific island countries to meet the obligations around transparency. There will be funding for public outreach and stakeholder engagement, and there will also be revenue planning and mitigation to help signatories manage any impact on government revenues associated with tariff reductions. There's also a PACER Plus implementation package. Upon entry into force, Australia and New Zealand will provide a further funding package of $19 million and NZ$7 million respectively over five years, and this will focus on rules of origin and the implementation of those tariff commitments; customs; sanitary and phytosanitary measures; technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment; trade in services; and investment.

One of the key advantages of PACER Plus—and I have had many conversations with different Pacific island country stakeholders, ministers and the private sector—is that, in short, if Pacific island countries get their biosecurity systems up to a level at which they can export to Australia and New Zealand, then they can export to any other country around the world. Therefore, this is a very, very good thing for the Pacific. This is one of the key features that they have been asking us for, and that's why PACER Plus is so important.

One of the other components of development assistance, particularly in the Pacific, has been our Aid for Trade program. As part of PACER Plus, Australia remains committed to our Aid for Trade funding target of 20 per cent of our overseas development assistance budget in the Pacific. This target, of course, will complement the party's own trade related initiatives as Pacific island countries seek to increase growth, generate jobs and increase living standards for their people. Let me share some examples with the Senate of how this is being done. It's being done through agriculture export development. The Pacific Horticultural and Agricultural Market Access Program, PHAMA, helps Pacific exporters meet quarantine standards and other market access requirements of trading partners. It's being done through trade facilitation, export promotion and investment. We have increased funding to the Oceania Customs Organisation to help strengthen Pacific customs administrations, and we will continue our longstanding support for Pacific Trade Invest which provides high-quality export facilitation, investment and tourism promotion services across the region.

A separate non-binding arrangement on labour mobility has also been signed by Australia, New Zealand and Pacific island signatories to PACER Plus. Our new Pacific labour scheme will allow workers from the Pacific to take up non-seasonal low-skilled and semiskilled work in rural and regional Australia in growth sectors such as tourism and hospitality, disability and aged care, and non-seasonal agriculture. Why? Because it's about capacity building. It's about developing and affording opportunities to our Pacific island neighbours and people there to develop their skills, to come to Australia, to work in Australia and then to take those skills back into the Pacific, which is vitally important for their own economic development.

This, of course, is in parallel with our Seasonal Worker Program. Our Seasonal Worker Program will be streamlined to give more Australian employers access to a reliable, seasonal workforce drawn from the Pacific and Timor-Leste. We know how successful the Seasonal Worker Program has been for our Pacific island neighbours. Since its inception, about 12,000 or 13,000 Pacific island workers have come to Australia, and they often take back to their countries net gains of $5,000 or $6,000, which has enabled families to send their children to school, buy their own homes and do those things that are very important: to pay for their education, to set up businesses, and to build houses and community facilities. Of course, we will continue to work on all the outstanding partners to the agreement, because we consider that the benefits for Pacific economies outweigh any potential costs. I know that those discussions are ongoing, and I'm sure the minister will elaborate on how those are progressing.

Whilst PACER Plus will reduce government tariff revenue, it includes lengthy implementation schedules. The first tariff reductions are not required until 10 years after the agreement enters into force, and they are then phased in over the following 25 years. This means that all of the tariff reductions will not be fully implemented until 2053 at the earliest. That well and truly will enable Pacific island countries to take the implementation of this agreement at their own pace and implement it fully within their own economic systems.

The agreement underscores the role of open trade and investment in enabling economic development and rising living standards across our region. The agreement will cover an additional 1.5 million people who are not presently captured under Australia's existing FTAs. Whilst the commercial value of the trade with Pacific island countries is modest, this agreement will lay the foundations for its future growth. In 2015, Australia's goods and services two-way trade with participating Pacific countries totalled $1.2 billion of our total trade.

As I have said, PACER Plus is an unique agreement, because it is both a trade and a development agreement. It has the potential to shape and reshape the economic fundamentals of the Pacific region by creating new opportunities for trade and investment in our neighbourhood. Overall, we will see simplification and enhancing of regional trade, and also, of course, we will help Pacific island countries grow their economies by accessing international markets. It will facilitate greater integration of Pacific island economies into the global rules-based trading system and, of course, reshape the economic fundamentals of the Pacific region, creating new opportunities for trade and investment that will drive economic growth and, as I have said, raise living standards. It will also help Pacific island countries modernise their economies. For example, we will be able to assist Pacific island countries to modernise their customs and tax systems in preparation for implementation of PACER Plus. Our assistance will help build capacity in trade promotion, in investment facilitation, in biosecurity, and in micro, small and medium enterprises. The region has been slow to implement structural reform, and more needs to be done to integrate business environments and promote intraregional trade and investment. This is a great opportunity to promote reform, and it will provide an important impetus for change.

PACER Plus is also designed to remain open to the participation of nonparties, including Fiji and PNG. The agreement will be beneficial for all Pacific island countries, including Fiji and Papua New Guinea, if and when they decide to become parties. And I know that those discussions are ongoing. I, myself, was part of those discussions as minister. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties noted that the absence of Fiji and PNG from PACER Plus may impact the scope of PACER Plus, but it also noted that, due to the long time frame over which PACER Plus will be implemented, there is sufficient opportunity for these countries to join the agreement if satisfactory conditions can be negotiated.

French Polynesia and New Caledonia, having now become full members of the Pacific Islands Forum, can apply to accede to PACER Plus, and perhaps the minister can also advise us as to how those negotiations are going. As with other parties, participation would require them to conclude negotiations on their market access schedules, and we know that those discussions have been had with countries around their potential involvement. As part of the readiness package, parties will be supported in their preparation to initially implement and ratify the agreement to respond to the needs assessment undertaken by the independent Office of the Chief Trade Adviser. Australia, as I have indicated, and New Zealand are assisting with those readiness activities. (Time expired)

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As it stands, the Greens do not support PACER Plus, and we won't be supporting this legislation. It's worth pointing out that Papua New Guinea and Fiji, the two largest Pacific island nation economies, are notably absent from this deal, and Vanuatu and Tonga have, at various times, withdrawn from the process. But what remains the elephant in the room as far as the Australian government is concerned in its dealings with our Pacific island neighbours is climate change. Of course, climate change is the elephant in the room as far as this government is concerned with regard to a whole range of public policy matters that it considers, but it is particularly relevant when we think about our Pacific neighbours. There are many Pacific island nations that have actually shown fantastic global leadership on the issue of climate change, and that's because they are going to be disproportionately impacted by climate change, particularly sea level rise, when in fact at a global level they have contributed next to nothing to the problem.

It's all very well for Senator Fierravanti-Wells to get up and talk today about some pitifully small amounts of money that Australia has allocated to Pacific island nations to prepare for the climate catastrophe that is looming for them, but let's be clear about the actual opportunity here for Australia. We need to show leadership in emissions reduction, not hand over some pitifully small amounts of money to nations that are likely to disappear off our global maps by the end of the century as a result of sea level rise. What's the Australian government proposing—that a nation like Kiribati, for example, get a few hydraulic jacks under it and jack itself up a couple of metres to avoid it disappearing underneath the surface of the Pacific Ocean in the next century or so? It beggars belief that we had a Pacific Islands Forum recently where the LNP government took deliberate steps to undermine serious action on climate change. And, remember, this government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the fossil fuel sector in this country. The LNP receives tens of millions of dollars in donations every year from dirty, polluting big corporations. We've got a Prime Minister who, of course, is infamous for waving a lump of coal around in the House of Representatives. Typically, he had to have that lump of coal covered in lacquer so he wouldn't get his hands dirty. Well, it didn't work for the Prime Minister, because his hands are filthy with coaldust and they are filthy from accepting donations from big fossil fuel companies.

This is a government made up of climate change deniers, a government made up of climate criminals, and it is posing an existential threat to some Pacific island nations. And do you know what? They know all this. Remember that the Minister for Home Affairs, Peter Dutton, and former Prime Minister Tony Abbott were caught on camera a few years ago having a good old laugh at the impacts of sea level rise on Pacific island nations. Until Australia steps up on emissions reduction, until we become a global leader on climate change, we are a bad neighbour to Pacific island countries. We need to do more. We need to take stronger action. We ought to be a global leader in emissions reduction. And we ought not believe that we can somehow buy off Pacific island nations with pitifully small amounts of foreign aid money that, in the words of the government, will enable them to build climate resilience into their economies and their communities when, in fact, it will do next to nothing to help our Pacific island neighbours avoid the most serious impacts of the disruption to our climate—which half of this government don't believe is being caused by humans and which the other half are not prepared to take the required action on because they have been bought off by the fossil fuel sector.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the associated bill. I would note that the bill is, I think rather fittingly, the first bill I am taking through this chamber, and I'm very happy and proud that it is this particular bill.

First of all, I'd like to thank those opposite for their support for this very important bill. I think bipartisanship on this particular issue for our Pacific neighbours is particularly important. Before I go into the specifics of the bill, I would like to address a number of the issues raised by the two Greens senators speaking on this. I think there are a number of areas where they have grossly misrepresented the nature and the benefits of this PACER agreement. Also, clearly, they have no understanding of the strategic context. So I'd like to deal with both of those first.

In relation to the issue of who is joining this, 11 Pacific countries, as we know, have engaged in this already. In relation to the issue of Papua New Guinea, we would note that this is not the end of the agreement; this is just the start. The nations that are still considering joining this agreement are of course very welcome, but I would point out to the Greens that this is a sovereign decision of those nations. In relation to several comments from Senators McKim and Hanson-Young, I'd make this point: like my colleague Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I found them extremely patronising to those nations involved. These negotiations have been extensive and they have been done with the utmost mutual respect on behalf of all of the nations involved. Our officials and the former minister, Senator Fierravanti-Wells, as we've heard, were deeply engaged in this process. But I don't think the senators stopped to think about that or about our trade negotiators, who have spent many months, if not years, on these negotiations. I think that to suggest they were bullying or intimidating our partners in the region is, quite frankly, insulting, and the facts certainly do not bear that out.

In relation to the bill itself, PACER Plus is a regional-development-centred trade agreement. That is why I'm particularly proud to be taking the bill through this chamber today. To date, PACER Plus, as I said, has been signed by 11 member of the Pacific Islands Forum—that is, Australia, Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. As I said, this is just the start, and negotiations and discussions still continue with other nations.

PACER Plus will provide commercial opportunities for Australian exporters and investors in a range of sectors. These opportunities will increase over time as the provisions of the agreement lead to more open and transparent policies as wider relationships are built regionally and beyond. The agreement itself reflects Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific island countries' commitment to the principles of free and open trade. The underlying impetus for negotiating the PACER Plus and its goals of regional commercial integration is the formation of an interconnected Pacific market that includes Australia and New Zealand, which will enable the Pacific Islands greater access to a larger market for their own consumers and also for their producers, and that is a very good thing.

Despite the somewhat patronising and insulting comments from the Greens, I would just like to remind those in this chamber what this agreement is actually about. Australia and the Pacific island countries are longstanding partners and friends. We have common interests in both economic progress and regional stability. Our partners in the region range from countries richly endowed with people and resources to small atolls with geographically isolated populations. The PACER Plus agreement reflects this diversity as a comprehensive free trade agreement tailored to help Pacific island countries address their specific development challenges and also to assist them in a very sovereign respectful way to better participate in global trade and engage more effectively into global markets.

The coalition government has the most ambitious trade agenda in Australia's history. PACER Plus, a unique trade agreement to drive economic prosperity and raise living standards in our region, will complement our trade agreements already in force, which, I would note very happily, are delivering record export growth and creating hundreds of thousands of more local jobs.

As Senator Fierravanti-Wells has said, this is not a policy done in isolation and it is an important part of the objectives of Australia's white paper—and, again, I commend Senator Fierravanti-Wells for her role in developing this. The Foreign policy white paper has an important process called stepping up. Stepping up support for a more resilient Pacific is one of five priorities for Australia's foreign policy and is set out in the 2017 Foreign policy white paper released only 12 months ago. The white paper states that the Pacific is of fundamental importance to Australia and that 'Australia will engage with the Pacific with greater intensity and ambition'.

The white paper also announced new regional security cooperation initiatives, including the Australia Pacific Security College and work to improve regional information sharing. And we on this side of the chamber, and also the Labor Party, can see that this is an important role for Australia to play in our region. The white paper further reinforces the announcements made by Prime Minister Turnbull at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders meeting year that Australia would step up its engagement through three things—that is, stronger partnerships for economic growth; stronger partnerships for security; and stronger relationships between people—and our PACER Plus agreement assists and works in all three of those areas.

Australia's longstanding development assistance to the Pacific has helped address many of the acute challenges facing the region over many years, including climate change and responding to natural disasters; sustaining economic growth and boosting education, skills and jobs for growing populations; gender equality and recognising the central role women play in achieving better development outcomes for their nations; the threat of major disease outbreak; and, increasingly, the threat of transnational crime across the Pacific. However, we do recognise that the complexities of these challenges demand deeper engagement, integrated policy and fresh ideas to drive transformative change in the region, and this is where PACER Plus assists in that process. Australia's stepped-up engagement is our response to these significant long-term challenges.

In relation to the bills, while PACER Plus provides a framework for integration, dedicated assistance is critical to barriers in Pacific Islands signatories and unlocking the benefits PACER Plus provides for this assistance. The PACER Plus bills represent the key legislative changes required to give effect to the new rules of origin required to implement PACER Plus. The Customs Act 1901 is being amended to include the new rules-of-origin requirements and to enable a full set of related product-specific rules to be made in keeping with our modern free trade agreements. The amendments contained in the legislation will enable eligible goods that satisfy PACER Plus rules of origin to be entered into Australia at preferential rates of customs duty. The Customs Tariff Act 1995 is being amended to set out the preferential rate of customs duty for goods that satisfy the new rules-of-origin requirements. These new rules are consistent with existing arrangements for duties imposed on excise equivalent goods.

Without these amendments, Australia would not be able to complete its domestic arrangements, and the agreement would not be able to enter into force. This would prevent Australian businesses from receiving the various benefits that would flow from the agreement, but it would also prevent the equally significant, if not more significant, benefits that would flow to the PACER Plus partners. It is important that Australia be amongst the first eight countries to ratify, as early ratification would signal Australia's commitment to PACER Plus. As we've talked about in this chamber and in other places many times, PACER Plus is very important for the maintenance of rules based order and rules based trade in the Indo-Pacific region. As I said, PACER Plus does provide commercial opportunities for Australian exporters and investors in a wide range of sectors. These opportunities will increase over time as the provision of the agreement will lead to more open and transparent policies, both here and across the other 10 partners who have already signed up. This agreement reflects our principles of free and open trade and rules based trade. PACER Plus will enter into force 60 days after the eighth signatory notifies Tonga, as the depositary, that it has ratified the agreement.

I'd just like to come back to the point that the Greens made in relation to the 11 countries who are ratifying this and are initial signatories. They specifically raised Fiji and Papua New Guinea. As I've noted in this place, PACER Plus is a truly regional agreement which has 11 Pacific Islands Forum members. PACER Plus will deliver benefits for these nations. Despite the assertions of those on the Greens benches, this hasn't been done in a way that is disrespectful of these nations' sovereignty and it is not disrespectful of those governments. This has been done over an extended period of time with them as partners. Extensive engagement has been undertaken by these nations. In fact, the information that I have back from the minister and the teams who were responsible for this at the time is that this was done in a truly respectful way. We listened to our Pacific partners. There was wide consultation.

The development assistance that is so important that is embedded in this agreement was worked out with each of the individual Pacific island nations, to find out what they needed for this. I would say—through you, Mr Acting Deputy President—to my Greens colleagues in this chamber: this was done with them as full sovereign partners in the process. It was done in a new way to provide the development assistance from Australia and New Zealand that these nations recognise that they need to develop their capability, their processes, their systems and their trade regulations and legislation to make sure that they can engage in the international trade environment.

The Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 represent the main legislative changes for the new rules of origin under PACER Plus.

With those comments I again thank those opposite in the Labor Party for their engagement and support for these bills, I thank all those officials who were engaged in these negotiations for that time, and I also commend the government for this agreement, because I as the minister now responsible think that this is the way forward for our free trade agreements: to not only look at how we as a nation might benefit from this process but also assist other nations and other regional partners, ensuring they are capable of maintaining sovereign trade interests and trade with other countries where their size and their location may in the past have prohibited them from doing so. I commend these bills to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bills read a second time.