Published in The Weekend Australian on 21.09.13
After about 100 days in office, governments are usually presented by the media with a list of broken promises prepared by the opposition. The purpose of the list is both political - seeking to demonstrate the new government has breached the people's trust - and substantive, explaining how the government has damaged the national interest. But what happens if the list includes promises that are inimical to the national interest?
The Coalition has promised a bunch of bad policies, many of them in the trade and investment arena, which should be quietly ditched. They are policies to which the opposition should not hold the government.
At the top of the pile is the Coalition's decision to reduce the threshold dollar amount of foreign investment in agricultural land that triggers the Foreign Investment Review Board assessment processes. During the Labor years, every one of the 350 applications by Chinese investors for FIRB approval was given the go-ahead. Senior Nationals have nominated this as a sign of an ineffective screening process - as if a few a year should be knocked off just to prove Australia is tough. At the same time, the Chinese see it as unnecessary screening and a signal that Australia is reticent about Chinese investment.
Rural Australia is screaming out for the completion of a free-trade agreement between Australia and China, to put our farmers on a level footing with their New Zealand cousins who are already benefiting from zero Chinese tariffs.
Reducing the FIRB screening threshold would be a victory for the xenophobic Fortress Australia philosophy of the modern Nationals and a defeat for our farmers.
The next promise that should be consigned to the shredder is that of Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss that the government should reject the proposed acquisition of Australian agribusiness GrainCorp by American company Archer Daniels Midland on the basis that "Australian farmers will be servants to foreign masters" (yes, Truss did actually say that).
Later in the election campaign, Truss was apparently reminded that such decisions lie with the Treasurer, based on advice from the FIRB, and not with the Nationals. Interfering in those processes and rejecting the application for political purposes would send a very bad message about the new government's attitude towards foreign investment.
With the failure of just one Liberal, former industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella, to retain her seat, the Abbott government should quietly junk her key policy, foolishly announced against the strongest advice that it would be highly damaging to the national interest. In its bid for the vote of blue-collar workers the Coalition announced it would reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations - obliging foreign businesses accused of selling their products in Australia below cost to prove that they are not doing so.
When this proposal was first raised in a Senate inquiry, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade provided unambiguous
advice that reversing the onus of proof was in clear breach of the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Undeterred, Mirabella ensured it was adopted as official Coalition policy.
Breaching world trading rules is no trivial matter. It can lead to authorised retaliation, enabling affected countries to impose new restrictions on access to their markets for Australian exporters. Wilfully breaking the agreed world trading rules would relegate Australia from a champion of the global trading system to a pariah, undoing half a century of good, bipartisan policy work.
More difficult to quietly slip into the policy shredder is the Coalition's dangerous threat to good relations with our nearest neighbour, Indonesia, by promising to tow asylum-seeker boats back into Indonesian waters, buy $400 million worth of boats from poor Indonesian fishermen and pay Indonesian nationals for information about people-smuggling operations.
Each of these is considered by Indonesia to be an incursion into its national sovereignty. Add to them Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce's urging of the public to "make a big noise" about Indonesian proposals for joint ventures in northern Australian cattle-raising and you have a recipe for poor relations between two countries who have much to gain from greater trade and investment.
But here's the good news. Prime Minister Abbott has appointed to the trade portfolio the best possible candidate for the job, Andrew Robb. Having grown up on a dairy farm, Robb graduated with a first-class honours degree in economics and has headed up the National Farmers' Federation and the Cattle Council of Australia. He's spent much of his professional life fighting xenophobic economic nationalism, usually winning. Robb will be in plenty of fights with Nationals in the cabinet room. For Australia's sake, here's hoping he wins them and is able to make good use of the shredder of bad policies.
AFTER about 100 days in office, governments are usually presented by the media with a list of broken promises prepared by the opposition. The purpose of the list is both political - seeking to demonstrate the new government has breached the people's trust - and substantive, explaining how the government has damaged the national interest. But what happens if the list includes promises that are inimical to the national interest?
The Coalition has promised a bunch of bad policies, many of them in the trade and investment arena, which should be quietly ditched. They are policies to which the opposition should not hold the government.
At the top of the pile is the Coalition's decision to reduce the threshold dollar amount of foreign investment in agricultural land that triggers the Foreign Investment Review Board assessment processes. During the Labor years, every one of the 350 applications by Chinese investors for FIRB approval was given the go-ahead. Senior Nationals have nominated this as a sign of an ineffective screening process - as if a few a year should be knocked off just to prove Australia is tough. At the same time, the Chinese see it as unnecessary screening and a signal that Australia is reticent about Chinese investment.
Rural Australia is screaming out for the completion of a free-trade agreement between Australia and China, to put our farmers on a level footing with their New Zealand cousins who are already benefiting from zero Chinese tariffs.
Reducing the FIRB screening threshold would be a victory for the xenophobic Fortress Australia philosophy of the modern Nationals and a defeat for our farmers.
The next promise that should be consigned to the shredder is that of Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss that the government should reject the proposed acquisition of Australian agribusiness GrainCorp by American company Archer Daniels Midland on the basis that "Australian farmers will be servants to foreign masters" (yes, Truss did actually say that).
Later in the election campaign, Truss was apparently reminded that such decisions lie with the Treasurer, based on advice from the FIRB, and not with the Nationals. Interfering in those processes and rejecting the application for political purposes would send a very bad message about the new government's attitude towards foreign investment.
With the failure of just one Liberal, former industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella, to retain her seat, the Abbott government should quietly junk her key policy, foolishly announced against the strongest advice that it would be highly damaging to the national interest. In its bid for the vote of blue-collar workers the Coalition announced it would reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations - obliging foreign businesses accused of selling their products in Australia below cost to prove that they are not doing so.
When this proposal was first raised in a Senate inquiry, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade provided unambiguous advice that reversing the onus of proof was in clear breach of the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Undeterred, Mirabella ensured it was adopted as official Coalition policy.
Breaching world trading rules is no trivial matter. It can lead to authorised retaliation, enabling affected countries to impose new restrictions on access to their markets for Australian exporters. Wilfully breaking the agreed world trading rules would relegate Australia from a champion of the global trading system to a pariah, undoing half a century of good, bipartisan policy work.
More difficult to quietly slip into the policy shredder is the Coalition's dangerous threat to good relations with our nearest neighbour, Indonesia, by promising to tow asylum-seeker boats back into Indonesian waters, buy $400 million worth of boats from poor Indonesian fishermen and pay Indonesian nationals for information about people-smuggling operations.
Each of these is considered by Indonesia to be an incursion into its national sovereignty. Add to them Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce's urging of the public to "make a big noise" about Indonesian proposals for joint ventures in northern Australian cattle-raising and you have a recipe for poor relations between two countries who have much to gain from greater trade and investment.
But here's the good news. Prime Minister Abbott has appointed to the trade portfolio the best possible candidate for the job, Andrew Robb. Having grown up on a dairy farm, Robb graduated with a first-class honours degree in economics and has headed up the National Farmers' Federation and the Cattle Council of Australia. He's spent much of his professional life fighting xenophobic economic nationalism, usually winning. Robb will be in plenty of fights with Nationals in the cabinet room. For Australia's sake, here's hoping he wins them and is able to make good use of the shredder of bad policies.
- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/coalition-policies-that-are-perfect-for-the-shredder/story-e6frg6zo-1226723797219#sthash.T8K1cpEu.dpufAFTER about 100 days in office, governments are usually presented by the media with a list of broken promises prepared by the opposition. The purpose of the list is both political - seeking to demonstrate the new government has breached the people's trust - and substantive, explaining how the government has damaged the national interest. But what happens if the list includes promises that are inimical to the national interest?
The Coalition has promised a bunch of bad policies, many of them in the trade and investment arena, which should be quietly ditched. They are policies to which the opposition should not hold the government.
At the top of the pile is the Coalition's decision to reduce the threshold dollar amount of foreign investment in agricultural land that triggers the Foreign Investment Review Board assessment processes. During the Labor years, every one of the 350 applications by Chinese investors for FIRB approval was given the go-ahead. Senior Nationals have nominated this as a sign of an ineffective screening process - as if a few a year should be knocked off just to prove Australia is tough. At the same time, the Chinese see it as unnecessary screening and a signal that Australia is reticent about Chinese investment.
Rural Australia is screaming out for the completion of a free-trade agreement between Australia and China, to put our farmers on a level footing with their New Zealand cousins who are already benefiting from zero Chinese tariffs.
Reducing the FIRB screening threshold would be a victory for the xenophobic Fortress Australia philosophy of the modern Nationals and a defeat for our farmers.
The next promise that should be consigned to the shredder is that of Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss that the government should reject the proposed acquisition of Australian agribusiness GrainCorp by American company Archer Daniels Midland on the basis that "Australian farmers will be servants to foreign masters" (yes, Truss did actually say that).
Later in the election campaign, Truss was apparently reminded that such decisions lie with the Treasurer, based on advice from the FIRB, and not with the Nationals. Interfering in those processes and rejecting the application for political purposes would send a very bad message about the new government's attitude towards foreign investment.
With the failure of just one Liberal, former industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella, to retain her seat, the Abbott government should quietly junk her key policy, foolishly announced against the strongest advice that it would be highly damaging to the national interest. In its bid for the vote of blue-collar workers the Coalition announced it would reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations - obliging foreign businesses accused of selling their products in Australia below cost to prove that they are not doing so.
When this proposal was first raised in a Senate inquiry, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade provided unambiguous advice that reversing the onus of proof was in clear breach of the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Undeterred, Mirabella ensured it was adopted as official Coalition policy.
Breaching world trading rules is no trivial matter. It can lead to authorised retaliation, enabling affected countries to impose new restrictions on access to their markets for Australian exporters. Wilfully breaking the agreed world trading rules would relegate Australia from a champion of the global trading system to a pariah, undoing half a century of good, bipartisan policy work.
More difficult to quietly slip into the policy shredder is the Coalition's dangerous threat to good relations with our nearest neighbour, Indonesia, by promising to tow asylum-seeker boats back into Indonesian waters, buy $400 million worth of boats from poor Indonesian fishermen and pay Indonesian nationals for information about people-smuggling operations.
Each of these is considered by Indonesia to be an incursion into its national sovereignty. Add to them Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce's urging of the public to "make a big noise" about Indonesian proposals for joint ventures in northern Australian cattle-raising and you have a recipe for poor relations between two countries who have much to gain from greater trade and investment.
But here's the good news. Prime Minister Abbott has appointed to the trade portfolio the best possible candidate for the job, Andrew Robb. Having grown up on a dairy farm, Robb graduated with a first-class honours degree in economics and has headed up the National Farmers' Federation and the Cattle Council of Australia. He's spent much of his professional life fighting xenophobic economic nationalism, usually winning. Robb will be in plenty of fights with Nationals in the cabinet room. For Australia's sake, here's hoping he wins them and is able to make good use of the shredder of bad policies.
- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/coalition-policies-that-are-perfect-for-the-shredder/story-e6frg6zo-1226723797219#sthash.T8K1cpEu.dpufAFTER about 100 days in office, governments are usually presented by the media with a list of broken promises prepared by the opposition. The purpose of the list is both political - seeking to demonstrate the new government has breached the people's trust - and substantive, explaining how the government has damaged the national interest. But what happens if the list includes promises that are inimical to the national interest?
The Coalition has promised a bunch of bad policies, many of them in the trade and investment arena, which should be quietly ditched. They are policies to which the opposition should not hold the government.
At the top of the pile is the Coalition's decision to reduce the threshold dollar amount of foreign investment in agricultural land that triggers the Foreign Investment Review Board assessment processes. During the Labor years, every one of the 350 applications by Chinese investors for FIRB approval was given the go-ahead. Senior Nationals have nominated this as a sign of an ineffective screening process - as if a few a year should be knocked off just to prove Australia is tough. At the same time, the Chinese see it as unnecessary screening and a signal that Australia is reticent about Chinese investment.
Rural Australia is screaming out for the completion of a free-trade agreement between Australia and China, to put our farmers on a level footing with their New Zealand cousins who are already benefiting from zero Chinese tariffs.
Reducing the FIRB screening threshold would be a victory for the xenophobic Fortress Australia philosophy of the modern Nationals and a defeat for our farmers.
The next promise that should be consigned to the shredder is that of Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss that the government should reject the proposed acquisition of Australian agribusiness GrainCorp by American company Archer Daniels Midland on the basis that "Australian farmers will be servants to foreign masters" (yes, Truss did actually say that).
Later in the election campaign, Truss was apparently reminded that such decisions lie with the Treasurer, based on advice from the FIRB, and not with the Nationals. Interfering in those processes and rejecting the application for political purposes would send a very bad message about the new government's attitude towards foreign investment.
With the failure of just one Liberal, former industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella, to retain her seat, the Abbott government should quietly junk her key policy, foolishly announced against the strongest advice that it would be highly damaging to the national interest. In its bid for the vote of blue-collar workers the Coalition announced it would reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations - obliging foreign businesses accused of selling their products in Australia below cost to prove that they are not doing so.
When this proposal was first raised in a Senate inquiry, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade provided unambiguous advice that reversing the onus of proof was in clear breach of the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Undeterred, Mirabella ensured it was adopted as official Coalition policy.
Breaching world trading rules is no trivial matter. It can lead to authorised retaliation, enabling affected countries to impose new restrictions on access to their markets for Australian exporters. Wilfully breaking the agreed world trading rules would relegate Australia from a champion of the global trading system to a pariah, undoing half a century of good, bipartisan policy work.
More difficult to quietly slip into the policy shredder is the Coalition's dangerous threat to good relations with our nearest neighbour, Indonesia, by promising to tow asylum-seeker boats back into Indonesian waters, buy $400 million worth of boats from poor Indonesian fishermen and pay Indonesian nationals for information about people-smuggling operations.
Each of these is considered by Indonesia to be an incursion into its national sovereignty. Add to them Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce's urging of the public to "make a big noise" about Indonesian proposals for joint ventures in northern Australian cattle-raising and you have a recipe for poor relations between two countries who have much to gain from greater trade and investment.
But here's the good news. Prime Minister Abbott has appointed to the trade portfolio the best possible candidate for the job, Andrew Robb. Having grown up on a dairy farm, Robb graduated with a first-class honours degree in economics and has headed up the National Farmers' Federation and the Cattle Council of Australia. He's spent much of his professional life fighting xenophobic economic nationalism, usually winning. Robb will be in plenty of fights with Nationals in the cabinet room. For Australia's sake, here's hoping he wins them and is able to make good use of the shredder of bad policies.
- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/coalition-policies-that-are-perfect-for-the-shredder/story-e6frg6zo-1226723797219#sthash.T8K1cpEu.dpufAFTER about 100 days in office, governments are usually presented by the media with a list of broken promises prepared by the opposition. The purpose of the list is both political - seeking to demonstrate the new government has breached the people's trust - and substantive, explaining how the government has damaged the national interest. But what happens if the list includes promises that are inimical to the national interest?
The Coalition has promised a bunch of bad policies, many of them in the trade and investment arena, which should be quietly ditched. They are policies to which the opposition should not hold the government.
At the top of the pile is the Coalition's decision to reduce the threshold dollar amount of foreign investment in agricultural land that triggers the Foreign Investment Review Board assessment processes. During the Labor years, every one of the 350 applications by Chinese investors for FIRB approval was given the go-ahead. Senior Nationals have nominated this as a sign of an ineffective screening process - as if a few a year should be knocked off just to prove Australia is tough. At the same time, the Chinese see it as unnecessary screening and a signal that Australia is reticent about Chinese investment.
Rural Australia is screaming out for the completion of a free-trade agreement between Australia and China, to put our farmers on a level footing with their New Zealand cousins who are already benefiting from zero Chinese tariffs.
Reducing the FIRB screening threshold would be a victory for the xenophobic Fortress Australia philosophy of the modern Nationals and a defeat for our farmers.
The next promise that should be consigned to the shredder is that of Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss that the government should reject the proposed acquisition of Australian agribusiness GrainCorp by American company Archer Daniels Midland on the basis that "Australian farmers will be servants to foreign masters" (yes, Truss did actually say that).
Later in the election campaign, Truss was apparently reminded that such decisions lie with the Treasurer, based on advice from the FIRB, and not with the Nationals. Interfering in those processes and rejecting the application for political purposes would send a very bad message about the new government's attitude towards foreign investment.
With the failure of just one Liberal, former industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella, to retain her seat, the Abbott government should quietly junk her key policy, foolishly announced against the strongest advice that it would be highly damaging to the national interest. In its bid for the vote of blue-collar workers the Coalition announced it would reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations - obliging foreign businesses accused of selling their products in Australia below cost to prove that they are not doing so.
When this proposal was first raised in a Senate inquiry, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade provided unambiguous advice that reversing the onus of proof was in clear breach of the rules of the World Trade Organisation. Undeterred, Mirabella ensured it was adopted as official Coalition policy.
Breaching world trading rules is no trivial matter. It can lead to authorised retaliation, enabling affected countries to impose new restrictions on access to their markets for Australian exporters. Wilfully breaking the agreed world trading rules would relegate Australia from a champion of the global trading system to a pariah, undoing half a century of good, bipartisan policy work.
More difficult to quietly slip into the policy shredder is the Coalition's dangerous threat to good relations with our nearest neighbour, Indonesia, by promising to tow asylum-seeker boats back into Indonesian waters, buy $400 million worth of boats from poor Indonesian fishermen and pay Indonesian nationals for information about people-smuggling operations.
Each of these is considered by Indonesia to be an incursion into its national sovereignty. Add to them Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce's urging of the public to "make a big noise" about Indonesian proposals for joint ventures in northern Australian cattle-raising and you have a recipe for poor relations between two countries who have much to gain from greater trade and investment.
But here's the good news. Prime Minister Abbott has appointed to the trade portfolio the best possible candidate for the job, Andrew Robb. Having grown up on a dairy farm, Robb graduated with a first-class honours degree in economics and has headed up the National Farmers' Federation and the Cattle Council of Australia. He's spent much of his professional life fighting xenophobic economic nationalism, usually winning. Robb will be in plenty of fights with Nationals in the cabinet room. For Australia's sake, here's hoping he wins them and is able to make good use of the shredder of bad policies.
- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/coalition-policies-that-are-perfect-for-the-shredder/story-e6frg6zo-1226723797219#sthash.T8K1cpEu.dpuf