Civil society and non-government organisations in the region are renewing calls for an independent impact assessment of PACER-Plus.
Transcript
A market at Port Vila, Vanuatu Photo: RNZ
Civil society and non-government organisations in the region are renewing calls for an independent impact assessment of PACER-Plus.
The regional free trade agreement driven by Australia and New Zealand is supposed to bring great economic benefits to the Pacific.
But a campaigner for the Pacific Network on Globalisation says the agreement is designed to benefit big businesses and will not support a dynamic Pacific economy.
Adam Wolfenden told Koroi Hawkins PANG is calling for a halt to negotiations and the release of all negotiation texts.
ADAM WOLFENDEN: The provisions currently proposed in PACER-Plus are very weak in terms of creating an environment that boosts Pacific livelihoods and those businesses and protects them and nurtures them to be able to compete against a lot of those quite substantial companies from Australia and New Zealand.
KOROI HAWKINS: They're planning on wrapping this up next year. Do you see any way where the Pacific leaders have a position or a place where they can say no to this?
AW: Previously, there's a mandate that came up at the Pacific Islands Forum saying they wanted it wrapped up by the end of next year. But that is discounting the depserate need for ongoing consultation and a real analysis of the key legal text that will comprise PACER-Plus. So far that text is only coming out by being leaked to the media. And that is completely inadequate for an agreement that is being talked about as the most important one for the Pacific in a decade. So what we are saying is that wrapping it up in mid 2016 is way too fast. There hasn't been the adequate consultation needed to really narrow it down, and say what are the legal provisions of PACER-Plus, what do they mean for Pacific businesses, for the environment, for the ability of governments to regulate and create not just an environment that supports and nurtures domestic industries in the Pacific but creates the infrastructure needed, the health systems, the education systems. We want dynamic economic development in the Pacific but we want that to be Pacific focussed and centered. Staking an economic future on a framework like PACER-Plus directly leads us away from that. And that's what we are saying. And we need to be consulted, and we need to be brought in to being allowed to having this discussion, and a vision for what we want for the Pacific's economic future. And I think when you talk to a lot of people and show them the text they will say it is not PACER-Plus that they want.
However the chief trade adviser on PACER Plus negotiations has hit out at the regional non government organisation questioning the transparency of the planned trade deal.
Edwini Kessie says calls from regional NGOs, for the release of the negotiation texts are redundant because local stakeholders are regularly briefed by their trade officials on the progress of PACER Plus.
Edwini Kessie Photo: Supplied
EDWINI KESSIE: Well we had a meeting for the NSAs on Friday and Saturday and it was quite telling that you know most of the trade officials basically questioned the legitimacy of these regional NSAs for them to make such statements because they are the ones who carry the national consultations in their respective countries. And their NSA's don't have any issues with PACER Plus because they are thoroughly briefed. So the idea that it is not transparent is simply not true. Countries share the text with their local constituencies the NSAs the stakeholders. So there is legitimacy in the process and I think that was made very clear where a number of the trade officials basically told the NSAs at the regional level that, questioned who they represent because they did not certainly represent their constituencies. So the allegation that PACER Plus is shrouded in secrecy is simply not true.
KOROI HAWKINS: There are widespread criticisms of regional trade agreements, international trade agreements, talking about it being tailored towards big business and that it won't be an advantage to smaller Pacific Island local industries. What is it that PACER Plus brings for the region?
EK: Well PACER Plus is being constructed with, certainly with that in mind. There will be many flexibility's for the Pacific Island countries. They will have the possibility to protect their infant industries. Australia, New Zealand have agreed to increase access to their labour markets particularly under the RSE and SWP. Australia and New Zealand have also committed to assisting them not only to implement their obligations under PACER Plus but also to help them to address their supply side constraints which prevent them from taking advantage of trade agreements. So PACER Plus is not a conventional free trade agreement and we are working to ensuring that the Pacific Island countries as an engine of economic growth and development, that mechanism.
KH: Now this is all planned to wrap up by June next year. How long will it be before actual benefits are seen on the ground do you think?
EK: Well trade agreements are one thing, at the end of the day I think some of the areas are immediate like labour mobility. Both Australia and New Zealand did not wait until after the conclusion to carry out their reforms. So the countries have already started benefiting from the reforms which have been made to the labour mobility schemes but here again to I need to stress that for countries also to benefit from trade agreements they need themselves to carry out the necessary reforms. An agreement per se is not a panacea for any country, they will need to also put in place the appropriate policies to be able to benefit from the agreement.
