Through the crystal ball – life under the next Federal regime
AirCargo Archive Stories #225
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
The modern practice of the law now requires significant technological assistance. Mobile phones, emails, Twitter and Facebook apparently now are indispensable measures used to deliver services faster than ever before, writes Andrew Hudson.
When I was a young lawyer, the fax machine was the cutting edge of practice – now I hardly ever see it being used and clients certainly don’t accept it as a means to deliver advice.
Clients these days expect comprehensive advice at very short notice together with absolute certainty of outcome as soon as instructions are provided. Consequently, I now have a crystal ball on my desk to advise on issues ahead of time. It is a wonderful addition to the practice as well as being decorative.
I have used it this week to provide details on outcomes for industry following the upcoming Federal election.
Below, please find the outcomes of my discussions with the magic crystal ball on what could be on the Australian agenda after the vote on 7 September.
Please keep in mind that the Coalition Trade Policy has not been made public and we need to rely on Coalition Manufacturing Policy to provide some indication on the likely direction for Trade Policy.
International trade Both parties have gone to some lengths to affirm their commitment to the WTO Doha round of negotiations. Not entirely unexpected. However, it would also seem that both major parties recognise that the Doha round is unlikely to deliver the desired happy ending of an international reduction in trade barriers so other avenues will need to be addressed, whether that be the separate Trade in Services Agreement or an increase in negotiations for various bilateral or multilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).
Many academics criticise the plethora of these FTAs as creating an undesirable “spaghetti bowl” of FTAs that is not ideal and detracts from the aim of improvements in trade.
However, personally, I would prefer a spaghetti bowl to no bowl at all and I think that both major parties share that view and will continue to pursue the FTA agenda we already are following.
No real difference there – a nil-all draw really, but things may change with the specifics below.
Where to on the FTA agenda? Both main parties have promised to complete the proposed FTAs with China, Japan and Korea as well as supporting the completion of the Trans Pacific Partnership. However, the completion of all those deals may depend in part on the willingness of a new Federal government to resile from the position adopted by the current government some years ago, which required all deals to be comprehensive and for no deal to include an “Investor/State Dispute Resolution” provision.
While the current government seems wedded to those positions, a change in government may well allow for Australia to pursue more flexible outcomes include Investor/State Dispute Resolution provisions. While the Coalition will be subject to certain pressures from the National Party and its constituents, it appears that it may be better disposed to further compromises that allow the FTA with China, Japan and Korea to be completed in the near future. As much as the current government has promised positive outcomes, it may take a change of parties and in attitude to complete the deals.
Anti dumping At the risk of being seen as a ‘dumping nerd’, my view is that the government’s position on AD is a predictor of government’s attitude to free/fair trade and the degree to which protectionism could surface.
Certainly the WTO has counselled against additional protectionist advances around the world and there also is some political benefit in being seen as supporting local industry and opposing unfair overseas practices.
Unfortunately the Coalition Manufacturing Policy has some holes here. It calls for AD to be taken from Customs (which already has happened with the new ADC) and has suggested a ‘reverse of onus’ in Investigations (which already has been proposed in rejected legislation). The same policy calls for ‘tougher’ action without details and seems to ignore the significant recent reforms. All in all it’s hard to see how the Coalition would change very much and any changes would push us further away from the WTO ideal. All things considered, given the extent of recent change which has yet to be completed, it is difficult to see significant change in policy other than additional and more aggressive action by Customs to enforce current measures and stop the attempts to circumvent those measures.
The role of Customs? One conspiracy theory has been that Customs would relinquish its revenue role to the ATO and focus on ‘border control’ issues. However, at this juncture the only available evidence points to both major parties supporting the current reform process initiated in relation to Customs. Both major parties support the ‘tough’ stance on border control and revenue issues as well as ensuring fair trade. On that basis, it is probably fair to expect no major changes and possibly a higher level of enforcement action by Customs against those perceived to fail to comply with statutory obligations.
Conclusion? We face an economy under perceptible stress locally and from overseas. We also see significant pressure for tough measures at the border and to protect local industry against unfair competition from overseas while trying to advance our FTA agenda. The upshot is likely to be the same from both political parties – continuing the current measures and reforms for Customs, a focus on improved compliance and revenue recovery but with the chance of a less “pristine” FTA agenda and an increased likelihood of deals focusing on main issues and less attention on peripheral issues of environment and labour standards. Tougher for all those in industry with the chance of quicker and less comprehensive FTA for the foreseeable future. This all places a premium of maintaining close attention to the current and future agenda and focusing on ensuring compliance at all times – no matter how difficult that may prove to be.
Through the crystal ball – life under the next Federal regime
AirCargo Archive Stories #225
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
The modern practice of the law now requires significant technological assistance. Mobile phones, emails, Twitter and Facebook apparently now are indispensable measures used to deliver services faster than ever before, writes Andrew Hudson.
When I was a young lawyer, the fax machine was the cutting edge of practice – now I hardly ever see it being used and clients certainly don’t accept it as a means to deliver advice.
Clients these days expect comprehensive advice at very short notice together with absolute certainty of outcome as soon as instructions are provided. Consequently, I now have a crystal ball on my desk to advise on issues ahead of time. It is a wonderful addition to the practice as well as being decorative.
I have used it this week to provide details on outcomes for industry following the upcoming Federal election.
Below, please find the outcomes of my discussions with the magic crystal ball on what could be on the Australian agenda after the vote on 7 September.
Please keep in mind that the Coalition Trade Policy has not been made public and we need to rely on Coalition Manufacturing Policy to provide some indication on the likely direction for Trade Policy.
International trade Both parties have gone to some lengths to affirm their commitment to the WTO Doha round of negotiations. Not entirely unexpected. However, it would also seem that both major parties recognise that the Doha round is unlikely to deliver the desired happy ending of an international reduction in trade barriers so other avenues will need to be addressed, whether that be the separate Trade in Services Agreement or an increase in negotiations for various bilateral or multilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).
Many academics criticise the plethora of these FTAs as creating an undesirable “spaghetti bowl” of FTAs that is not ideal and detracts from the aim of improvements in trade.
However, personally, I would prefer a spaghetti bowl to no bowl at all and I think that both major parties share that view and will continue to pursue the FTA agenda we already are following.
No real difference there – a nil-all draw really, but things may change with the specifics below.
Where to on the FTA agenda? Both main parties have promised to complete the proposed FTAs with China, Japan and Korea as well as supporting the completion of the Trans Pacific Partnership. However, the completion of all those deals may depend in part on the willingness of a new Federal government to resile from the position adopted by the current government some years ago, which required all deals to be comprehensive and for no deal to include an “Investor/State Dispute Resolution” provision.
While the current government seems wedded to those positions, a change in government may well allow for Australia to pursue more flexible outcomes include Investor/State Dispute Resolution provisions. While the Coalition will be subject to certain pressures from the National Party and its constituents, it appears that it may be better disposed to further compromises that allow the FTA with China, Japan and Korea to be completed in the near future. As much as the current government has promised positive outcomes, it may take a change of parties and in attitude to complete the deals.
Anti dumping At the risk of being seen as a ‘dumping nerd’, my view is that the government’s position on AD is a predictor of government’s attitude to free/fair trade and the degree to which protectionism could surface.
Certainly the WTO has counselled against additional protectionist advances around the world and there also is some political benefit in being seen as supporting local industry and opposing unfair overseas practices.
Unfortunately the Coalition Manufacturing Policy has some holes here. It calls for AD to be taken from Customs (which already has happened with the new ADC) and has suggested a ‘reverse of onus’ in Investigations (which already has been proposed in rejected legislation). The same policy calls for ‘tougher’ action without details and seems to ignore the significant recent reforms. All in all it’s hard to see how the Coalition would change very much and any changes would push us further away from the WTO ideal. All things considered, given the extent of recent change which has yet to be completed, it is difficult to see significant change in policy other than additional and more aggressive action by Customs to enforce current measures and stop the attempts to circumvent those measures.
The role of Customs? One conspiracy theory has been that Customs would relinquish its revenue role to the ATO and focus on ‘border control’ issues. However, at this juncture the only available evidence points to both major parties supporting the current reform process initiated in relation to Customs. Both major parties support the ‘tough’ stance on border control and revenue issues as well as ensuring fair trade. On that basis, it is probably fair to expect no major changes and possibly a higher level of enforcement action by Customs against those perceived to fail to comply with statutory obligations.
Conclusion? We face an economy under perceptible stress locally and from overseas. We also see significant pressure for tough measures at the border and to protect local industry against unfair competition from overseas while trying to advance our FTA agenda. The upshot is likely to be the same from both political parties – continuing the current measures and reforms for Customs, a focus on improved compliance and revenue recovery but with the chance of a less “pristine” FTA agenda and an increased likelihood of deals focusing on main issues and less attention on peripheral issues of environment and labour standards. Tougher for all those in industry with the chance of quicker and less comprehensive FTA for the foreseeable future. This all places a premium of maintaining close attention to the current and future agenda and focusing on ensuring compliance at all times – no matter how difficult that may prove to be.
