Japan deal not a 'pot of gold'

Is the govt making deals for the sake of ticking off a political box at the expense of real benefit?

THE federal government is making headlines with its free trade deals, and appears to be making progress on its promise that “we’re open for business”.

But is it making deals for the sake of ticking off a political box at the expense of real benefit?

For agriculture the latest deal with Japan has, for more industries than not, been considered a dud.

Milk products being excluded from most tariff cuts in Japan is most surprising (dairy tariffs will remain relatively unchanged), despite Australia being the biggest exporter of dairy products to Japan.

Some short-term gains will come for beef and horticulture where we’ve beaten our competitors to the punch on signing a deal, but it’s questionable if these deals will help agriculture long term.

Once other countries sign their own trade deals, their competitive advantage on cost of production and subsidies through which they have traditionally been able to undercut us on will still be there.

Other exporters will also see their tariffs drift lower, meaning we’ll effectively be back to the same old “level” playing field.

And other countries might be smart enough not to sign unless they get better access on pork, rice, dairy and sugar.

Meanwhile, we’re assuming companies in Japan and Korea will automatically pass on our import tariff cuts to Australians for

foreign-produced goods such as cars and electrical items.

However, the risk is that those companies will still dictate a price while our balance of trade will be open to the usual maket forces.

In other words, commodity suppliers such as agriculture and mining remain as price takers, while foreign manufacturers will set their price.

One big advantage for our farmgate prices could be that increased accessibility to our beef and horticulture products improves demand, placing price pressure via extra competition back down the chain to impact at the farm gate level.

But all of this will mean nothing if we can’t get the produce to port efficiently.

We already have under-used port infrastructure due to poor road and rail access.

Market access isn’t all about offshore politics – some well targeted projects in our own backyard might have just as much potential to improve our competiveness as any given tariff cuts.

TheLand
Andrew Norris

Andrew Norris

is the editor of The Land
Date: Newest first | Oldest first

READER COMMENTS

Simon
11/04/2014 8:09:25 AM

I'm concerned about the concessions Australian negotiators will make to China. If you think the Japanese are tough negotiators, they've got nothing on the Chinese. Political pressure for a deal will make it expensive for Australia. This should be treated as a long term game. Remember, they want what we've got.
Logic
11/04/2014 12:06:34 PM

Are we afraid of being positive or is whining more fun. This deal is a big positive but yes it could have been better. Ask a Japanese beef farmer and see if he thinks it won't make a difference.
Chick Olsson
11/04/2014 1:06:51 PM

The deal is totally brilliant, and opens up further trade potential with over a 100 million new customers. Bring it on !!
A matter of opinionA selection of editorials from around the Fairfax Agricultural Media group covering the issues of the week.

COMMENTS

light grey arrow
I'm one of the people who want marijuana to be legalized, some city have been approved it but
light grey arrow
#blueysmegacarshowandcruise2019 10 years on Daniels Ute will be apart of another massive cause.
light grey arrow
Australia's live animal trade is nothing but a blood stained industry that suits those who