Malaysia and Canada resist TPP deal

28 Jul, 2015 02:00 AM
Better market access for Australian farmers, including dairy in Canada, are likely to figure prominently.
Better market access for Australian farmers...are likely to figure prominently
Better market access for Australian farmers, including dairy in Canada, are likely to figure prominently.

RESISTANCE from a stubborn Canada and protectionist Malaysia is emerging as the biggest hurdle ahead of a crucial Trans-Pacific Partnership meeting starting in Hawaii on Tuesday.

Trade negotiators believe sealing a ministerial-level deal at the TPP on the island of Maui is critical, because further delays risk negotiations dragging the talks into the US election season where populist anti-free trade rhetoric could jeopardise any deal.

Trade sources say that an in-principle TPP deal at the Maui meeting would allow time for legal documents to be prepared for leaders like US President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Tony Abbott to officially sign at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in the Philippines in November.

Australian trade minister Andrew Robb who'll attend the meeting said negotiations were at a very advanced stage.

"We are pushing hard to ensure we can secure major gains and opportunities for Australian business and for economy," he said.

Matthew Goodman, a former economic adviser to President Obama and now an Asia Pacific adviser at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies, said trade ministers like US Trade Representative Mike Froman would make a concerted effort to "get an initial agreement done."

"I don't think Froman would have called this meeting unless he thought he had a good shot," said Mr Goodman, who has been speaking to government officials from the countries involved in the talks.

The TPP is a proposed accord that would cover more than 40 per cent of the world's economy and set sweeping new rules for trade, investment, intellectual property, state-owned enterprises, labour and the environment.

The 12 TPP countries are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.

Notably, it excludes China, which was unable to meet the rules seeking to level the playing field for private companies against favoured state-owned enterprises.

The TPP is central to the Obama administration's "rebalance" to Asia. The President has championed the mooted deal at home as a way for the US to set the economic rules in the region, to trump emerging rival China.

Sugar and dairy to figure prominently

The most contentious issues in the TPP chapters are on agriculture, intellectual property rights and state-owned enterprises.

The US is aggressively pushing to strengthen IP protections for its pharmaceutical, technology and entertainment companies.

Better market access for Australian farmers, including sugar in the US and dairy in Canada, are likely to figure prominently in Mr Robb's agenda at the Maui meeting.

However, Canada is a potential stumbling block because the conservative government is reluctant to open up its protected dairy and poultry sectors ahead of an election in October.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper needs to secure votes from rural farming districts cosseted by the severe limits on foreign imports.

The ruling Conservative Party's caution was amplified by a shock loss at the Alberta province election in May.

Complicating the final TPP stages, the scandal-plagued Malaysian government is resisting reforms to state- owned enterprises and opening up government procurement contracts to foreign firms.

Some trade officials are privately discussing the possibility of Malaysia being left out of the pact.

"Canada and Malaysia are the real problems in trying to get a deal done at Maui," Mr Goodman said.

More promisingly, the US and Japan, the TPP's two largest economies, have virtually agreed to a deal on cutting tariffs and other import restrictions on their respective agriculture and automotive markets.

"Japanese and US agreement on multiple issues in early July makes a broader agreement by all 12 countries more likely," said IHS country risk senior analyst Alison Evans.

"Both US President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe have used political capital to push their respective trade policies."

President Obama is required to give Congress 90 days' notice before he signs a deal and must publicly release the agreement 60 days before signing.

Given this timetable, achieving a ministerial-level agreement in Maui would allow time for a deal to be formalised in a legal document ahead of the APEC leaders meeting at Manila on November 18-19. The White House and congressional leaders are aiming to push the TPP through Congress before the 2016 election year begins.

Date: Newest first | Oldest first


28/07/2015 7:40:24 AM

set sweeping new rules for trade, investment, intellectual property, state-owned enterprises, labour and the environment."" - not for Australians but for large corporations so they can tell us how we should run our country
28/07/2015 11:16:25 AM

Phillip Morris is already suing the Australian taxpayer over the plain packaging legislation. That's going to cost us about $50Million. How many more companies will sue us for governing OUR country under the TPP?
28/07/2015 1:02:11 PM

Where is the Australian economic analysis on previous ftas and this secret deal to prove they are worth touching? Any contract I sign requires me to read the fine print, we don't even get to read it, yet we are liable for any ISDS challenges. Our forefathers fought so that we could have the right to maintain our sovereignty, it seems the corporations dont need a war to take it from us. How does putting more rules on trade align with free market mantra, no politician should be agreeing to this, grow some backbone.
28/07/2015 2:54:44 PM

too much negativity and fact free zone. Standing commitees examine all treaties and they had a hearing yesterday in Brisbane.
No way Jose
28/07/2015 3:27:41 PM

I'm struggling to see how it is in Australia's interest to be signing a treaty that 1. allows a US chemical or pharmaceutical company an additional 10-20 years of unimpeded and legally protected manufacturing and distribution in Australia of products whose patents have already expired in the US and 2. does not appear to give all our agricultural sectors the same access to the US market (sugar being the most glaring example). I am concerned we are giving up far too much in exchange for far too little in return.
29/07/2015 3:25:07 AM

How is a request for our own economic analysis negative Newbroom? its called due diligence and from where I'm standing there has been none. How can any form of gov't be expected to extract a good deal in these agreements when we have other factors at play such as military dependence, surely your not asking the public to ignore this in these negotiations. Seems to me the only ones who win here are the corporations who will then have the right to set our laws in our own country, does that sound right to u?. Whose scientists will be allowed to determine what is correct and what is protectionist?
29/07/2015 5:05:57 AM

...perhaps Canada learnt a few lessons over the last 20 years when signing the North American Free Trade Agreement?


Screen name *
Email address *
Remember me?
Comment *


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