As published in the June 2004
edition of Horticulture News
Australia took a step closer to its much coverted
free trade agreement with United States last month, but growers remain
sceptical that the deal will do much for their industry.
Eleven months of negotiations on the AUSFTA were
finalised in February and on May 18 Australia’s Trade Minister Mark Vaile
and United States Trade Representitive Robert Zoellick signed the agreement
in Washington.
It will now go to the US Congress for approval,
and, to a lesser degree, the Australian Senate, which cannot refuse it,
but is empowered to block aspects that may require domestic law changes.
Mr Vaile publicised the full text of the agreement
in late April, declaring this the best way for Australians to see for themselves
that the agreement “does not compromise our sonservative approach to quarantine
and biosecurity”.
However, Australian growers, initially excited
at the proposition of tariff-free access to the US, now believe they have
been misled as to its scope and benefits and are concerned the FTA will
see a reduction in biosecurity standards.
Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers chief executive
Jan Davis says that after an initial reading of the FTA she is “concerned
at the inference that trade considerations will play a role in development
of sanitary and phytosanitary measures”, and, worse still, the FTA appears
to include many barriers that indicate it is not a “free” trade agreement
at all.
“Free trade does not include agricultural safeguards,
quota access, phase-outs of tariffs over 18 years and similar obstacles,”
she says.
“The US is allowed to impose an agricultural safeguard
measure on some horticultural products if it deems the price of imports
entering the US is too low, thereby impacting on domestic farmers.
We have not found any such safeguard that Australia can impose.
“A safeguard is a new form of tariff. This
is not free trade; this seems more like protectionism.”
Other industry leaders appear to be taking a more
diplomatic line.
John Webster, managing director of Horticulture
Australia and chair of the HAL Market Access committee, says individual
sectors will have to examine the FTA’s wording and make their own judgements
on its pros and cons.
He says it will likely have a positive impact
on horticultural exports to the US and experts benefits to increase with
time.
Price-based tariffs, imposed by the FTA on 33 mostly
prepared and processed horticultural products, are opposed on principal
but their impact is not expected to be significant, says Mr Webster.
Seventeen of the affected products have not been
traded for the past five years and of those remaining, only three were
exported at a price that could trigger the safeguards.
June 2004
