{"id":13945,"date":"2018-10-15T02:43:06","date_gmt":"2018-10-15T02:43:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=13945"},"modified":"2018-10-16T02:45:01","modified_gmt":"2018-10-16T02:45:01","slug":"the-senate-is-set-to-approve-it-but-what-exactly-is-the-trans-pacific-partnership","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/the-senate-is-set-to-approve-it-but-what-exactly-is-the-trans-pacific-partnership\/","title":{"rendered":"The Senate is set to approve it, but what exactly is the Trans Pacific Partnership?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Pat Ranald<\/a>, University of Sydney<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

These days it is called the TPP-11 or, more formally, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans Pacific Partnership<\/a>. <\/p>\n

It is what was left of the 12-nation Trans Pacific Partnership after President Donald Trump pulled out the US, after a decade of negotiation, in 2017. <\/p>\n

Still in it are Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Chile, Japan, Brunei, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam. It\u2019ll cover 13% of the world\u2019s economy rather than 30%. <\/p>\n

What\u2019s in it for us?<\/h2>\n

It is hard to know exactly what it will do for us, because the Australian government hasn\u2019t commissioned independent modelling, either of the TPP-11 before the Senate or the original TPP-12.<\/p>\n

A report<\/a> commissioned by business organisations, including the Minerals Council, the Business Council, the Food and Grocery Council, the Australian Industry Group and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, finds the gains for Australia are negligible<\/a>, eventually amounting to 0.4% of national income (instead of 0.5% under the TPP-12).<\/p>\n

The report says:<\/p>\n

\n

The reason is simple:
\nAustralia already benefits from extensive past
\nliberalisation, especially with Asia-Pacific partners.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But it says bigger gains would come from expanding TPP-11 to many more members, all using \u201ccommon rules\u201d and the same \u201cpredictable regulatory environment\u201d.<\/p>\n

Gradual deregulation<\/h2>\n

Setting up that predictable environment takes an unprecedented 30 chapters, covering topics including temporary workers, trade in services, financial services, telecommunications, electronic commerce, competition policy, state-owned enterprises and regulatory coherence. <\/p>\n

Most treat regulation as something to be frozen and reduced over time, and never increased.<\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n
\n Read more:
\n The Trans-Pacific Partnership is back: experts respond<\/a>
\n <\/strong>
\n <\/em>\n<\/p>\n

\n

It\u2019s a regime that suits global businesses, but will make it harder for future governments to re-regulate should they decide they need to. <\/p>\n

Our experience of the global financial crisis, the banking royal commission, escalating climate change and the exploitation of vulnerable temporary workers tells us that from time to time governments do need to be able to re-regulate in the public interest.<\/p>\n

\n