Mr TAYLOR —My question is addressed to the Minister for Trade. I refer the minister to his trade statement yesterday in this place and media reports of initial reaction from the United States. Can the minister inform the House of the validity of reports that the US intends to challenge the marketing role of the Australian Wheat Board under the World Trade Organisation guidelines? What is the government doing in response to this development?

Mr TIM FISCHER —There has been a very positive reaction to the trade outcomes and objectives statement across the board from a number of industry spokesmen as it gives a good, effective blueprint to pragmatic, hard-edge trade negotiating in a world which consists of a very unlevel playing field. In respect of the specific matters that were addressed, they were discussed in a constructive way. Many of those countries, of course, are lowering their own tariff walls, and we are making good progress in our bilateral negotiations as well as in the regional and multilateral setting, but there is a long way to go and I recognise that.

There was a particular comment made by the United States spokesman, as part of the Outlook conference and parallel with the tabling of the trade outcomes and objectives statement, which said that the single desk selling of the Australian Wheat Board would be under review again and would be taken to the WTO by the United States. I say simply in respect of that: I will defend the right of Australia to decide upon a single desk selling mechanism for the Australian wheat industry or, as maybe required from time to time, with regard to other industries as may be determined by the government.

I note that my colleague the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, John Anderson, when he met with US Secretary for Agriculture, Dan Glickman, in Rome late last year, took a similar position. He discussed it there. I discussed it with US interlocutors in Manila in the APEC setting and in other settings, and the position is very clear: the United States itself has investigated the Australian wheat industry, most recently by the General Counting Office of the US, which is an independent arm and one of some note. It found that there was absolutely no risk of citing the Australian wheat industry and its single desk selling power to the World Trade Organisation and that there was no subsidy involved.

Further to that, a former senator of the US Congress, Senator Boren, led a subcommittee investigation which made a similar finding. So the single desk selling power in respect of the Australian wheat industry is a mechanism which is fair, which is transparent, which is above board, which helps hard-pressed Australian wheat growers who have no subsidy whatsoever to do battle in a very competitive circumstance, and which helped them forge some additional sales in recent weeks to India, Iran and other places in the Middle East and elsewhere—in fact, almost a record selling program with the huge harvest that they have to deal with at this time.

The trade outcomes and objectives statement is a very comprehensive statement. It gives many benchmarks and it is one which will, I think, greatly facilitate business, especially small business, as we go down the path of expanding our trade export efforts to the world.