Senator COOK —My question is to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Hill, in his capacity as Minister representing the Minister for Trade. In view of the APEC meeting in September and the upcoming World Trade Organisation meeting in November-December, will the new protectionist Minister for Trade, Mr Vaile, be offering to brief other APEC and WTO member nations on the virtues of slowing down the pace of tariff reform, as he believes Australia should do? Does the government believe that Minister Vaile will get international support for this view? How many of Australia's export industries are in support of Mr Vaile's preferred policy position?

Senator HILL (Environment and Heritage) —I think that Senator Cook might have misunderstood Mr Vaile's position in this matter. Mr Vaile obviously reflects the government's position—and that is that ongoing trade liberalisation is in Australia's interest. We are burdened by trade barriers in our markets, and the more they can be reduced, the better off Australia is going to be. I even recall that being a position advocated by Senator Cook when he was the minister in this area, so he will be pleased to hear my answer in that regard. At the forthcoming trade discussions Australia will be taking the position that further liberalisation should be encouraged and supported, and we will be endeavouring to persuade others to that position.

Senator COOK —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for that assurance. It is different from what Mr Vaile told Laurie Oakes in his Sunday interview. In view of that answer, is it still the government's policy to pursue the goal of `aggressive bilateralism' at the expense of multilateralism as outlined in the coalition's 1998 election policy? Does the government believe that aggressive bilateralism is preferable to trade multilateralism, and will this be Australia's position as it enters the APEC and WTO trade round discussions? How is aggressive bilateralism of more advantage to Australia's exporters than the opening of many markets under a multilateral approach?

Senator HILL (Environment and Heritage) —Regrettably, again I fear that Senator Cook has misread or misunderstood the government policy. Government policy is to take all opportunities to reduce trade barriers and open markets—whether it can be achieved on a bilateral basis or on a multilateral basis. What the coalition did say was that the previous government, of which Senator Cook was a member, erred in putting too much emphasis upon multilateralism at the expense of taking full opportunity under bilateral occasions as they present. In its bilaterals this government has vigorously sought—and I think Senator Cook need only refer to the record of Mr Fischer in this regard—to open markets at each and every opportunity as it has presented. Through the WTO and other venues, it has similarly sought to persuade a broadscale opening of markets. So it just requires a correct interpretation of the policy. (Time expired)