Senator FERRIS (4:31 PM) —Earlier in my speech, I was discussing multilateral versus bilateral trading arrangements and I was making the point that a number of witnesses to our inquiry raised the issue of whether or not the bilateral free trade agreement with the United States would undermine our capacity to successfully negotiate multilateral trade arrangements in the future. I posed two questions: does the negotiation of this free trade agreement with the United States—and others with Singapore and Thailand—help or hinder our position within the current round of WTO multilateral trade negotiations; and what would be the impact of this agreement on Australia's position in the Cairns Group of fair trading agricultural exporting economies? I am proud to say that the Cairns Group was formed when I was working at the National Farmers Federation, which has always been a very strong supporter of the Cairns Group.

This was a very interesting academic debate and one that I was pleased to take part in, but by far the most compelling evidence presented to the committee came not from academics or theorists but from those with direct experience at the coalface of international trade negotiations. Mr Bruce Gosper, First Assistant Secretary of Australia's Office of Trade Negotiations, told the committee:

The highly respected trade analyst Mr Alan Oxley, who has extensive experience in international trade negotiations, provided another compelling statement to the committee in response to a question from Senator Cook. He said:

Mr Peter Corish, the president of the National Farmers Federation, told the committee:

There we have it: three highly respected individuals representing specific areas of expertise commenting positively on the operation of a bilateral agreement in relation to criticism about multilateral arrangements and how they might be affected by the signing of this agreement.

I turn to quarantine, an issue which was very significant in the inquiry carried out by the Senate committee and the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. There were some quite irresponsible assertions presented to the committee which claimed that in some way Australia's strict science-based quarantine system would be compromised by the agreement. Having thoroughly examined these assertions, I can clearly and unambiguously inform the Senate that it is now clear that they were nothing more than that—simply assertions. They were not based on fact, and they were not supported by any empirical evidence.

On this issue, Ms Virginia Greville, Special International Agricultural Adviser from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, told the committee on May 18:

Mr Acting Deputy President Cherry, I think that you and I—as members of the Senate committee that is hearing some of these challenges for apples, bananas and pork—can attest to that transparent and contestable process. Ms Greville went on to say:

I thank Ms Greville for her quite substantial expertise that was made available to the committee during its inquiry. In relation to the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Matters and the Standing Technical Working Group on Animal and Plant Health Matters that will be created under chapter 7 of the FTA, Ms Greville advised:

These statements were reinforced by Mr Andy Stoler, the Executive Director of the Institute for International Business, Economics and Law at the University of Adelaide—a very skilled and experienced trade negotiator. He said:

In conclusion, the FTA will benefit all sections of the Australian economy. I have focused my remarks today on what it will mean for Australia's primary industries because this is a focus of interest for me. Trade liberalisation, both multilateral and bilateral, has served Australian industry very well, increasing productivity and competitiveness across all sectors. The FTA will deliver real economic benefits and will secure for Australia greater access to the world's largest and most powerful economy. It will ensure Australia has the capacity to compete against other suppliers from Canada, Mexico and other countries which currently enjoy preferential access to the US market. All major sectors of the Australian economy stand to benefit from the free trade agreement.

I state clearly and unambiguously to the Senate that assertions that this agreement will impact on Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prices are simply groundless. These claims are not supported by the text of the agreement and are not supported by any genuine evidence. When examined by the select committee—and, incidentally, the treaties committee—they did not stand up to scrutiny. Furthermore, many of the claims that have been made in relation to intellectual property law changes introduced by this agreement are, in fact, baseless and wrong. Far from being detrimental, the intellectual property provisions of the agreement will provide substantial benefit to Australia's creative industries, which must compete within a global entertainment market.

Greater symmetry between Australian and US laws will provide the certainty needed to produce greater investment in Australia's creative talents and will deliver substantially improved growth and employment. I urge all senators who believe in trade, who believe in promoting export opportunities for our very valuable primary and secondary industries, and who believe in creating—ultimately—a wealthier and more economically secure Australia to support this legislation.