Mineral Council: Bring on TPP-11 or lose $15bn a year

The nation’s peak mining lobby says an 11-nation free trade deal will bring the economy an extra $15 billion a year in income.

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive David Byers says parliament should back the TPP “as soon as possible”.

The nation’s peak mining and energy lobby group has urged the federal parliament to endorse a massive 11-nation free trade deal or deny the economy an extra $15 billion a year in income, dismissing arguments the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as it is known, will cause an influx of foreign workers.

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive David Byers said “strategic benefits” of the deal — which had to be renegotiated after US President Donald Trump withdrew January last year — meant the parliament should back the TPP “as soon as possible”.

He pointed to significant export opportunities for resource firms, especially to Peru and Vietnam, where resource exports have more than trebled in value in the past five years.

“The TPP-11 means stronger economic growth, more jobs, higher incomes, lower prices and more choice for consumers in Australia,” Mr Byers said.

He released analysis showing the average gain across 10 different modelling exercises showed an increase of 0.54 per cent, or more than $15bn, in GDP.

“The MCA has also debunked anti-trade scare campaigns claiming that the TPP’s temporary entry of business people and ­labour market testing provisions will lead to an influx of temporary migrants,” Mr Byers said.

In March the Turnbull government signed a far-reaching trade and investment agreement — with Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam — that will slash trade barriers faced by Australian exporters across a wide range of goods and services, including beef, wine, rice, universities, hospitals, pharmaceuticals and ship manufacturers.

Even without the US, the TPP makes up about 13.5 per cent of the global economy, worth almost $13.7 trillion.

Trade minister Steve Ciobo tabled the treaty in parliament, which is expected to endorse it, in late March.

Unions and environmentalists have opposed the landmark deal because, following the practice in earlier bilateral deals signed with Japan, Korea and China, it relaxes requirements for foreign workers in certain circumstances. For example, the TPP would permit “intra company” staff transfers for between two to four years to Australia for specialists and executives from Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru and Vietnam — six of the 11 TPP nations. “Business visitors” will be allowed to visit for up to three months.

The peak trade union body, in its submission, has urged the parliament to reject the treaty until labour market testing for foreign nationals is tightened, suggesting the overall benefits of trade agreements were “oversold by governments and the downsides are dismissed”. But Mr Byers said: “The TPP-11 includes the strongest labour standards provision in any Australian trade agreement, including commitments to environmental protection and safeguard for public policies in health, education, social welfare and environmental regulation.”

457 visas granted before and after FTAs

The number of visas granted to Chinese nationals has fallen 35 per cent since the China-Australia free trade agreement began. Just under 400 were granted in the September quarter of 2017, the lowest number since early 2015.

“The experience under the Korea and Japan free trade agreements, which also removed labour market testing, reinforces this conclusion,” it added. “The concerns over the impact of the removal of labour market testing on temporary skilled migration levels have not been realised.”

In its submission to the parliamentary committee, the Minerals Council endorsed the findings of the most recent study of the effects of the TPP-11 by Peter Petri of Brandeis University and Michael Plummer of Johns Hopkins University, which showed Australia’s national income would rise 0.5 per cent and exports by 4 per cent by 2030.

The National Farmers Federation also backed the deal. “Had TPP-11 been in effect in 2016-17, more than $5.5 billion dutiable agricultural exports would not have attracted tariffs,” it noted in its submission.

Elizabeth Thurbon, a professor at UNSW, said parts of the deal that gave more rights for foreign firms to sue Australian government — known as Investor-State Dispute Provisions — could “violate the principles of the multilateral trade regimen, which Australia has long sought to defend”.

“In the absence of a comprehensive, independent analysis of the deal, it is impossible for Australians and their elected representatives to weigh the relative merits of the deal and to make an informed decision as to whether to support it,” she said in her submission.