Review Essay: Death and Delusion on the Trade Front

Abstract

There are three major elements to trade policy in today’s world – the first is the expansion of trade through multilateral liberalisation under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the second is the movement towards regional trade agreements (RTAs), and the third is the development of bilateral deals. Under the Howard government, Australian trade policy has shifted unequivocally from multilateralism and (open) regionalism towards bilateralism. Australia now has bilateral deals with New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, and of course the United States. It also has a series of scoping studies, partnerships and negotiations going on with ASEAN, Malaysia, Japan and China.

Trade policy took center stage in 2004 with the debate over the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA). The shift towards bilateral deals, especially with the US, has attracted criticism across the political spectrum. Many liberal supporters of freer trade are critical of the shift towards bilateralism because it is seen to damage the first best option of multilateral liberalisation. But criticism has also come from the left. Critics of Coalition trade policy, including the authors of the two books under review, argue that the free trade deal restricts Australia’s ability to make health and social policy, damages the progress of the WTO and makes Australia’s trade relationships confusing. Most importantly, however, critics of AUSFTA argue that it is simply a bad deal that should have been rejected. Liberal detractors point out that the deal is anything but a free trade agreement, but liberal supporters argue that this is beside the point: what matters is the expansion of trade and investment and connecting Australia more closely with the world’s largest economy. Supporters also point out the potential economic gains (although these vary considerably), the benefits to consumers of any decline in protectionism, and the potential increase in foreign investment.