The China free trade agreement, hailed by the government as the start of a new era of opportunity for Australia, has passed parliament's lower house. With Labor support, the necessary changes to customs law sailed through on Thursday after a two-day debate. Trade Minister Andrew Robb, who finalised 10 years of negotiations on the deal, said the Australian brand in China was gold standard. Mr Robb said China, Australia's most important trading partner, was an economy in transition and still had a long way to go to reach its potential. The trade deal would boost many Australian exports, including premium food, value-added manufactures and innumerable services.The long parliamentary debate was generally a chorus of praise for the benefits the deal will bring, although a few Labor MPs expressed some concerns about its effect on jobs and its dispute-settlement mechanisms. In the end, the government, anxious to get the legislation passed before parliament breaks for a fortnight, cut the debate short with 10 of its own MPs still listed to speak. Crossbench co-operation then turned to rancour when Greens MP Adam Bandt tried to amend the legislation to enforce more advertising for jobs before foreign workers were allowed in. Mr Robb accused him of parroting misrepresentations from union thugs, as well as fearmongering and dog-whistling. Mr Bandt shot back that the new era of reasoned debate hadn't lasted long. However, his amendments were crushed by the combined forces of the major parties.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2015/10/22/vote-expected-on-china-free-trade-deal.html?cid=BP_RSS_top-stories_1_vote-expected-on-china-free-trade-deal_221015

Is there any FTA we have signed that has been of any benefit to us? Doubt it.

Chinese firms will have some rights to sue Australian governments for policy changes that adversely affect their interests


The old parties are selling out or democracy so to cuddle up with the communist party of China. 

So Labor never voting for another trade agreement that had ISDS didn't last long.  ::)

Kiron22 wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2015 at 5:00pm:

So Labor never voting for another trade agreement that had ISDS didn't last long.  ::)

Well it is labor. What did you expect? Principles?  They were right to do so, but for all the wrong reasons.

Ah, yes - but will it clear the last hurdle.. or even the next.......

A grab for wealth by the few at the expense of everyone else. More jobs shipped overseas to make the rich richer.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 7:51am:

A grab for wealth by the few at the expense of everyone else. More jobs shipped overseas to make the rich richer.

Blah, blah, blah! Can't you idiots come up with something original?

That'e a good one! Armpit, the Daily Telegraph Puppet complaining the he's seeing nothing original.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 7:53am:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 7:51am: A grab for wealth by the few at the expense of everyone else. More jobs shipped overseas to make the rich richer. Blah, blah, blah! Can't you idiots come up with something original?

its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite.

____ wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2015 at 4:35pm:

Chinese firms will have some rights to sue Australian governments for policy changes that adversely affect their interests The old parties are selling out or democracy so to cuddle up with the communist party of China.

I'm not too worried about the ISDS conditions with the China FTA. Basically the agreement is less aggressive, partly because China does not want to be held to some of the provisions.

For example, a Chinese mine investor could sue if they were denied approval for environmental concerns, but only if the same conditions didn't apply to all applicants.

There is also a clause that the host nation can seek an agreement with home nation that measures being challenged are not in violation of the treaty, and if they agree the company can no longer pursue the claim.

Kytro wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 8:44am:

____ wrote on Oct 22nd, 2015 at 4:35pm: Chinese firms will have some rights to sue Australian governments for policy changes that adversely affect their interests The old parties are selling out or democracy so to cuddle up with the communist party of China.  I'm not too worried about the ISDS conditions with the China FTA. Basically the agreement is less aggressive, partly because China does not want to be held to some of the provisions. For example, a Chinese mine investor could sue if they were denied approval for environmental concerns, but only if the same conditions didn't apply to all applicants. There is also a clause that the host nation can seek an agreement with home nation that measures being challenged are not in violation of the treaty, and if they agree the company can no longer pursue the claim.

And that makes perfect sense. The agreement does not sell out our rights and most of the complaining has been either on the basis of fabricated or misunderstood issues.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 8:38am:

its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite.

The gap between rich and everyone else is growing though, and it is a cause for concern. If it grows too much it could cause a societal collapse.

Kytro wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 12:06pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 8:38am: its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite. The gap between rich and everyone else is growing though, and it is a cause for concern. If it grows too much it could cause a societal collapse.

this is just the natural order of things.

the gap between Roger Federer and everyone else is growing as tennis players become more and more elite.

solution....start training hard when you are young.  its unlikely roger is going to agree to play with a ping pong bat just to make you feel better.

the gap between the skills of an Apple IT specialist and everyone is growing every year too.

solution....work your asss off to get good at IT.
Its unlikely Apple are going to agree to go back to MS Dos, just to make you feel better.

and so we could go on.


solution ....if the rich are becoming more successful, then study what they are doing and do that yourself.
Dont be thinking they will just turn down the passion to make you feel better.
The truth is that a lot of rich people would love to help, but the poor are so hateful,  most rich people just keep a low profile and carry on.

When a westerner goes to africa and sees terrible poverty, dont you think most westerners would like to help.
Why do people assume that rich people dont want to help poor people. Its the poor themselves who keep themselves poor. They self sabotage at every turn

mariacostel wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 8:38am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 7:53am: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 7:51am: A grab for wealth by the few at the expense of everyone else. More jobs shipped overseas to make the rich richer. Blah, blah, blah! Can't you idiots come up with something original? its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite.

Does that include the 800,000 unemployed with little real hope plus the two million or so under-employed who are in the same boat?

Perhaps you could offer us chapter and verse on exactly how we are all so much better off these days.... in fact, so better off that we need pruning since we are apparently getting too much....

aquascoot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 12:37pm:

Kytro wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 12:06pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 8:38am: its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite. The gap between rich and everyone else is growing though, and it is a cause for concern. If it grows too much it could cause a societal collapse. this is just the natural order of things. the gap between Roger Federer and everyone else is growing as tennis players become more and more elite. solution....start training hard when you are young.  its unlikely roger is going to agree to play with a ping pong bat just to make you feel better. the gap between the skills of an Apple IT specialist and everyone is growing every year too. solution....work your asss off to get good at IT. Its unlikely Apple are going to agree to go back to MS Dos, just to make you feel better. and so we could go on. solution ....if the rich are becoming more successful, then study what they are doing and do that yourself. Dont be thinking they will just turn down the passion to make you feel better. The truth is that a lot of rich people would love to help, but the poor are so hateful,  most rich people just keep a low profile and carry on. When a westerner goes to africa and sees terrible poverty, dont you think most westerners would like to help. Why do people assume that rich people dont want to help poor people. Its the poor themselves who keep themselves poor. They self sabotage at every turn

These are very old, outdated ideas. The literature clearly shows both agency and structure contribute to individual outcomes. This has been known for quite a while.

Kytro wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 12:06pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 23rd, 2015 at 8:38am: its the same conspiracy theories over and over. While the average man is now the wealthiest he has ever been, they complain about the opposite. The gap between rich and everyone else is growing though, and it is a cause for concern. If it grows too much it could cause a societal collapse.

The so-called gap is not any such thing. While the average person continues to have wage rises ahead of inflation and a rise in the standard of living how is that a societal PROBLEM? This gap only really foments trouble is living standards are poverty level and they arent. The rest is mere envy that the worlds super-wealthy are wealthiER.   If I get to have twice as much has I have at the moment but the top get three times as much, why is this 'gap' such a problem?

The gap is growing and growing fast tho here it is not growing as fast as elsewhere.

One reason is the HUGE amount of tax money going to the top 10% of income earners. An unsustainable amount, even morriscum will have to move on those.

Jovial Monk wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2015 at 5:30pm:

The gap is growing and growing fast tho here it is not growing as fast as elsewhere. One reason is the HUGE amount of tax money going to the top 10% of income earners. An unsustainable amount, even morriscum will have to move on those.

I was hoping for an intelligent, reasoned response and instead, just got you.