Page 27 - IB MAY 2017

The Region
Big brothers get deal they always wanted

‘ PACER-Plus

has never
been about

the Pacific

despite the
reassurance

and New

Zealand

of Australia ‘

and New Zealand, turning lunch on the
first day into an unscheduled ‘closed
meeting’ for Ministers, only to end five
hours later with the decision to launch
negotiations. It is no surprise that the
final outcome represents its genesis.
Sold as a ‘development agreement’,
PACER-Plus was meant to support the
Pacific to trade and develop. Sadly what
has been revealed is an agreement that
will see Australia and New Zealand in-
crease their exports to the region, restrict
the ability of Pacific governments to
Faiyaz Siqqiq Koya told negotiators in trade deals doesn’t lead to companies
no uncertain terms in 2015 that PACER- making greater investments in those make decisions about their economies,
Plus “Pacific Parties are being pushed to countries. and place the importance of foreign in-
give away their policy space, especially The conclusion of negotiations last vestors above the needs of Pacific people.
the right to regulate. The Chapters on month serves as a perfect metaphor for The failure to bring transparency to the
Investment and Service and General Ex- the whole PACER-Plus ordeal. Australia entire process has meant that the peoples
ceptions, for example, seek to constrain and New Zealand got the outcome they of the Pacific have been denied a voice
our policy space to the extent that we wanted and the OCTA failed to accommo- in their economic futures. Releasing the
no longer are in control of our develop- date all its members and instead chose texts and market access schedules after
ment”. The leaking of the draft text has to pursue conclusion over development they have been agreed to offers nothing
shown that the proposed safeguards for outcomes. The Chief Trade Advisor, in the way of consultation and genuine
Pacific producers will, in practice, be inef- Edwini Kessie, was already on his way desire to have input from people.
fectual as they are not permanent, avoid back to Geneva before Fiji could express PACER-Plus represents not an oppor-
simple and effective remedies, and will their frustration at being ‘locked-out’ of tunity for a development outcome but a
require comprehensive data (something the final round of negotiations. dangerous restriction from real options
not always available in Pacific countries) The signing of PACER-Plus is sched- for development in the Pacific.
before being applied. Even the promises uled for June 16, almost nine years to the
of increased investment are based on day that Ministers decided to launch ne- - Adam Wolfenden is a trade campaigner
belief rather than evidence, with many gotiations on PACER-Plus. That meeting with the Pacific Network on Globalisation
studies highlighting that signing free was marred by an ambush by Australia (PANG).

Islands Business, May 2017 27