Trade protection
|
Replies to:
‘Free trade benefits everyone’ |
To: The Editor, News Weekly, 582 Queensbury St, North Melbourne, Victoria,
3051, Australia |
120
CONTENTS 1-100
101-on
Translate Links
Events
Books HOME
Foot v v
122
I say that the Australian lamb export cut-off by the U.S. President
is just one example of the foolishness of expecting the Great Powers to adopt
genuine free trade policies. Mr Clinton supposedly bowed to the voting power
of the American farmers. In reality, he bowed to the huge export
corporations, which are part of the corporate groupings that finance the
multi-billion dollar U. S. election campaigns, and presumably pay bribes
to politicians.
To maintain cheap banana production for three big U.S. companies,
200 heavily-armed men recently surrounded a meeting of Guatemalan banana
workers and forced union leaders to tell the local radio station that a
demonstration had been cancelled. The workers had been called together
by the union, because almost 1000 workers had been dismissed from three
plantations. These plantations belonged to a subsidiary of Del Monte
Fresh Produce, one of the "big three." The UN agency trying to monitor
the Peace Accords in Guatemala said this was the most serious violation of
human rights since Archbishop Juan Jose Gerardi was murdered in 1998.
In Colombia, the banana workers' leader Cesar Herrera Torreglosa was
assassinated on 13 December 1999, as part of the same campaign to keep the
banana workers' wages below subsistence level.
Renwick Rose, a leader of the Windward Islands, hardest hit by the
Banana War, said: "When you buy a cheap banana you are unwittingly participating
in exploitation. People need to understand what lies behind the banana. There
are children, mothers, fathers and blood, sweat and toil. Fair trade is not
asking you to pay more, just what it costs."
Meanwhile, businessmen and governments of the European Union and the
United States are involved in a "Banana War" in the marketplace, and through
the World Trade Organisation, where negotiations stumbled on.
Raw salmon from North America, complete with viruses and other
parasites, is being forced onto the Australian market in defiance of Tasmania's
state rights, the exporters using the World Trade Organisation's lop-sided
rules to overcome environmental considerations.
The world's armaments trade was recently spotlighted again, huge bribes
being uncovered. Behind the disgraceful behaviour of the arms companies
selling weapons to dictators and terrorists around the globe, and thus largely
creating the refugee crisis, there is the ironic fact that in many developed
countries research into new weapons is largely financed by government subsidies
and other support.
This is well-documented for the United Kingdom and the United States,
as the Campaign Against the Arms Trade has shown.
A few years ago it was revealed that the Italian Christian Democrats
had been backed by the Mafia right from the start. In recent months
we had the amazing revelation that the German Christian Democrat party had
been receiving "slush funds" from Big Business for years. One donor
to a Christian Democrat was a left-wing French President. Far from
convincing me that old enmities had faded away, I wondered where this Frenchman
obtained the huge sum involved. An Irish Prime Minister received a
huge sum as a non-repayable loan from a businessman -- surely Big Business
gets more than charming blarney and a Guinness or other liquor out of these
transactions!
Now that we understand more about parasites, some wide-awake people
oppose too much international trade, and many oppose doctrinaire attitudes
to free trade. For example, North American forests are at risk from
the long-horned asian beetles that come in packing boxes from mainland China.
The New York authorities tried to force the Communist Chinese to fumigate
the boxes, but the WTO ruled that this was an unfair restraint of trade!
Grape imports into Australia are now about to be increased at give-away
prices -- does anyone remember the terrible imported grape disease that wiped
out the wine industry in Victoria and other places about a century ago?
Will having cheaper grapes for a season or two pay for the ruined lives
of the vineyard owners and workers if a similar disease gains entry?
News Weekly published Max Teichmann's article saying that
Australian rural industries were being slowly leached by tariff cuts, exclusion
from important markets, and undercutting by subsidised products from the
U.S. Yet, the U.S. preaches economic rationalism and free trade!
Your letter-writer said you can't have it both ways -- to criticise
the fact that our citrus industry is being devastated by cheap imported juice,
and to criticise Japan for imposing tariff barriers against Australian rice.
I suggest that your journal has exposed the hypocrisy and stupidity
of our leaders, past and present. The growth of Australia's whole fruit
industry was for the export trade -- it certainly wasn't to fill hungry
Australian mouths. Likewise, after the early ricegrowing attempts,
every farm that grew rice after that was for export, just as our wheat farms
have been for more than a century.
With unjust bribes, worker exploitation, subsidies, tariffs, dumping,
etc., it is no wonder that Australian politicians a century ago demanded
protection from imports.
Much of the world's trade is a waste of fuel and other precious resources.
Ships carrying cans of herring from Norway might be passing ships carrying
herring to Norway. Much of the trade is propped up by bad government
laws on subsidies, low rural wages, land tax abolition, income tax concessions,
etc., etc.
But, in an ideal world, what we want is Fair Trade, not Free Trade.
A whole movement for Fair Trade has sprung up world-wide, largely since
the big campaign against the now-stalled Multilateral Agreement on Trade
(MAI). I recommend that your readers use the internet to link with
the Fair Trade movement, which is taking up signatures on a proposal to adopt
a new kind of WTO that will respect the rights of workers and consumers to
a healthy clean environment, as well as a living wage, decent conditions,
and assurance of food production in each country.
Yours faithfully, John Massam, March 16 2000
Free trade benefits everyone
Sir, News Weekly needs to make its position clear on the issue of
protection versus free trade.
In the same sentence of your editorial (February 12, 2000) you complain
about our citrus industry being "devastated" by cheap imported juice concentrates
and then go on to criticise Japan for imposing tariff barriers against Australian
rice.
NEWS WEEKLY, MARCH 11, 2000 -- PAGE
10 |
Mark Hassed,
Canterbury, Vic
“Free trade” and predatory
policies
Sir, May I comment on M. Hassed's letter on free trade in News Weekly
(March 11, 2000).
Extremes in economic policy are neither practical nor useful.
Pursued to its limit, unrestricted free trade simply leads to the
industrial and commercial barons going flat out until monopolies and oligopolies
become rampant predators.
This was exemplified in oil and rail in 19th and 20th Century America.
We are seeing a similar trend in banking and communications emerging
in Australia now.
NEWS WEEKLY, MARCH 25, 2000 -- PAGE
11 |
R. A. D'Arcy,
Burleigh Waters, Qld
Editor's
Note:
The writer worked for some 25 years at the Tariff Board, later the
Industry Assistance Commission, in both research and
projects.