Government needs to tighten food standards &Importation laws

[Outlaw Yogi]

One Nation was the only party actively working against them when Hanson was in Parliament.

Incorrect. Joe Bryant (right winger) and the Greens (left wingers) were the only entities opposing FTAs. Hanson never said "Boo" about the issue.
I should know, I was involved in preventing the FTA with the European Union run by the European Commission in 2004.
Reading the documents submitted to the Howard govt by the EC, demanding we alter our laws to conform with WTO regulations was an attack on our soveriegnty.
In short, it demanded that all govt services be privatised or that private competitors be given equal government funding as the govt run/owned enterprise.

Personally I could live with most of what was demanded, but not water privatisation.
There's no way I'd pay some foreign company for a licence to collect water in a dam or tank on my own land because they'd bought the catchment.

Emerson was all for free trade and only ON stood up and debated him in public forums. Mind you he just did what he always did... moth propaganda and platitudes.

Not far off the mark. Craig Emerson held an inquirey into the impacts of FTAs ... notably NAFTA ... but clearly this inquirey was fake or the findings regarding impacts on Mexico and Canada ignored, because he in concert with Mark Latham rolled over and gave support.

[Rorschach]

Incorrect. Joe Bryant (right winger) and the Greens (left wingers) were the only entities opposing FTAs. Hanson never said "Boo" about the issue.

Well your complete ignorance is showing again Yogi.... ON was always about buying back the farm, getting Australian manufacturing going and against globalisation and free trade agreements...

You should know? Yes you should and you should stop lying or educate yourself.

[mellie]

Incorrect. Joe Bryant (right winger) and the Greens (left wingers) were the only entities opposing FTAs. Hanson never said "Boo" about the issue.

Well your complete ignorance is showing again Yogi.... ON was always about buying back the farm, getting Australian manufacturing going and against globalisation and free trade agreements...

You should know? Yes you should and you should stop lying or educate yourself.

You are a wanker and a troll Roach, piss off and troll someone elses topic because it's clear, you have no interest in this topic, only wish to attack and abuse(aka troll) people for kicks.

Ozpolitic could use a few more trolls, why don't you join them.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Well your complete ignorance is showing again Yogi.... ON was always about buying back the farm, getting Australian manufacturing going and against globalisation and free trade agreements...

You should know? Yes you should and you should stop lying or educate yourself.

Listen you half witted gronk. When I am ignorant of something I either say so, avoid the topic, or research it and learn about.

I know about FTAs and WTO rules because I was involved in preventing GATS with Europe and opposed AUSFTA. Plus I had copies of their documents.
The FTA with the US [AUSFTA] is not really free trade anyway.
Probably removed now, but for a while you could compare the OZ and US tarrif schedules via DFATs site. The OZ schedule had zero against all items and the US schedule remained virtually unchanged, with tarrifs still on heaps of goods. For example, from memory the tarrif on beef was to stay in place for 20 years.

As for lying, well I vary rarely have a need to do so, and when I do it's usually to save a drama for someone else. I tend to admit to what I do and then suggest the other party get over it.

You on the other hand seem to compulsively lie whenever challenged, and that is typical of weak minds, particularly schizophrenics and manic depressives.

Fact is, One Nation had anti-FTA polices (almost identical to the Greens) on their website, but neither Hanson, Olfield, or the 3rd party member (forget name) said a word publicly on the issue. Not even a sound bite.

[Rorschach]

One Nation was the only party actively working against them when Hanson was in Parliament.

Incorrect. Joe Bryant (right winger) and the Greens (left wingers) were the only entities opposing FTAs. Hanson never said "Boo" about the issue.

Puhlease stop exhibiting your ignorance.
I know all about Joe Bryant thanks and so did Hanson and Oldfield and their webmaster etc, etc, etc... it was all over their gwb website from day one.

Emerson was all for free trade and only ON stood up and debated him in public forums. Mind you he just did what he always did... mouth propaganda and platitudes.

Not far off the mark. Craig Emerson held an inquirey into the impacts of FTAs ... notably NAFTA ... but clearly this inquirey was fake or the findings regarding impacts on Mexico and Canada ignored, because he in concert with Mark Latham rolled over and gave support.[/quote]
Like I said Emerson and the ALP always backed globalisation and FTAs...

[Rorschach]

Yogi

We all know that the early steps when Hanson was in parliament was the MAI.

http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/mai/mai.html

Hanson's work at exposing MAI:

Pauline Hanson, the independent Australian federal MP for the seat of Oxley and leader of One Nation has always been at the forefront of trying to regain some of the ground that has been lost in this country to multinationals and foreigners. The links below detail the press releases, newspaper reports and publicity her intervention on this issue has created:

Email your contribution to the "stop the MAI petition" now.

The early beginnings under the Australian Labor Party (ALP)

In a classic case of re-writing history the ALP are now trying to blame the Coalition government for Australia's involvement in the MAI following concerns raised by Australians. The links below clearly establish that ALP Senator Gareth Evans (the great internationalist who wants to be the "President of the UN) and ALP trade minister (1995) Bob McMullan are the men who steered Australia into this secret agreement.

With links to original articles on the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) web site.

Australian related MAI articles:

These only started appearing after Pauline Hanson publicly raised the MAI as an issue in January 1998.

The mainstream media have tried to re-write history on the source of the MAI being exposed in Australia and continue to do this.

The Great Australian Swindle - October 1996

Ms Hanson on Customs Tariff Amendment Bill

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment - full transcript of Background Briefing, 30th November 1997, by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on radio..

Since 1953 Multinationals have paid little or no tax.

Dear Prime Minister of Australia

MAI benefactors funding major Australian political parties.

Municipalities and the MAI

The response by City Councils to the MAI - 1st April 1998

Known email addresses of active Australian anti-MAI participants.

Stealthy March towards a single, global economy. "The Age" 5th February 1998

Australia's Selfhood Vanishes in the Market "The Age" 7th February 1998

Potential of Treaty deserves a hearing "The Age" 9th February 1998

Opening Melbourne Convention - Sir Anthony Mason - 2nd March 1998

ABC Lateline report on MAI 10.30pm Tuesday 3rd March 1998

Treaty xenophobia - Sydney Morning Herald, 7th March 1998

Trade pact won’t bar local control of Telstra - Rod Kemp, 22nd March 1998

Scott Balson (SB) on the ABC’s 4QR responding to Peter Charlton (News Limited’s Courier Mail) comments on the MAI. - 24th March 1998

The MAI and ‘globalisation’ - Graham Strachan, 25th March 1998

No secrecy about MAI - Bill Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties 27th March 1998

Lies and the MAI - by Graham Strachan, 1st April 1998

Letter to the Prime Minister - an act of treason - Charles Connolly, 10th April 1998

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment faces indefinite postponement - 25th April 1998

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ON THE MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT (MAI) - 28th April 1998

OECD MEETING AT MINISTERIAL LEVEL 28th April 1998

MAI- the Canadian debate Australians have been "protected" from.

Explain the MAI treaty Sydney Morning Herald - 8th May 1998

[Rorschach]

The MAI

21st January 1998

Ladies and gentlemen of the press,

Today’s press conference is more than just a matter of news, it is a very serious matter of national interest and it is only through yourselves that Australians can be effectively informed of the treacherous nature of their government’s intentions to sign away the future of Australia by selling us out completely.

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) is the brainchild of the OECD and is an attack on everything Australian. In fact it poses the same threat to many countries and various groups around the world are conducting their own fight just as we must.

Currently, the government is negotiating the treaty in secret and it is expected to be ready for signature in April or May this year. Once we are bound by this agreement its terms will trap us for 20 years with no facility for changes.

The purpose of this agreement is to transfer power and control away from citizens and their democratically elected representatives to the world’s largest multinationals with no strings attached.

The effect of this agreement as they are known to us at present include:

Australian governments, whether federal, state or local, will not be able to favour local business over foreigners.

Any performance requirements for multinationals, such as creating jobs for Australians, using local components, or loyalty to Australia, will not be allowed.

Australia will not be able to stop multinationals from importing foreign workers and their families into our country.

Multinationals will be able to sue all three levels of Australian government for any infringements of the rights given to them by the agreement - it will be the Australian taxpayers who will pay the legal costs and damages compensation.

It is important to understand this is not about trade, it is all about power and control.

This is the multinationals shifting production and workforces without impediment from country to country to minimise costs and maximise profits. Giving them unrestricted rights and freedom to buy, sell and move their operations whenever and wherever they want around the world.

The agreement is designed to impose tight restrictions on what National governments can do in regulating their own economies.

We will no longer be able to attach conditions to, or limit the extent of foreign investment and many of our decisions will be made by international bureaucrats.

It will be impossible for Australians to run our country for our own interests. Our government will in many respects be reduced to simple managers and caretakers for foreigners.

In the words of Renato Ruggerio, Director General of the World Trade Organisation, “We are writing the constitution of a single Global Economy.”

The negotiation of the agreement commenced under Labor in 1995, and has continued under the current Coalition government - Liberal, National and Labor must shoulder the responsibility and wear the blame.

While it has been reported Australian negotiators have submitted 29 reservations to the agreement, we have no idea what those reservations are and it must be acknowledged that Canada has asked for 48 exemptions.

The secret negotiations must stop and the government must come clean immediately. In particular the government must disclose forthwith the 29 areas they have already raised as issues.

Australians must be given details of this agreement.

They must issue a draft of the agreement to any interested community groups for full and frank public scrutiny as well as opening up the issue for parliamentary debate.

It will effect everyone from workers to owners of Australian businesses, their families, their futures, everything.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the press, I believe you have a professional and patriotic responsibility to do all you can to alert Australians to the dangers of this agreement and the need for the government to be more open and accountable for their intended actions with relation to the MAI.

Statement issued by Pauline Hanson MP, member for Oxley.

[Rorschach]

Hanson warns of MAI pillage.
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/198/2201.html

Hanson slams secret deal.
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/mai/qthead1.html

Representatives from ACE-J said that a survey late last year had shown that most of our Federal MPs and Senators either knew nothing about or cared to know nothing about the MAI. Somebody noted that the recent ALP Conference in Tasmania had declared they were against MAI with "certain reservations." (Richard had spoken personally with Opposition Leader Kim Beazley last year and noted his support for the MAI. Ironically a similar conversation with Federal Industrial Relations Minister Peter Reith had revealed a negative response!) The media attention that Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party had lately received with respect to this issue was dealt with by the re-affirmation that in fighting MAI we are caring not only for our own country but for the whole world - especially the poor majority. It was noted that Australian Democrats and Australian Greens Senators were now very aware of the issue and were preparing themselves for a public and parliamentary campaign.

The Democrats and Greens came late to the party. Joe Bryant and his ragtag political wannabe ferals were always pissing and howling in the outback wind.

[Rorschach]

Speech by Pauline Hanson MP
to the Australian Parliament -
Grievances debate - March 9th 1998

Following my briefing from the Treasury on the MAI last week I read the latest draft of the MAI document which is now available on the Australian Government treasury Internet site.

Having read this latest document, my original concerns regarding the effect of MAI on the people of Australia have been reinforced and remain as strong as ever.

First I must state that as it is not possible to download the text of the agreement from the treasury internet site on a computer disk, it is very difficult and expensive to distribute the text of the treaty.

Distributing the document is essential if the Australian people are to know what the government is negotiating, and what that will mean for us all.

Also, the decision to examine the MAI through the Joint Standing Committee on treaties, is but part of the cover up, and will not result in the concerns of ordinary Australians even getting a hearing, let alone being taken into account.

15 of the 16 members of the Joint Committee will be appointed by the Government or the Opposition, and we all know the Labor Party started the negotiations on the MAI in May 1995. Both the Coalition and the Labor Party have demonstrated their commitment to sign this treaty.

Despite requests, I could not obtain a list of any Australian government exemptions to the treaty from the Treasury or any detailed information from the Parliamentary library.

My having to rely on the internet for information on the MAI caused me to make contact with representatives of the Canadian Parliament for help.

These contacts, made in desperation, have been by fax, e-mail, and phone, and began late last year.

It is scandalous that a Member of the Federal Parliament has to go to such lengths. My accusation of secrecy remains, and I put to the Australian people the simple question -

If the MAI is good, why is the government even now still keeping all the important parts secret?

This is not an issue of national security, so why is there so much secrecy? What is it that the government doesn’t want the Australian people to know?

I will detail some of my specific concerns with the treaty.

Equal treatment for multinationals.

It may sound warm and fuzzy but the point will make it illegal for Australian levels of government to favour a local company over a foreign company.

There are many good reasons why we should be able to discriminate in favour of Australian companies.

For example, it will even be illegal for a local council to favour a local business over a foreign company for council work or for deals to be negotiated with the understanding money will stay in the community.

Instead of the money and employment going into the local area, the work could be performed by foreign labour, and the profits repatriated overseas, most likely untaxed.

The subject of multinationals importing labour may seem unlikely but just listen to this paragraph from page 16 of the draft MAI -

“No contracting party may deny entry and stay as provided for by this article, or authorisation to work as provided by paragraph 1 (a) of this article, for reasons relating to labour market or other economic needs tests or numeric restrictions in national laws, regulations and procedures.”

The treaty allows multinationals to bring in their own employees and their families, and we will have to give their spouses a work permit.

Will these foreigners also get access to Medicare and other social security benefits?

We have enough unemployment without multinationals bringing in foreign workers. But as the Demtel man says, “But wait, there’s more.”

Under the MAI, no one, not even the Federal Government, can attach conditions to foreigners who seek to establish themselves in Australia.

For example, we will not be able to make a multinational use any Australian made components or domestic content. We will not be able to make a multinational establish a joint venture with an Australian company. We will not even be able to insist multinationals even employ any Australian people at all.

Within three years of signing this treaty, we will have to enter into negotiations to rollback and remove any current Australian laws that the Multinationals don’t like.

Any exemptions the Government proposes will likely be worthless in the future, as we will be forced to repeal them.

The question of whether taxation constitutes a form of expropriation is not all that clear, and as it stands the Australian Taxation Office has already told us multinationals pay little or no tax now.

If, in its current form, this agreement is signed, we may never be able to correct the pathetic situation of multinationals paying virtually no tax.

All levels of government in Australia are liable to be sued in the event of an infringement of multinational “rights”. Under the MAI, it is compulsory for the government to enter into binding arbitration, which will leave us, the Australian taxpayers liable for damages and horrific fees.

Under the ‘protection from strife’ clause, the Australian people are also liable for any loss of profits resulting from a state of emergency. Just what exactly will that mean?

As if this isn’t enough punishment for the innocent victims currently known as the Australian people, will not be able to signal our wish to get out of the MAI for 5 years. After that the treaty still will continue in effect for another 15 years.

The Australian people must be made aware we will be bound by this draconian agreement for at least 20 years.

Australia is currently very good to foreign investors, and many, including me, would argue in fact we are too good, and give too much away. We have many resources, we have a well educated workforce, and we have a fairly good infrastructure.

Multinationals get the benefits of our natural resources, infrastructure, stable society, and educated population without contributing. More and more Australians are becoming aware of these facts, and they are getting angry and are tired of being used.

It is time to make multinationals and foreigners pay their share of tax.

It must be acknowledged that while some foreign investment may be good, foreign control is not.

It must also be understood, the majority of foreign investment buys up existing profitable Australian companies and downsizes the workforce - much of what the government says about the benefits of foreign investment is simply a lie.

Australia has relied far too heavily on foreign capital in the past, and we are now paying the price of high unemployment, a failing society, and less ability to control our destiny.

I maintain the MAI is being largely negotiated in secret because it is not in the best interests of Australians, and will only benefit the multinationals in their push for a single world economy.

In its current form, the MAI will hand over vast powers to multinational companies who will plunder our country on their terms, and then bill us for their time.

Rather than relying forever on foreign capital, only worsening the situation, One Nation policies will reindustrialise Australia and embark on programs of self sufficiency. We will create jobs in diverse industries and lift our living standards.

In short, One Nation will arrest the social decay that it would seem is almost a government sponsored plan.

The day of the ballot box is coming.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Puhlease stop exhibiting your ignorance.

Like I stated previously, if I am ignorant of something I just say "I don't know".
If mentioning something I don't know the bona fides of I say "I've heard/read blah blah blah but don't know if it's true".

I know all about Joe Bryant thanks and so did Hanson and Oldfield and their webmaster etc, etc, etc... it was all over their gwb website from day one.

If that is the case, then you also knew the Greens were actively campaigning against AUSFTA. Meaning you knowingly lied when claiming One Nation were the only ones opposing FTAs.

Emerson was all for free trade and only ON stood up and debated him in public forums. Mind you he just did what he always did... mouth propaganda and platitudes.

Maybe he was, but not at face value. My guess is he was personally pro-FTA but had rank file members on his back to prevent it.
I was personally involved in the opposing campaign and don't remember any of the 3 One Nation members (there were ever only 3 members) in attendance at any public forum, let alone speaking on the issue. So where did this/these public forums you claim Hanson spoke at happen? Timbuktu.

[Not far off the mark. Craig Emerson held an inquirey into the impacts of FTAs ... notably NAFTA ... but clearly this inquirey was fake or the findings regarding impacts on Mexico and Canada ignored, because he in concert with Mark Latham rolled over and gave support.

Like I said Emerson and the ALP always backed globalisation and FTAs...

[/quote]

Actually the ALP had quite a few of their rank and file openly opposing FTAs, and Emerson per se publicly expressed some reservations, thus his supposed inquirery.

But the real culprits who sold out Australia were John Howard as PM and Mark Vaile as deputy PM who signed the WTO documents concerning AUSFTA.

And before that/them is was Bob Hawke and Co who signed upto GATT [General agreement on tarrifs and trade] in South America, which has facilitated all the subsequent FTAs we're in on.

What nealy everybody failed to realise is that prior attempts to implement older WTO schemes, like MAI [multilateral agreement on investment] ect which had been publicly exposed, campaigned against and knocked on the head, were snuck in the back door via being included as part of AUSFTA.

Now lets see you slag off Howard and Vaile as Australia's biggest trators.