Australia-US free trade deal may not be finalised by deadline
This Sunday's deadline for the finalisation of the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement may not be met due to continuing disagreement about Australia's legislative interpretation of the agreement, Trade Minister Mark Vaile said today. US trade representatives under pressure from Big Pharma's lobbyists are holding up the deal.
Mr Vaile said the FTA was supposed to come into force on January 1 and the agreement provided for an exchange of letters 60 days before that. He said he remained very confident the FTA would become effective on January 1 although he could not give an absolute undertaking. "We both remain absolutely committed to achieving that implementation date and I am very confident that we will, but certainly, we might not meet the deadline on Sunday of this week."
Mr Vaile said the government was holding discussions with the US over both the Labour party's FTA amendment on generic drugs and on concerns the US pharmaceuticals industry had over the governing Coalition's election promise to cut the drug prices when cheaper generic versions hit the market.
"On both counts obviously we are in discussions with the US with regard to our view in terms of impact on those issues," he said. "On the Labour amendments, we maintained from the outset that they were unnecessary because evergreening basically doesn't occur within our system. We are explaining (to the US) and making good progress on that - that these concerns are unfounded."
Evergreening is a process in which US drug companies continually lodge patents to prevent generic companies from marketing medicines more cheaply once the original patent expires. The practice is banned under the Australian Labour party's Senate amendment.
Mr Vaile said there would be no concessions to the US on the FTA. "We don't see any need to give any more ground to the US," he said. "We are not going to renegotiate this agreement. The negotiations are over. This is the technical implementation of those negotiated outcomes." Mr Vaile said the key issues of disagreement related to differences in interpretation of language and how that was implemented in law.
US Big Pharma corporations lobbied hard for caveats to the free trade deal to protect their interests. The political influence of the pharmaceutical industry in Washington means that they have succeeded in undermining free trade principles in many of the FTAs recently negotiated by Washington. Big Pharma is estimated to have spent $500m this election year on lobbying for its interests and as a consequence is rapidly succeeding in becoming paradoxically one of the most heavily taxpayer subsidised beneficiaries of corporate welfare, whilst at the same time being one of the most profitable industries in the US and globally.
The excessive influence of Big Pharma as problematic, not just because of politically bought subsidies, but because of its malign influence on the negotiating stance of US trade representatives during WTO and bilateral deal making. Essentially the Big Pharma corporations are aggressively protectionist. Countries seeking the wider benefits of a free trade agreement with the US are forced to accept protectionist measures written into the deal by the political allies of the Big Pharma corporations - whose election campaigns they finance - a system of political pay-offs that borders on corruption. The problems with the Australia-US FTA are a classic example of these tactics not only holding up an agreement, but endangering it altogether.
Mr Vaile said the FTA was supposed to come into force on January 1 and the agreement provided for an exchange of letters 60 days before that. He said he remained very confident the FTA would become effective on January 1 although he could not give an absolute undertaking. "We both remain absolutely committed to achieving that implementation date and I am very confident that we will, but certainly, we might not meet the deadline on Sunday of this week."
Mr Vaile said the government was holding discussions with the US over both the Labour party's FTA amendment on generic drugs and on concerns the US pharmaceuticals industry had over the governing Coalition's election promise to cut the drug prices when cheaper generic versions hit the market.
"On both counts obviously we are in discussions with the US with regard to our view in terms of impact on those issues," he said. "On the Labour amendments, we maintained from the outset that they were unnecessary because evergreening basically doesn't occur within our system. We are explaining (to the US) and making good progress on that - that these concerns are unfounded."
Evergreening is a process in which US drug companies continually lodge patents to prevent generic companies from marketing medicines more cheaply once the original patent expires. The practice is banned under the Australian Labour party's Senate amendment.
Mr Vaile said there would be no concessions to the US on the FTA. "We don't see any need to give any more ground to the US," he said. "We are not going to renegotiate this agreement. The negotiations are over. This is the technical implementation of those negotiated outcomes." Mr Vaile said the key issues of disagreement related to differences in interpretation of language and how that was implemented in law.
US Big Pharma corporations lobbied hard for caveats to the free trade deal to protect their interests. The political influence of the pharmaceutical industry in Washington means that they have succeeded in undermining free trade principles in many of the FTAs recently negotiated by Washington. Big Pharma is estimated to have spent $500m this election year on lobbying for its interests and as a consequence is rapidly succeeding in becoming paradoxically one of the most heavily taxpayer subsidised beneficiaries of corporate welfare, whilst at the same time being one of the most profitable industries in the US and globally.
The excessive influence of Big Pharma as problematic, not just because of politically bought subsidies, but because of its malign influence on the negotiating stance of US trade representatives during WTO and bilateral deal making. Essentially the Big Pharma corporations are aggressively protectionist. Countries seeking the wider benefits of a free trade agreement with the US are forced to accept protectionist measures written into the deal by the political allies of the Big Pharma corporations - whose election campaigns they finance - a system of political pay-offs that borders on corruption. The problems with the Australia-US FTA are a classic example of these tactics not only holding up an agreement, but endangering it altogether.
<< Home