- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
Does anyone see a logical fallacy in that statement ?
Is Shorten PM material?
- Thread starter dutchie
- Start date
Does anyone see a logical fallacy in that statement ?
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
The other day I watched Chris Pyne (I think it was ) gushing forth how the Coalition had delivered cheaper electricity ........ I think that was on another planet that also speaks Na-Nu Na-Nu and practices the art of Shazbot?
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
That would be the famous third eye that people like Andrew Bolt have ... being the praetorian guard of all things and blessed Oracles, they see things that are never seen by mere mortals like you and me Rumpole.
This a press release by Greg Hunt who somehow received a leaked document from a Labor Shadow Cabinet meeting.
Labor in unity.
The Hon. Greg Hunt MP
Minister for the Environment
MEDIA RELEASE
10 August 2015
Labor’s desperate back-peddling over $633 billion carbon tax plan
It’s hardly surprising that Labor is out today desperately trying to distance themselves from their modelling which shows the painful impact of their new carbon tax plan.
Of course Bill Shorten wants to hide the damaging impact of his carbon tax plan.
But Labor can’t dismiss or distance themselves from this.
Labor commissioned this modelling while they were in government. This is Labor’s carbon tax target modelled using Labor’s numbers.
At the ALP Conference last month, Labor aligned themselves with the Climate Change Authority’s 40-60 per cent emissions reduction target (through amendment 249A).
Bill Shorten’s carbon tax will see tens of thousands of jobs lost, power bills skyrocket, wages will be lower and the economy will be more than half a trillion dollars weaker.
Bill Shorten says it’s all just a scare campaign but we know the truth. Labor’s plan for a carbon tax was exposed in leaked shadow cabinet documents and these numbers show just how destructive Bill Shorten’s carbon tax will be.
Under Labor’s new supercharged carbon tax, the price would need to skyrocket to $209 per tonne to achieve a target of around 44 per cent below 2000 levels by 2030.
Australia’s GDP would be 2.6% lower in 2030 and $633 billion lower between 2015 and 2030.
Real wages growth would be around 6 percent lower.
Australian income per person is a whopping $4,900 lower than it would be without Labor’s new carbon tax in 2030.
Wholesale electricity prices would be 78% higher in 2030. This would drive up electricity costs for Australian families, pensioners and businesses.
Australia’s aluminium industry employing around 17,600 people would collapse by 46 per cent because the carbon tax would make it unprofitable to continue manufacturing in Australia.
Construction would be 11 per cent lower. This means fewer opportunities for plumbers, electricians and carpenters.
These numbers show Labor’s carbon tax would have a devastating impact on the Australian economy, jobs, incomes and we would see power prices skyrocket.
Labor commissioned this modelling but of course given the results, they would never want these numbers to see the light of day.
If Labor has any sense then surely they will see that these numbers are a fatal blow to Bill Shorten’s carbon tax plan.
What Labor refuses to learn is that you can tackle climate change without a carbon tax. You can tackle climate change without a $633 billion hit to the economy.
We’ve already shown with the 47 million tonne first Emissions Reduction Fund auction that we can reduce emissions effectively without a massive hit to families through a carbon tax.
We all thought the original carbon tax was painful. Bill Shorten’s new carbon tax plan will make Julia Gillard’s carbon tax look like a walk in the park.
The idea of Bill Shorten voluntarily choosing to inflict this sort of pain on the Australian people is beyond belief. Labor hasn’t learnt its lesson.
There are many, many families out there struggling to make ends meet. The last thing they need is Bill Shorten’s super-charged carbon tax.
Kevin Rudd couldn’t trust Bill Shorten. Julia Gillard couldn’t trust Bill Shorten. The Australian people can’t trust Bill Shorten.
(ENDS)
Labor in unity.
The Hon. Greg Hunt MP
Minister for the Environment
MEDIA RELEASE
10 August 2015
Labor’s desperate back-peddling over $633 billion carbon tax plan
It’s hardly surprising that Labor is out today desperately trying to distance themselves from their modelling which shows the painful impact of their new carbon tax plan.
Of course Bill Shorten wants to hide the damaging impact of his carbon tax plan.
But Labor can’t dismiss or distance themselves from this.
Labor commissioned this modelling while they were in government. This is Labor’s carbon tax target modelled using Labor’s numbers.
At the ALP Conference last month, Labor aligned themselves with the Climate Change Authority’s 40-60 per cent emissions reduction target (through amendment 249A).
Bill Shorten’s carbon tax will see tens of thousands of jobs lost, power bills skyrocket, wages will be lower and the economy will be more than half a trillion dollars weaker.
Bill Shorten says it’s all just a scare campaign but we know the truth. Labor’s plan for a carbon tax was exposed in leaked shadow cabinet documents and these numbers show just how destructive Bill Shorten’s carbon tax will be.
Under Labor’s new supercharged carbon tax, the price would need to skyrocket to $209 per tonne to achieve a target of around 44 per cent below 2000 levels by 2030.
Australia’s GDP would be 2.6% lower in 2030 and $633 billion lower between 2015 and 2030.
Real wages growth would be around 6 percent lower.
Australian income per person is a whopping $4,900 lower than it would be without Labor’s new carbon tax in 2030.
Wholesale electricity prices would be 78% higher in 2030. This would drive up electricity costs for Australian families, pensioners and businesses.
Australia’s aluminium industry employing around 17,600 people would collapse by 46 per cent because the carbon tax would make it unprofitable to continue manufacturing in Australia.
Construction would be 11 per cent lower. This means fewer opportunities for plumbers, electricians and carpenters.
These numbers show Labor’s carbon tax would have a devastating impact on the Australian economy, jobs, incomes and we would see power prices skyrocket.
Labor commissioned this modelling but of course given the results, they would never want these numbers to see the light of day.
If Labor has any sense then surely they will see that these numbers are a fatal blow to Bill Shorten’s carbon tax plan.
What Labor refuses to learn is that you can tackle climate change without a carbon tax. You can tackle climate change without a $633 billion hit to the economy.
We’ve already shown with the 47 million tonne first Emissions Reduction Fund auction that we can reduce emissions effectively without a massive hit to families through a carbon tax.
We all thought the original carbon tax was painful. Bill Shorten’s new carbon tax plan will make Julia Gillard’s carbon tax look like a walk in the park.
The idea of Bill Shorten voluntarily choosing to inflict this sort of pain on the Australian people is beyond belief. Labor hasn’t learnt its lesson.
There are many, many families out there struggling to make ends meet. The last thing they need is Bill Shorten’s super-charged carbon tax.
Kevin Rudd couldn’t trust Bill Shorten. Julia Gillard couldn’t trust Bill Shorten. The Australian people can’t trust Bill Shorten.
(ENDS)
Will the real Bill Shorten please stand up......According to this link there could be 2,3 or even 4 different Bill Shortens.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...h-fta-opposition/story-e6frg76f-1227490450050
China-baiting Bill Shorten disappoints with FTA opposition
The Australian
August 20, 2015 12:00AM
Print
Save for later
55
Greg Sheridan
Foreign Editor
Melbourne
https://plus.google.com/101372426793016687263
On national security and foreign affairs, there are two Bill Shortens. One was in evidence in a speech last week at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. That Bill Shorten is solid, substantial, grounded in key values and national interests, sober, tough-minded. That Bill Shorten is in the tradition of Bob Hawke.
You would certainly not hesitate to think the nation’s security interests would be well safeguarded by him.
The other Bill Shorten is the leader running the campaign, which is really absolutely disgraceful, against the free trade agreement with China. This Bill Shorten has licensed economic vandalism, destructive anti-trade populism of the worst kind, and has nothing at all to say against gross xenophobic paranoia from within the broader labour movement. If John Howard deserved criticism (and I gave him plenty at the time) for being slow to condemn Pauline Hanson’s xenophobia, Shorten’s acquiescence in union scaremongering against Chinese temporary skilled migrants is several orders of magnitude worse.
Let’s concentrate on good Bill first.
Shorten’s ASPI speech contained important commitments and gave expression to a serious world view that commands respect. Shorten recommitted Labor to increased defence spending. He said: “Labor has previously committed to increasing defence funding towards a target of 2 per cent of GDP. We urge the government to set out a credible trajectory to 2 per cent of GDP in their forthcoming white paper.”
If those words mean what they say, a Shorten government surely could not do what the Rudd and Gillard governments did: attack and erode the funding basis of defence, putting off all expenditure into the never-never beyond the forward estimates. This broad commitment needs to be backed by commitment to specific defence projects, but it is travelling in the right direction.
Shorten also reiterated in the most comprehensive fashion Labor’s commitment to the US alliance. He also re-emphasised *bipartisan support for Australian military action in Iraq.
On the South China Sea, he asserted Australia’s right to free passage through its oceans and skies “in accordance with international law”. This is polite but tough-minded code for rejecting Beijing’s most assertive territorial claims. It is one thing, however, to make a clear statement about Beijing’s territorial assertiveness in the South China Sea; it is another to demonise Chinese skilled *migrants.
Still, it is worth pausing to celebrate the strategic personality Shorten presents in the ASPI speech. Formerly, the heart and soul of strategic sense in Labor was the NSW Right. With honourable exceptions such as Joel Fitzgibbon, this has fallen away.
Strategic grip now lies with the Victorian Right — Shorten, Stephen Conroy, Mark Dreyfus, David Feeney, Anthony Byrne, Michael Danby. On foreign affairs and national security, Labor is in outlook by far one of the better centre-left parties in the world, certainly compared with most European centre-left parties, and infinitely better than British Labour. Its main negative is the terrible *record in defence spending and incoherent procurement policy in the Rudd-Gillard years.
But on the free trade agreement with China, Shorten is leading an extravagantly irresponsible push to damage, if not destroy, a critically important deal with our biggest and most important trading partner. The irony is epic.
Modern Labor prides itself (often pretty dishonestly) as the party that pioneered relations with China and can handle them uniquely well. This record doesn’t really stand up when you compare the solid progress in ties under John Howard and the episodic dramas under Kevin Rudd.
But now Labor is committing shocking vandalism against our national interests. The FTA promises billions of dollars of extra trade for Australia. A similar but more modest FTA with China has been the driving force behind what you could almost now call New Zealand’s boom.
The FTA is even more important for services than it is for commodities. And perhaps it will be most important as a driver of *investment. With the global economy slowing, our productivity stalling and our agriculture sector desperately undercapitalised, with the construction phase in the minerals boom long over, attracting foreign investment is one key part of any chance we have for ongoing prosperity.
Yet Labor is running a quite vicious scare campaign on wholly spurious ground that Chinese labour will flood the market. Is this the ALP of 2015 or 1899? It is almost impossible to credit.
The FTA does not give Chinese investors any scope for the unregulated entry of large numbers of Chinese workers. It removes China from a small list of nations with special restrictions on importing labour. But it requires any imported workers that any Chinese venture may want to bring in to undergo all the normal procedures associated with the 457 visa class for temporary entry of skilled workers.
Incidentally, there are actually 6000 fewer 457 visa holders in Australia today than there were when Labor left office in 2013. Far from becoming a flood, the tide has been receding.
The 457 process requires that no suitable Australian workers be available for positions filled. There has been some rorting of 457 visas but on a minor scale.
Labor, in concert with a truly disgraceful and xenophobic union campaign, is giving the impression that the FTA irreversibly allows Chinese companies or projects to bring in unlimited numbers of Chinese workers. In fact, not only do all such people have to comply with all the 457 regulations, but any government can, whenever it wants, tighten the 457 regulations without being remotely in breach of the FTA.
Labor has a poor record on FTAs. It couldn’t complete them in government. It very nearly opposed the FTA with the US, which has seen a huge flow of investment into Australia; it opposed aspects of the South Korean FTA until the last minute. Mark Latham claims Shorten publicly opposed the US FTA while privately backing it. Probably Labor will fin*ally pass the Chinese FTA-enabling legislation after irresponsibly opposing it until the last minute. Either way, this is a very poor show from Shorten.
More false propaganda by the LUGs (Labor..Unions and the Greens.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...h-fta-opposition/story-e6frg76f-1227490450050
China-baiting Bill Shorten disappoints with FTA opposition
The Australian
August 20, 2015 12:00AM
Save for later
55
Greg Sheridan
Foreign Editor
Melbourne
https://plus.google.com/101372426793016687263
On national security and foreign affairs, there are two Bill Shortens. One was in evidence in a speech last week at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. That Bill Shorten is solid, substantial, grounded in key values and national interests, sober, tough-minded. That Bill Shorten is in the tradition of Bob Hawke.
You would certainly not hesitate to think the nation’s security interests would be well safeguarded by him.
The other Bill Shorten is the leader running the campaign, which is really absolutely disgraceful, against the free trade agreement with China. This Bill Shorten has licensed economic vandalism, destructive anti-trade populism of the worst kind, and has nothing at all to say against gross xenophobic paranoia from within the broader labour movement. If John Howard deserved criticism (and I gave him plenty at the time) for being slow to condemn Pauline Hanson’s xenophobia, Shorten’s acquiescence in union scaremongering against Chinese temporary skilled migrants is several orders of magnitude worse.
Let’s concentrate on good Bill first.
Shorten’s ASPI speech contained important commitments and gave expression to a serious world view that commands respect. Shorten recommitted Labor to increased defence spending. He said: “Labor has previously committed to increasing defence funding towards a target of 2 per cent of GDP. We urge the government to set out a credible trajectory to 2 per cent of GDP in their forthcoming white paper.”
If those words mean what they say, a Shorten government surely could not do what the Rudd and Gillard governments did: attack and erode the funding basis of defence, putting off all expenditure into the never-never beyond the forward estimates. This broad commitment needs to be backed by commitment to specific defence projects, but it is travelling in the right direction.
Shorten also reiterated in the most comprehensive fashion Labor’s commitment to the US alliance. He also re-emphasised *bipartisan support for Australian military action in Iraq.
On the South China Sea, he asserted Australia’s right to free passage through its oceans and skies “in accordance with international law”. This is polite but tough-minded code for rejecting Beijing’s most assertive territorial claims. It is one thing, however, to make a clear statement about Beijing’s territorial assertiveness in the South China Sea; it is another to demonise Chinese skilled *migrants.
Still, it is worth pausing to celebrate the strategic personality Shorten presents in the ASPI speech. Formerly, the heart and soul of strategic sense in Labor was the NSW Right. With honourable exceptions such as Joel Fitzgibbon, this has fallen away.
Strategic grip now lies with the Victorian Right — Shorten, Stephen Conroy, Mark Dreyfus, David Feeney, Anthony Byrne, Michael Danby. On foreign affairs and national security, Labor is in outlook by far one of the better centre-left parties in the world, certainly compared with most European centre-left parties, and infinitely better than British Labour. Its main negative is the terrible *record in defence spending and incoherent procurement policy in the Rudd-Gillard years.
But on the free trade agreement with China, Shorten is leading an extravagantly irresponsible push to damage, if not destroy, a critically important deal with our biggest and most important trading partner. The irony is epic.
Modern Labor prides itself (often pretty dishonestly) as the party that pioneered relations with China and can handle them uniquely well. This record doesn’t really stand up when you compare the solid progress in ties under John Howard and the episodic dramas under Kevin Rudd.
But now Labor is committing shocking vandalism against our national interests. The FTA promises billions of dollars of extra trade for Australia. A similar but more modest FTA with China has been the driving force behind what you could almost now call New Zealand’s boom.
The FTA is even more important for services than it is for commodities. And perhaps it will be most important as a driver of *investment. With the global economy slowing, our productivity stalling and our agriculture sector desperately undercapitalised, with the construction phase in the minerals boom long over, attracting foreign investment is one key part of any chance we have for ongoing prosperity.
Yet Labor is running a quite vicious scare campaign on wholly spurious ground that Chinese labour will flood the market. Is this the ALP of 2015 or 1899? It is almost impossible to credit.
The FTA does not give Chinese investors any scope for the unregulated entry of large numbers of Chinese workers. It removes China from a small list of nations with special restrictions on importing labour. But it requires any imported workers that any Chinese venture may want to bring in to undergo all the normal procedures associated with the 457 visa class for temporary entry of skilled workers.
Incidentally, there are actually 6000 fewer 457 visa holders in Australia today than there were when Labor left office in 2013. Far from becoming a flood, the tide has been receding.
The 457 process requires that no suitable Australian workers be available for positions filled. There has been some rorting of 457 visas but on a minor scale.
Labor, in concert with a truly disgraceful and xenophobic union campaign, is giving the impression that the FTA irreversibly allows Chinese companies or projects to bring in unlimited numbers of Chinese workers. In fact, not only do all such people have to comply with all the 457 regulations, but any government can, whenever it wants, tighten the 457 regulations without being remotely in breach of the FTA.
Labor has a poor record on FTAs. It couldn’t complete them in government. It very nearly opposed the FTA with the US, which has seen a huge flow of investment into Australia; it opposed aspects of the South Korean FTA until the last minute. Mark Latham claims Shorten publicly opposed the US FTA while privately backing it. Probably Labor will fin*ally pass the Chinese FTA-enabling legislation after irresponsibly opposing it until the last minute. Either way, this is a very poor show from Shorten.
More false propaganda by the LUGs (Labor..Unions and the Greens.
This Shorten fellow is an absolute joke when he has so many Labor People stacked against him on the CHAFTA.
Someone remarked the other day about CHAFTA , Shorten HAFTA or else he will go down in flames.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...509973759?sv=b1bdf984c71507dae828c87c83567c06
Bill Shorten is increasingly *isolated over the China-Australia free-trade agreement, with six Labor leaders backing the deal and the Business Council of Australia *accusing the opposition of playing politics on a deal vital to the *national economy.
The Opposition Leader has locked in behind a campaign against the agreement run by the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union, which claims it will cost Australian jobs by giving *concessions to Chinese workers — claims rejected by the government.
Yesterday, Mr Shorten was forced to deny a rift with his state and territory colleagues after Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr and Tasmanian Labor leader Bryan Green joined Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill and NSW Labor leader Luke Foley in expressing support for the deal.
The deal has also been *endorsed by Labor elders, including former prime minister and ACTU leader Bob Hawke, former foreign minister Bob Carr and former trade minister Simon Crean, who believe the wording of the agreement does not have to be *revisited to protect workers from the use of cheap Chinese labour on Australian projects.
How could he possibly be Prime Minister material?
Someone remarked the other day about CHAFTA , Shorten HAFTA or else he will go down in flames.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...509973759?sv=b1bdf984c71507dae828c87c83567c06
Bill Shorten is increasingly *isolated over the China-Australia free-trade agreement, with six Labor leaders backing the deal and the Business Council of Australia *accusing the opposition of playing politics on a deal vital to the *national economy.
The Opposition Leader has locked in behind a campaign against the agreement run by the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union, which claims it will cost Australian jobs by giving *concessions to Chinese workers — claims rejected by the government.
Yesterday, Mr Shorten was forced to deny a rift with his state and territory colleagues after Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr and Tasmanian Labor leader Bryan Green joined Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill and NSW Labor leader Luke Foley in expressing support for the deal.
The deal has also been *endorsed by Labor elders, including former prime minister and ACTU leader Bob Hawke, former foreign minister Bob Carr and former trade minister Simon Crean, who believe the wording of the agreement does not have to be *revisited to protect workers from the use of cheap Chinese labour on Australian projects.
How could he possibly be Prime Minister material?
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
Because he is standing up for the Australian workforce, something Abbott will never do.
CHAFTA does not guarantee labour market testing, it's up to the Immigration Department. Shorten wants legislation that does guarantee it. Abbott doesn't. Abbott says labour market testing is guaranteed, "trust me". Trust him ? A lot of people did at the last election and got kicked in the teeth for it.
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
The way things are going for the govt, Bill will be in the Lodge by June next year.
With the bar now approaching irreversible "fail", I think I might just have a crack at being elected PM..... that pension for life and free 1st class travel anywhere has to be a plus.
Soooooooooo why aren't these men standing up to ban CHAFTA and back up Bill Shorten? :-
Bob Hawke
Bob Carr
Simon Crean
Jay Weatheral SA
Daniel Andrews Vic
Foley NSW
Anna Palaszczuk QLD.
Andrew Barr ACT
Bryan Green Tas.
Shorten is the odd man out ...no re negotiations required.....No need for legislation.....No need to play politics....What we need most of all is income and more jobs.
GET OUT OF THE WAY Bill and let the adults handle the job.
The way things are going for the govt, Bill will be in the Lodge by June next year.
With the bar now approaching irreversible "fail", I think I might just have a crack at being elected PM..... that pension for life and free 1st class travel anywhere has to be a plus.
I have just made a not of post # 468 in my diary dated 03/09/2015
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
True
False. Labor market testing is NOT guaranteed by the CHAFTA, legislation is needed to ensure that it is.
So how is it worded?...I am only going by what I have read in the media.......I have not had access to the CHAFTA ....Have you or are you going on what the LUG party tells you through their propaganda machine?
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
I'm telling you Labor's position, if you disagree please quote some evidence.
Actually it did not take long...I just googled the CHAFTA and bingo, there it was.
Now for gawd sake read the bloody thing and tell me what the hell is that grub going on about?
http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/chafta/fact-sheets/Pages/chafta-myths-versus-realities.aspx
Home Trade and investment Free Trade Agreements China-Australia Free Trade Agreement Understanding the Agreement
Listen to this page using ReadSpeakerListen to this page
China-Australia Free Trade Agreement
Understanding the Agreement
About the negotiations
News
Official Documents
China-Australia FTA (ChAFTA): myths versus realities
This document addresses some misconceptions about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA), signed in Canberra on 17 June 2015.
First myth: Chinese companies will have unrestricted access to Chinese workers for major projects, threatening Australian jobs
Reality: FALSE
ChAFTA will not allow unrestricted access to the Australian labour market by Chinese workers. It will not allow Australian employment laws or conditions to be undermined, nor allow companies to avoid paying Australian wages by using foreign workers.
Australia’s existing visa arrangements, including the 457 visa program, will continue to be the basis for implementing Australia’s commitments on labour mobility under ChAFTA. The 457 visa program assists employers to address labour shortages by bringing in genuinely skilled workers where they cannot find an appropriately skilled Australian. ChAFTA will not remove the need for employer sponsorship under the 457 visa programme.
Through Investment Facilitation Arrangements (IFAs) made available under a separate MOU concluded alongside ChAFTA, Chinese companies making significant investments in Australia (more than $150 million in specific types of infrastructure development projects) will have increased access to skilled overseas workers when suitable local workers cannot be found.
IFAs will strengthen infrastructure development and investment, leading to the creation of jobs and increased economic prosperity for all Australians.
IFAs will not allow unskilled or underpaid Chinese workers to be brought in to staff major projects. In fact, consistent with existing programmes, IFAs will provide certainty that investors will be able to access skilled overseas workers, under Australian employment conditions, when suitable local workers cannot be found.
Under IFAs, Australian workers will continue to be given first opportunity. Consistent with existing practice, employers will not be permitted to bring in overseas skilled workers unless there is clear evidence of a genuine labour market need, as determined by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
Second myth: ChAFTA will allow Chinese electricians to work in Australia without any skills assessment
Reality: FALSE
ChAFTA does not change the required skill levels for Chinese visa applicants.
Under ChAFTA, all Chinese applicants for a subclass 457 temporary work (skilled) visa, including electricians, will still need to have the requisite skills, qualifications and work experience to work safely in Australia, as well as meeting all the other regular visa requirements, before a 457 temporary work visa is granted.
All such visa holders will also continue to have to obtain any required Federal, State or Territory licenses or registration, to commence work within 90 days of arriving in Australia and be engaged in accordance with Australian workplace law, including awards and workplace health and safety.
The commitment undertaken in the ChAFTA side letter on skills assessments simply brings China into line with visa applicants from most other countries around the world with regard to application and skills’ assessment processes. For example, an additional skills’ assessment from a registered training organisation approved by Trades Recognition Australia will be conducted if further verification is required by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
Third myth: Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions will allow Chinese companies to sue the Australian Government if they make a loss on investments
Reality: FALSE
The ISDS provisions in ChAFTA provide a mechanism for Australian or Chinese investors to pursue international arbitration based on a claimed violation of the national treatment commitment in the investment chapter. ISDS does not protect an investor from a mere loss of profits following a change in government policy or regulation.
ISDS does not prevent a Government from changing its policies or regulating in the public interest and investors should understand the relevant regulatory environment before they commit to making their investment. Modern ISDS mechanisms incorporate explicit safeguards to re-affirm the right of governments to take decisions in the public interest, including in the areas of health and the environment, and reduce the chances that foreign investors bring frivolous claims.
Further information on ISDS.
Fourth Myth: ChAFTA will allow businesses to import dangerous substances, such as asbestos.
Reality: False
ChAFTA will not make any changes to Australia’s safety regulations or import/export prohibitions. There are no changes to restrictions on the import of asbestos and other dangerous products. ChAFTA’s chapter on technical barriers to trade focuses on improving information exchange and other cooperation at the level of experts on standards and compliance issues, but does not change any of our standards.
FTA tariff schedules typically list all products included in the World Customs Organisation’s Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (or Harmonized System (HS)). Asbestos is listed on the ChAFTA tariff schedules simply because it has a HS code.
Fifth Myth: ChAFTA will allow food importers to bypass Australia’s food safety processes and import contaminated foods, such as berries.
Reality: False
ChAFTA does not affect Australia’s science-based biosecurity system. SPS market access matters are separate to and negotiated independently of FTA negotiations. Australia’s biosecurity arrangements are science-based and Australia will not negotiate away our risk assessment processes in FTAs.
There are no changes to our quarantine and testing processes, which will continue to apply to food imports including berries. ChAFTA’s chapter on sanitary and phytosanitary issues aims to strengthen information exchange and other cooperation at the technical level on these issues. It does not change or weaken any of our food safety standards.
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
Read this, and tell me what you are on about
http://theconversation.com/factcheck-could-the-china-australia-fta-lock-out-australian-workers-43470
http://theconversation.com/factcheck-could-the-china-australia-fta-lock-out-australian-workers-43470
There is little doubt Jed Kearney has cherry picked out where she believes the unions have a case of grievance, but if you read deeper into the CHAFTA agreement including the IFA, the MOU and the DIBP, it becomes much clearer.
Rumpy, I don't know whether you have read it all in detail or if you have taken Jed Kearny's word for it.....It has taken me some 2 hours to absorb it all and even then some of it became a bit confusing but my own interpretation of it is the unions and Bill Shorten do not have a case.
I am sure if there was a case, at least one of the learned Labor Party mentioned in my previous post would have picked up on Jeds case.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
THE GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA
AND
THE GOVERNMENT OF
THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
ON AN INVESTMENT FACILITATION ARRANGEMENT
The Governments of Australia and the People ´s Republic of China (“the Participants”) have reached the following understandings in relation to establishment of an Investment Facilitation Arrangement (IFA).
1. An IFA for a project will be established between the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) of Australia, or its equivalent, and a project company (the “project company” ) in accordance with the provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”).
Establishment of IFA
2. The project company will be eligible to establish an IFA where:
(a) a single Chinese enterprise owns 50% or more of the project company; or, where no single enterprise owns 50% or more of the project company, a Chinese enterprise holds a substantial interest in the project company;
(b) there is a proposed infrastructure development project (“the project”) by the project company with an expected capital expenditure of A$150 million over the term of the project;
(c) the project is related to infrastructure development within the food and agribusiness; resources and energy; transport; telecommunications; power supply and generation; environment; or tourism sectors;
(d) the project company is registered as a business in Australia;
(e) the project company agrees to comply with all Australian laws and regulations, including applicable Australian workplace law, work safety law and relevant Australian licensing, regulation and certification standards; and
(f) the China International Contractors Association (CHINCA) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia (DFAT) have recommended the project and the project company meet the criteria in paragraphs 2(a) through 2(e).
3. In order to meet the requirement of paragraph 2(f), CHINCA will write to DFAT advising of a project company wishing to enter into an IFA for a project and will provide its recommendation that the requirements of paragraphs 2(a) through 2(e) have been met. DFAT will assess CHINCA’s recommendation in a timely manner and, once satisfied the eligibility criteria have been met, within 20 days will notify DIBP in writing of its recommendation that the proposed project constitutes an eligible project (“eligible project”) under the terms of this MOU and provide a copy of that notification to CHINCA. DFAT may request further information if necessary from CHINCA in respect of demonstrating the eligibility criteria have been met.
4. The areas which will be subject to negotiation between DIBP and the project company in respect of the eligible project will include:
(a) the occupations covered by the IFA project agreement;
(b) English language proficiency requirements;
(c) qualifications and experience requirements; and
(d) calculation of the terms and conditions of the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT).
5. The project company may be asked to provide additional information by DIBP in respect of its requests for concessions in the above areas. Other than the areas referred to in paragraphs 4(a) through 4(d), the grant of visas will be subject to meeting all other Australian nomination and visa requirements.
6. Following agreement between DIBP and the project company on the areas referred to in paragraph 4, an IFA will be executed in a timely manner in the form of a deed of agreement between DIBP and the project company. The IFA will set out guaranteed occupations and the terms and conditions against which overseas workers can be nominated for a temporary skilled visa for the purposes of the eligible project. The IFA will also record any requirements and conditions that the project company must comply with. There will be no requirement for labour market testing to enter into an IFA.
7. The IFA will be valid for four years from date of execution with the possibility of extension.
Issue of Visas under IFAs
8. Once the IFA is executed, direct employers (including, where applicable, the project company) on the eligible project can seek the endorsement of the project company to enter into a labour agreement under the IFA with DIBP to sponsor and nominate temporary skilled workers to be engaged on the project. A labour agreement will be entered into in a timely manner and will set out the number, occupations and terms and conditions under which temporary skilled workers can be nominated, consistent with the terms of the IFA, and the sponsorship obligations associated with the labour agreement, including any requirements for labour market testing.
9. Employers will provide information as required by DIBP to meet the requirements for a labour agreement under the IFA.
10. Complete nomination and visa applications submitted under an approved IFA labour agreement will be processed in a timely manner.
11. All direct employers under an IFA and workers granted visas under an approved IFA labour agreement will be required to comply with applicable Australian laws, including workplace law, work safety law and relevant Australian licensing, regulation and certification standards.
Administrative Provisions
12. The operation of this MOU will be reviewed by the Participants within two years of its commencement.
13. Changes to this MOU may be made at any time by a written arrangement between the Participants through diplomatic channels. The date of effect of any such change will be stipulated in the diplomatic correspondence.
14. This MOU takes effect on the date that the Participants mutually determine and notify to each other in writing through diplomatic channels, and will remain in effect unless terminated.
15. Any disputes between Participants which may arise over the interpretation and/or application of this MOU will be settled through direct negotiations and consultations.
SIGNED in duplicate at Canberra on the 17th day of June 2015 in the English and Mandarin (standard Chinese) languages, both texts being equally authentic.
For the Government of Australia: For the Government of the People’s Republic of China:
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
noco,
how do you read Article 10.4, paragraph three, quoted above ?
how do you read Article 10.4, paragraph three, quoted above ?
It is countered against by other parts of the agreement...If you continue along the lines of Shorten and his unions, you will surely finish up with egg on your face.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...cal-on-china-fta/story-e6frg76f-1227509867288
Bill Shorten irresponsible and cynical on China FTA
The Australian
September 03, 2015 12:00AM
Save for later
63
Greg Sheridan
Foreign Editor
Melbourne
https://plus.google.com/101372426793016687263
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews gave important national leadership this week. In one of the most important political and economic stories of the year, he utterly repudiated federal Labor leader Bill Shorten and expressed unqualified support for the free trade agreement that the Abbott government has negotiated with China.
As I wrote some time ago, the Labor Party is bitterly divided on this issue.
The three Labor premiers — Andrews, Jay Weatherill in *Adelaide and Annastacia Palaszczuk in Brisbane — plus Labor ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr, and NSW Labor Opposition Leader Luke Foley, have all come out in strong support of the FTA.
These Labor leaders come *substantially from the Left of the party but as state leaders they want the jobs that the China FTA represents.
Andrews’s intervention was devastating for Shorten. He told state parliament: “The free trade agreement is something that I *support and that our government supports, particularly for those industries — those export markets — that have been a staple, if you like, of our trading relationship and our economic development over such a long period of time, particularly in agribusiness, the food and fibre sector, but also in those new and emerging opportunities, with unprecedented *access in terms of the services *sector.”
Andrews agreed with a questioner who said that Andrews was in disagreement with Shorten.
Andrews said: “The leader of the Nationals expressed some surprise that a Victorian politician could disagree with his federal colleagues. Yes, and would we not be in a stronger position if those opposite stood up and found fault with Mr Abbott and his cutbacks and his closures?”
Remember, Andrews comes from the Left of his party and no senior figure has been more aligned with union influence than him. But he is also the Premier of Victoria and he deserves praise for taking those responsibilities *seriously.
It is worth pausing to note the extraordinary situation of TheAge * *in Melbourne and this story.
Here is the Victorian Premier, the most powerful Labor figure in government in Australia, on Tuesday in parliament explicitly repudiating Labor’s national leader on a key issue of national policy, and The Age on Wednesday didn’t mention it at all.
This is not a question of The Age being biased in its commentary, which it has every right to be. This is much worse. This is The Age effectively censoring critical facts that don’t fit its ideological agenda.
Labor is now bitterly divided on the FTA.
The list of Labor luminaries who have come out in strong support of the FTA as it stands is impressive. They include: Bob Hawke, Bob Carr, Simon Crean, Martin Ferguson, John Brumby, Kevin Rudd, Andrews, Weatherill, Barr, Palaszczuk and Foley.
All of those leaders, all loyal Labor people, support the FTA and think it so important that they are willing to disagree publicly with Shorten to do so.
Shorten and the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy oppose the FTA as it currently stands. Shorten’s position is the most irresponsible and cynically destructive I have seen in decades in federal politics.
Probably, the intervention of the state Labor leaders means that eventually Shorten’s Labor Party will embrace a humiliating back- down and pass the FTA enabling legislation.
It is complete nonsense for Labor spokespeople to say they haven’t seen the legislation yet and so can’t take a formal position on it.
The enabling legislation will be very straightforward Customs bills that will give effect to the new tariff levels negotiated in the FTA.
The level of dishonesty in this debate, and the basic factual ignorance of so many who comment on it freely in the media, have been staggering. When commenting on Labor’s claims that the FTA undercut labour market testing provisions, Crean said: “The agreement doesn’t do that.”
As Rudd commented some time ago: “It’s the easiest thing in the world to run fear *agendas against free trade agreements.”
The China FTA doesn’t change labour market testing rules at all. Anyone coming in under the FTA to work in Australia will have to come in under existing 457 visa provisions. Under these visa provisions a number of occupations are exempted from labour market testing.
This is the regime that Labor under Rudd in his second stint as prime minister put in place. They have nothing to do with the China FTA. Any Australian government, including any future Labor *government, could easily tighten the 457 visa administration if it wanted to do. There were substantially more 457 visa holders in *Australia in the last year of Labor than there are now.
This whole campaign against the FTA is disgraceful demagoguery.
The laziness of so many media commentators weighing in on this is also a sign of the decrepitude of our public debate. On Barrie *Cassidy’s Insiders program on ABC television at the weekend, one of the commentators pronounced pompously that in trade agreements there are always winners and losers and the problem is that some of the losers under this FTA, such as Australian tradies, are politically consequential.
This was a comment of staggering and invincible ignorance. There is not the slightest evidence that any Australian tradie would be a loser under this agreement. You are not a loser if you have a job that otherwise would not exist.
This lazy commentary simply *accepts the fear campaign as factually accurate.
It is still not quite clear how Shorten’s Labor will finally vote on the FTA. Does Labor see this as its Work Choices moment, when defying good policy makes good politics? The longer Shorten *allows this noxious campaign to go on, the more people in his party make extravagant comments that are then hard for him to back down from.
The Labor premiers have offered him a way out. He can promise to pass the FTA and say he will review it in office, and seek to renegotiate it — utter nonsense, but it would get him off the hook for the forthcoming vote — or simply that he will change 457 provisions if he wins government.
Or he can blow it up — as he presently threatens to do — and cost tens of thousands of Australian jobs.
This is surely one of the most disreputable episodes from federal Labor in modern politics.
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,065
- Reactions
- 12,640
All that is bluster noco.
Shorten has said he is in favour of CHAFTA as long as Labor market testing can be guaranteed. Abbott refuses to cooperate on legislation allowing that to happen.
Shorten has said he is in favour of CHAFTA as long as Labor market testing can be guaranteed. Abbott refuses to cooperate on legislation allowing that to happen.
Please take the time to read it all...it will take you 2 to 3 hours....It is there in black and white that the Chines will have to abide by the rules as set out for 457 visas. ...I must admit when I first read that cherry picked article Jed quoted and you parotted did make think you may have had a point, then when you read into it, it then becomes much clearer that the unions are being dishonest.
Now please don't come back with this "BLUSTER" business ....Don't rely on what Billy boy and the unions quote to you......satisfy yourself and read it from A to Z.....
Recent comments of the Chinese ambassador, Ma Zhaoxu, could mean Bill Shorten’s delaying stance on the free-trade agreement with China may not only be a problem for our economic future but also for our good relationship with China (“Beijing urges ‘win-win deal’ be passed quickly”, 2/9).
The seriousness of the situation has not been lost on a growing number of Labor figures who are putting themselves at odds with Shorten and going out of their way to support the agreement.
Are we getting a glimpse of the sort of PM Shorten would make — one who, against our national interest, would bow to the power of the union clique that installed him as leader?
