Transparency is a new idea to Australian Government, according to notes taken by Pirate Party Australia Secretary Brendan Molloy at the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) intellectual property meeting in Canberra last Thursday.

According the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), “the Australian Government will pursue a TPP outcome that eliminates or at least substantially reduces barriers to trade and investment” that will “also deal with behind-the-border impediments to trade and investment.”[1]

So far there has been no confirmation on exactly how the TPP will achieve these aims, as there have been no official drafts of the Agreement released, and the negotiators actively refuse to discuss the contents in anything other than vague and evasive statements.

At the meeting in Canberra, stakeholders were invited to participate in a question and answer session with the inter-departmental negotiators. Disappointingly, the negotiating team dodged almost all questions regarding the Agreement, including the impact it might have on the Australian Law Reform Commission’s copyright review. The negotiators also failed to give any definites about what intellectual property (IP) provisions would be included, and did not sufficiently address the concerns of those present.

“It would be absurd to believe the line that DFAT will not be negotiating a treaty that would require changes to our domestic law. The simple fact is, every single time we sign one of these treaties, we limit our ability to reform our domestic legislation. We are ceding sovereignty through treaties and trade agreements,” commented Mr Molloy.

A report on bilateral and regional trade agreements by the Productivity Commission contains the recommendation that Australia should “not … seek to include IP provisions in further [Agreements], and should … only be included after an economic assessment of the impacts, including on consumers, in Australia and partner countries.”[2]

“It seems to be the trend that our representatives – elected and unelected – pick and choose which recommendations to follow. Why do we have commissions like this if their reports are ignored at the drop of a hat and are not regularly consulted?” Mr Molloy asked.

According to his notes, there is absolutely no economic case for the IP Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.

“We are continually told that this Agreement is necessary to regional economic development, and yet there has been no evidence put forward that it would bring any economic benefit to Australia or the wider Pacific,” Mr Molloy continued. “Regional standards are important according to the negotiators, and yet there is no indication that those ‘standards’ being recommended would do anything other than complicate the introduction or reform of domestic legislation. We already have several international agreements that would need to be renegotiated if Australia wanted to modify its existing laws.”

The next round of negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership will be held from 2–10 July in San Diego, California.

[1] http://www.dfat.gov.au/fta/tpp/
[2] http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/104220/17-chapter14.pdf