Absolutely spot on! Nothing else to add.
Alan B.

That essay said absolutely nothing but jargon.
Free trade agreement is a hollow shell.
South East Asian countries will fight you every inch of the way. Things are not clear cut when it takes a team of lawyers to set up an export business from An Asian country.
With at least ten layers of govt bureaucracy, kickbacks and bribes all negotiated by lawyers it,s an uphill battle.
Free trade agreement is a very simple few words.

I don't think that anyone regards 'trade as aid'. And, governments have nothing to do with trading apart from writing 'policy documents' and the diplomatic bit. Governments do not produce anything to trade; the private sector is the “central core”. Perhaps any problems with trade are down to a “Trade Commissioner” who talks gobbledegook.

As for “ if trade liberalisation is to continue we will need to work harder to sustain a public consensus on the value of openness and international cooperation.” - why would it not continue if there is money in it; who are the “we” who have to “work harder”; and there is no “public consensus” because the public has no say in trade,or much else for that matter.

I suggest that the people who need to look after trade are in the private sector: a sector which is good, but which expects governments (and therefore taxpayers) to carry the can for it. And, perhaps they would be better off doing it without 'Trade Commissioners', who are are just bureaucrats.

Incidentally, HALF of Australia's trade is carried on WITHOUT the benefit of costly,corrupt Free Trade Agreements. The other half should give it a try.