Kevin Rudd is a hobby horse rider.
I cannot imagine that the trade union branch of the Labour Party will
allow such a policy to be put in place.

It is so obviously a nonsense that I cannot believe that he was so
stupid to put it up to see who would salute it. But he did !

We would see immigration of hundreds of millions at the least.
There is just not the water to do it.
All people currently in Australia would be unemployed and the
economy would become a mixture of the Indian & Chinese economies.

Arrrrggghhhh, is this the standard we can expect !

”Insane” seems to be the correct word to describe Kevin Rudd’s ‘Asian EU’; but then, it seems that Mr. Rudd has more than a touch of insanity. He is shaping up to be a megalomaniac, determined to strut the world stage with his trips overseas, most recently declaring that he wanted to kick off a new movement against nuclear proliferation after his first visit to Hiroshima.

The Australia/Asia union would be another one to add to his personal CV.

Like many leaders post-globalisation, our Kevin seems keen to concentrate on working for his own aggrandisement world-wide, playing the ‘workaholic’ PM, but working for himself. Like the Labor Premier of SA, Mike Rann, to be seen and heard only when there is good news.

Back to the dangerous idea of an Australia/Asia union. We certainly do not want free movement of people, which would see our already over-populated country flooded by people adding nothing, but taking everything they could get their hands on.

The Labor Party, like the Coalition, is a big-immigration party as it is. Just imagine the effect on wages and living standards of Australian workers if this free-movement happened. They are doing their best already to reduce wages and conditions with high immigration.

Mr. Rudd is shaping up to be a very dangerous man.

China has managed its face to the World and entry into herself, centrally. The cities and entrepots are set-apart from the other regions.

Free movement from China would not be free, methinks. The Communist Party and Chinese Oliarchs would control who left China's shores. I guess China's main purpose today would be to acquire[buy into] Western technologies and to ensure the enrichment of her elite.

China would not be willing to accept a level playing field with regards to rules of corporate governance or working conditions.

China would not want an EU situation. She would prefer to stand-apart and to be deferred to by smaller aggregate economies, whilst using trade surpluses to buy into other countries, especially in the area of supply. Her mission would be to subvert our free economic practices against us, to her advantage.

The Chinese oligarchs being puppet masters with stings leading to The West and her own interior.

One of the critical reasons I migrated from UK was because I disagree with the nature of EU. Western Europe was dominated by two economic blocks, the EEC and EFTA.

The UK and Scandinavian countries belonging to EFTA (European Free Trade Association).

The differences between EFTA and EEC are significant.

To join EEC UK had to withdraw from EFTA.

My preference would have been for EEC to have joined EFTA, which would have saved billions of dollars in EU bureaucracy and the shot-gun marriage of British economic interests with the conflicting interests of Germany and France.

I see no merit to duplicate the failings of Europe onto Australia.

I further concur with the views of the author, which show the dangers of mass migration across borders especially when domestic economic conditions are so diverse (ie Average Income).

All that would happen is Australia’s living standards would be reduced to those of a third world economy. Maybe bringing to life the Keating threat of a Banana republic, lets face it, Krudd, through the incompetence of socialism, is about to bring us another “Recession we have to have”.

Don’t blame me, I did not vote for them.

“Kevin Rudd is a hobby horse rider.”

He is better on the toy than the real thing, trouble is his other toy is the national economy and he does not have the where-with-all to play properly with either, in both cases being likely to get bucked (and other words which rhyme with “bucked”).

But as a diversion it displays Krudds "Neroic" ability to play the fiddle, whilst the economy burns.

Too stupid to contemplate, but nothing surprizes me about politicians these days,

I believe it was the threat of massive influx of Asians to Aus that brought about the so called 'White Australia Policy' years ago. I may be wrong but was it not Labor that implemented that policy. to protect our working conditions. Later it was wrongly conscrewed as 'racist' by social ideoligists.

If the unions thought that the previous IR policy was bad, wait until they absorb this notion.

We need to reduce our present immigration rate and be far more selective so those that come will integrate into our society.

Look and learn from Europe and England.

Further to my comment on China: I have worked not only in China, but also Hong Kong and Singapore [bases], and, Indonesia and Malaysia [visits]. The business communities would not want to play according to Western rules regarding corporate governance and IR policies.

As a rule of thumb, regarding the Chinese Diaspora, the Chinese business interests end-up owning 70% of economic activity. Basically, that is why Malaya, became Malaysia and Singapore. That doesn't happen in The West, because our penchant towards innovativeness, a wide educated middleclass and rules of corporate engagement. If memory services, it was Germany, followed by the US, whom moved the corporate sphere from familial based, familial controlled product focused organisations, to become the market based public companies, which succeed today.

Alteratively, should Australiatilt towards Asian business practices, then, we would be moving towards state capitalism and cronism on scale far beyond that which are now accustomed. Such a turn, could prove profitable in the short-term for oliarchs, but, in the longer term would collapse the breadth of the "consuming" Western [read Australian] middle class. It is not the path to follow. Instead, a market-based economy needs to be maintained. Melding into Asia is not for us. That said, we can trade with Asia, while maintaining control over our advantages.

In his ill-informed and intemperate article, Joel Butler concedes that his “end of the world as we know it” scenario sounds a little extreme. He's right, but that doesn't deter the chicken-little posters who seize the opportunity to beat the neo-White Australia drum.

Butler's economic data and information about movements of people are out-of-date and partial. He takes no account of the vast numbers of British citizens who work and live in Europe. Nor does he mention the massive economic boost foreign workers have given the British economy.

Nor is he familiar with recent trends the other way. As a recent visitor to the UK I know that the number of migrants to the UK from eastern Europe is falling - last year by 10% - and is expected to fall even further. ("Tide of migration turns as Polish workers return" The Independent, 27 February 2008, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tide-of-migration-turns-as-polish-workers-return-787914.html)

Polish workers - Butler's bogeymen- are not only choosing other EU countries in preference to Britain but are also returning to Poland because of the fall in the value of the pound, disillusionment with conditions in Britain (see Marina Lewycka's "Two Caravans", Penguin 2007) and Poland's improving economy which had led to higher salaries and job shortages.

A spokesman for the Institute for Public Policy Research, said of migration from Poland: "It has always been a question of when these flows started drying up, rather than whether they would."

Let's assess Rudd's broad proposal on its possible merits and demerits. It's worth making a detached consideration of the facts and making a cool evaluation of possible benefits and consequences.

This "free trade" is a recurrent favorite of right-wing ideologues the world over, an old well worn chestnut dating back to the 1850's. As there is no such thing as "free trade" this needs translating into "free labor". This is why there are references to Polish workers who lately have been a source of very cheap labor. Rudd wants to exploit the labor power of workers in the Asia Pacific Rim as a source of very cheap labor. The colonial interventions into Timor (oil and gas and and wages 30 cents an hour)and other Pacific Islands was to recolonise them, grab their resources and exploit the labor force. A similar scenario in the Northern Territory after a full two centuries of genocide and inexorable racial oppression, government neglect and high unemployment. Rudd and former Liberal leader Howard both wish to slash welfare, cut pensions and unemployment dole and serve the aboriginals up to the mine owners and stations as cheap labor. As well as, securing control of mineral-rich lands and dumping spent uranium on aboriginal lands.

It's an interesting article.

I suppose the value of the proposal might be to say that yes, there can be some longer term agreement one day in the distant future. Lets chat.

Given the difference in governments (Burma for example). No agreement seems possible for a long long time. And that's without looking at the economic policies of each country.

Aren't we jumping the gun a bit? Rudd has not said he wants free movement of labour and people between all Asia-Pacific nations. Has he? I took it more as a fostering of transnational cooperation.

The author is right in arguing that the lack of homogeneity and economic disparities between the countries of Asia and the Pacific would make the free movement of people unworkable. It would also be disastrous where large movements of people to one area would place a strain on the existing infrastructures not to mention other problems with surges of population growth eg. water, sustainability etc.

As far as free trade goes we all know that the term is an oxymoron there is no such thing, there is always a cost, there are always winners (those with economic power) and losers (those with no power) and there is a lack of esential national focus and attention to local agriculture and industry - all important to sustaining local communities.

It is seem that if we want to continue improving our economy we need a much bigger market. High technology means high productivity, which require big market, which means we must join with one or more countries. But it is not only economic needs which push us to join with other countries but also political and cultural reasons which press us to move to this direction.
IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE IMPROVING OUR ECONOMIC, POLITICAL AND CULTURAL STANDARDS WE MUST JOIN WITH OTHER COUNTRIES.
BUT if do not count our steps and join with the wrong countries then it could has catastrophic results for Australian labors and small businesses or even for Australian political and cultural standards.
I do not know what Rudd say and means but any kind of FREE (trade or movement)with our neighbors is extremely dangerous, we will be lost, AND WE MUST BLOCK IT. It is very different the cooperation from the free trade or free movement.
It is true that a big part of corporations in Australia belong to Asian, to our neighbors, mainly to China and Japan.
WHILE MANY CORPORATIONS BELONG TO ASIA, ALMOST ALL AUSTRALIANS HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS, VALUES, CIVILIZATION WITH EUROPEAN UNION.
If we have to join with a country or group of countries this could be ONLY THE EUROPEAN UNION.
Almost all Australians are from European background and if we want to keep the basic characteristics of Australian civilization WE HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE THAN TO JOIN WITH EUROPEAN UNION.
It is seem that Australian politicians are ready to give the Australia as a gift to Asian corporations.
WHILE AUSTRALIA GEOGRAPHICALLY BELONG TO ASIA, ALMOST ALL ITS CITIZENS ARE FROM EUROPEAN BACKGROUND AND I CAN NOT IMAGINE THEM LOST BETWEEN THE BILLIONS OF ASIANS. OUR CIVILIZATION IS SO DIFFERENT FROM THEIR CIVILIZATION AND OUR POPULATION SO SMALL COMPARE WITH THEIR POPULATION WE WILL HAVE NO CHANCE TO SAVVY.
INSTEAD TO SPEAK FOR FREE TRADE AND FREE MOVEMENT WITH ASIA LET'S START A DISCUSSION HOW TO JOIN WITH EUROPEAN UNION!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaid

The major flaw in Kevin Rudd's suggestion is that what he proposes is dependant
on the expectation of continued economic growth.
Too many politicians and indeed others presume that growth will be as
usual as in the past.

It won't, so how can free trade possibly work when everything is moving
towards localisation ?
In the same context a merge with the European Union is likewise impossible.
Frankly, it is pull up the drawbridge time.

He who thinks growth can continue indefinitely in a finite world
is either a madman or an economist.

Bazz
"In the same context a merge with the European Union is likewise impossible"
Why impossible? who blocks us? who can stopped us? what kind of democracy we have if we can not decide for our future?
I do not speak for UK BUT FOR EUROPEAN UNION.
It is an other story if UK left Australia and is an other story the European Union IN OUR DAYS.
We have the power to press the European Countries as we have or we can take easily the European citizenship as we come from Europe.
I do not see any problem from European Union, maybe from here but the mass majority knows the truth and the risks.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

ASymeonakis,
You misunderstand, it is not a case of what we might want
or not want, all free trade areas will waste away, including the EU.
The EU will probably continue for a longer time as it is in a small
geographical area.

Transport difficulties and costs will rule out common markets.
There will be trading between close communities just as there was in
times past. Certainly there will be some long range trading but as in
times past will be limited. Want a job as a seaman on a windjammer ?
Or a stoker on a coal fired Boeing 747 ?

We are in for major changes in the longer term and the first
casualties will be trading agreements such as the WTO agreements,
although IARTA, the airline treaty looks like it might go very soon.

I'd like to note that this influx of immigrants from east Europe into west Europe (mostly people that fill up the seasonal jobs in agriculture for which no other candidates are found) seems to be a temporary "problem" that solves itself in time. Already now companies in Belgium and Netherlands indicate that they don't find enough Polish workers to help harvesting in the summer months, because economy in Poland is booming since its admission into European Union, and wages are rising rapidly, taking away the motivation to look for jobs elsewhere. One can argue that such a process should happen gradually and controlled, but the end result seems to be beneficiary for both the "rich" and the "poor" partner countries. With rising wages in eastern europe, jobs in the west are less likely to move away.

a study on the impact of free movement of workers from central and eastern Europe on the UK labour market:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/WP18.pdf