It doesn't have to be all one or the other.

The term 'free' trade is a furphy. There is nothing free about free trade under the terms of many agreements especially with clauses which include compensation (paid by local taxpayers) for foreign investors.

There is little genuine oversight over dumping, shadow industries, safety and biosecurity regulations and exploitation of labour. Free trade might benefit one sector of Australian agriculture but greatly damage others. Why on earth would you buy food from overseas that can be grown here and where exists governance around wages, pesticide etc.

The dubious behavior of some countries forcing others to adopt policies that favour a one-sided self interest is the biggest problem. The Wikileaks documents exposed what can only be described as threatening behaviour by some US companies (via government) over accepting GM products and seed into Europe. Some industries, like tobacco, have been known to threaten legal action if domestic policies do not favour certain products including harm minimisation programs.

Do nations have a sovereign right to choose what they import?

The cost of imported food is shown to be no cheaper in the long term especially if you factor in social and other costs to the price. Often prices are the same as locally grown food with cost benefits made by middlemen over the consumer.

If you don't believe in it, don't buy imported food. These issues are not limited to agriculture. The collapse of economies in the West surely act as a warning bell that our economic mindsets need to change.

'Do we,for much the same reasons stop all forms of welfare including Social welfare.'

Hmmm. So your thesis is we should subsidise farmers rather than have them on the dole. Sounds good Belly. We should do this for any business or industry that cant compete internationally. Heaven forbid they start a profitable business or re-skill or move to land that's actually viable for farming.

All call centre businesses and staff should be subsidised by the government as a social welfare for the staff, and for the racist old people who cant understand the correct form of English used by staff in Bangalore.

'What? I live in Straya, what the hell is Aus-tra-li-a!'

We should pour billions into the TV industry in Australia, and then we'd still be able to buy AWA TVs! The cheaper CHina makes them the more we can support the industry via government grants. Then if there's a war, we will always have TV security.

In fact, any business that pours 110% of its profits back into the business, and bases it's viability on governmnet handouts should be bailed out continually no matter how inept or infeasible the business is.

In fact, I'm off to grow mandarins in the desert, and I await the governmnet subsidies for the 'drought' and I will enjoy the sympathetic ear of those city folk who are riding on my back. I will call Myself Mr Backbone. The backbone of the country.

I cant talk I suppose, I'm a working family. The best things to be in Australia is a working family or a farmer. Both groups are untouchable, and live their lives with their hand out reaping governmnet money while simultaneously crying about how hard they've got it and how they're doin' us all a favour.

SM,
Basicly it comes down to risk of introducing disease and we should take ALL steps to keep our products disease free. Phillipines bananas and NZ apples have diseases we do not have so should not import them.
If you seen the conditions some seafood is 'farmed' in Asia you wouldn't eat imported stuff either. Then there has been all sorts of additives put in food in China.

There are some that say if we can get it cheaper bring it in and to hell with the consequences. Lots of our industries have gone down the tubes because of that attitude. We have to look after our own first.
I try to buy Aussie products if possible but is getting harder.

With our wonderfull climate for growing things, there is very little foodstuffs we should need to import and at least we can set our own standards and controls.

I don't care if bananas in Equador are tastier, if there is the slightes chance of importing disesase they can keep them. Some time ago there was talk of importing cooked chook from somewhere. Low risk of disease they said, well yeah, trust me said the used car salesman. Even Chinese toothpaste was contaminated and we found kids clothes were being treated with formulin. Powered milk had ground up plastic in it

Would you buy beef from Indonesia if it was dumped here cheap?

No, and I will wait for the next crop of our bananas.

'We have to look after our own first.'

Really?

I don't understand that position.

I have no more allegiance to an 'Aussie farmer' than to a Chinese one. In fact, a true altruist would support the poorest farmer. So, instead of aid money and charity, we should campaign for people to buy the products of poor overseas farmers and factory workers.

Buying Australian Made is anti-charity, and by proxy is equivalent to a hand out (via overseas aid) rather than work for the dole (by supporting foreign made products).

The Australian Farmer really doesn't need a further free ride.

If bananas could be imported safely would you still oppose it.

The reality is that to import fruit, one has to follow very strict quarantine guidelines, and while there is always some risk, with the proper controls it is miniscule.

The shortage does not benefit the consumer, nor the farmer whose crop was lost, so there is no moral prerogative not to import.

Houlley
Trade can and often does benefit workers in poorer countries but only if the agreements are mutually beneficial. Often one sector does well while another suffers under FTA and two speed economies affect the poorest who may have given up some smaller landholding and a level of self-sufficiency to particpate in globalisation. Then there is the issue of food security.

It is a huge distortion to argue that FT has positive benefits on developing societies in all scenarios and particularly where the relationships are unequal.

This quote best represents my view.

"For the neo-liberal, individuals make rational economic and social choices only through the market. For the statist, the state is the sole custodian of society’s interests, and its decisions their only reliable expression, with or without free elections. While the one ideology seeks to subordinate state to market, and the other the market to the state, what both succeed in doing is subordinating society’s will and the means of its expression. The alternative is that both state and market should be the servants of society rather than society being the servant of either. Whether the next century will be marked by unity and harmony rather than division and conflict depends in no small part on what democracy and citizenship are to mean in the age of globalization." — Brendan Martin, In the Public Interest? Privatization and Public Sector Reform, Zed Books (London), 1993.

Some good perspectives here where this quote was obtained:

http://www.globalissues.org/issue/38/free-trade-and-globalization