Who has decided on this proposed crash of wages, working conditions, living standards, welfare, environmental care, national sovereignty? Who is advantaged? The 1%. Who is allowed to take part in the negotiations? The 1%. The free trade agreements and beyond have never been the subject of election campaigns or public referenda. This catastrophic loss planned in secret for the 99% is not decided on by any electorate anywhere in the world. Its planning and execution at the political and administrative level can only be described as treason.

Thanks SM.
One vital factor no one has mentioned on here is that global trade will
be reducing over the coming years. All the trade rule changes and money
fiddling won't make the slightest difference.

The real problem that will arise is how to manage these complicated
trade treaties in an era of reducing and zero growth and reducing international trade.

They appear to me to be a solution for 20th century trade.

Bazz, what makes you think global trade will be reducing over the coming years?

Bazz,

For once I agree with Aidan, trade world wide has been steadily increasing for more that a century with brief dips only for major calamities like wars.

NZ has an FTA with China, and has already seen a huge boost in dairy and other sales, far exceeding what Aus provides.

The FTA will increase trade, employment and the general welfare of Australians. The only reason the Unions are against it is to provide protection to the last outposts of inefficient unionised companies.

SM, nothing gets done without expending energy.
Energy is getting more expensive and growth is declining.
All countries are having difficulty with growth, the US is exceptionally
having a holiday because of the tight shale oil they have had for the
last few years but that is coming to an end.

As all countries find their economies winding down to lower levels of
activity, trade, especially international trade will decline.
If Hasbeen is right and ships switch to nuclear power, then the cost
may stabilise and freight will be one less factor pulling down growth.

Nevertheless we are tied to our energy decline and until we find the
next energy regime we will continue the growth decline.
That is why Tony's removal of windfarm subsidies and diverting funds
to energy research is a very badly needed change of direction.

Talk, talk, talk: what happens behind closed doors discussions seems endless. 1990s Australian trade deficits news fear stories were endless. come post 2000, somehow trade deficits are no longer a finance media scare story.

How about this theory: in a global village concept example: Australia sends iron ore to China and China sends consumer goods to Australia allowing Australian currency worth earning. Chinese consumer good get cheaper allowing workers to believe that inflation is low, allowing workers a belief is saving money for retirement.
Iron ore producer work force wages are paid for with invented bank credits.

Another example: Philippines has 100 million people yet exports little more than Philippine citizen. Philippines have motor vehicles; fuels; all manner of things. I believe a trade is one sided in favour of the Philippines.