THE PRESS FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1982. Acceptance of C.E.R.

Press, 12 November 1982, Page 16

THE PRESS FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1982. Acceptance of C.E.R.

The acceptance by the Australian Cabinet of the Closer Economic Relations agreement between New Zealand and Australia removes the last barrier before the accord is signed. At the eleventh hour, New Zealand had to make some further concessions, mainly on initial access for Australian manufacturers. Manufacturers in both New Zealand and Australia have complained that their Government negotiating teams have given too much away. The complaints do not appear to be so strong that there is a danger that the agreement will become unacceptable. Before the last negotiations, for which the Australian Minister of Trade and

Resources, Mr Anthony, visited New Zealand, there was a danger that Australian resentment was so strong that the agreement would break down before it started.

The agreement enables more trade between two. of the highest-cost manufacturing industries in the world. However, the manufacturing industries of both New Zealand and Australia have a particular significance. They represent more advanced technology in the economies. New Zealand is still a •predominantly agricultural country; Australia is still predominantly an agricultural and raw materials country. In international terms both countries are price-takers, subject in the extreme to the vagaries of the world economy. Manufacturing offers a broader base to both countries’ economies. New Zealand and Australia are each the other’s biggest market for manufactures. Exporters who have tested the markets have often gone further afield after the success of the initial experience in exporting. Three people have been particularly associated with bringing C.E.R. to a successful end. In New Zealand-, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Overseas Trade, Mr Brian Taiboys, was instrumental in setting up the conditions under which a new trade agreement could be brought

about and he took part in many of the negotiations. His personal, good relationship with Mr Anthony made the going easier. The present Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Templeton, has been an in defatigable worker and enthusiast for C.E.R. since he took over the portfolio. In Australia, Mr Anthony, who is Deputy Prime Minister as well as Minister of Trade and Resources, was the person who first suggested that something should be done. At times he seemed alone as an advocate for C.E.R. As leader of the Country Party, Mr Anthony took some political risks in the cause of C.E.R.

All three Ministers held to the view that what was being negotiated was not simply a new trade deal between two countries, but something that dealt very fundamentally with the relationship between New Zealand and Australia. In spite of difficulties, they kept before them the view that two countries as similar as New Zealand and Australia should be able to get on together and work something out to their common benefit.

Understandably, there will be some nervousness among some manufacturers in New Zealand and Australia. The bigger Australian industry in some fields could hurt New Zealand industry in the same fields. Questions about the drift of population and of industry, and about the effect of differences in exchange rates and in wages remain unanswered. It is not, however, as if trade between New Zealand and Australia were something new. The trade is already extensive. The agreement is likely to make it even more extensive, but gradually. In the end, the success or failure of the new agreement will depend on the attitude of people in the industries. Will C.E.R. be seen as a threat or as an opportunity? If the opportunities are seized, the new agreement will work and industries, employment levels, and consumers in both countries should be the better for it.