Wary on FTA, TFIA hails SIP changes
As the peak employer body for the Australian textile and clothing sector, the council had moved quickly to address TCF issues following an undertaking, forged late last 2006 between Australia and Japan, to commence FTA negotiations this year.
TFIA executive director Ashley Van Krieken confirmed the council had made a submission to the government requesting FTA negotiators ensure a number of points. These included a requirement that "no element of an agreement should impact policy or tariff levels under [government grant scheme] the Post-2005 Strategic Investment Program (SIP)." A further condition stated that all non-tariff barriers (NTB's) - possible examples include pricing and licencing schedules - should be addressed by the agreement, which itself should avoid inadvertently creating new NTBs.
Another threat, that of trans-shipment from countries other than Japan piggybacking Japan's preferential tariffs under the FTA, should be prevented through effective Rules of Origin regulations, while adequate intellectual property protection measures should also be implemented. Furthermore, transparency on Japanese Government procurement activities should be guaranteed to ensure they were proportionate to Australia's procurement program, Van Krieken said.
In a separate move, recent weeks also saw the TFIA welcome approval by Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources The Hon Ian Macfarlane MP, of amendments to the Post-2005 SIP Scheme. The changes - to apply for the 2005/06 year onwards and also covering non-clothing textiles - would include one alteration directly impacting fashion businesses; namely "a more realistic treatment of trade marks" to reflect changes in company ownership. While many products gained by companies through mergers and acquisitions were ineligible under the previous scheme - which only recognised expenses on products for which the company was the original trade mark registrant - the amendment would require that a company was the registered owner of the trade mark or had applied for a trade mark, regardless of whether it was the original registrant, Van Krieken said.