Original MAI site established 5th December 1998
|
In 1985 Treasurer Paul Keating allowed foreign banks into Australia. He was subsequently named the "world's best treasurer".
A title which had nothing to do with the interests of Australians but everything to do with the
foreign investors and multinationals who wanted to "acquire" Australia. The FSIA represents the formal submission of the Australian banking industry to the World Trade Organisation. A treaty which was signed by the ALP Government in 1995 which was never debated in Parliament - despite the impact that it would have on our nation. |
Quotable FSIA quotes:
"The financial services agreement will directly benefit Australian banks, insurance companies and securities traders." - 1995, Senator Bob McMullan, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade
"The current government may not bind future Parliaments to agreements which cannot be abrogated during their tenure - however the MAI would effectively be in force for 20 years; it appears that the FSIA is permanent."
The FSIA has already been implimented by the governments of countries like Australia without any consultation with the people most affected - the Australian voter. This agreement allows foreign ownership of banks and will lead to the inequitable burdening of bank fees onto those least able to afford it - the poor.
Foreign ownership of Australian banks is critical to the multinationals - it allows them to control our money supply, loans and to whom they are granted. In effect, they become the defacto money lenders - the power to choose who they will allow to borrow and those who will be cut off from the chance to create wealth for themselves - or for their own country.
The banks are also the financial conduit for the foreign multinationals who control 80% of Australia's economic activity.... yet these same multinationals pay little or no tax to the Australian Tax Office.
GO TO comprehensive FSIA links, commentary and background
Quotable MAI quotes:
"We are writing the constitution of a single global
economy."
- Renato Ruggerio, Director General of the World Trade Organization
"Under this agreement governments would be ruled by
corporations".
See transcript of
ABC
Background Briefing report - 30th November 1997
"The main enemy of the open society, I believe, is
no longer the communist but the capitalist threat."
- George Soros , The Atlantic Monthly, February 1997
"If we reflected upon the economic, social and ethical
ramifications of the MAI, they reveal what is
perhaps its most salient feature. It challenges
the right of a nation to determine its own economic, social
and ethical development."
- Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, Director, Just World Trust
"However, we are most definitely in a democracy and there shouldn’t be cause for scare-mongering or major concern just yet.
After all, such an agreement would have to be ratified via the normal parliamentary processes.
"
- Editor, The Queensland Times, January 1998.
"However, other OECD members have resisted these demands, partly because the US has appeared unwilling to remove restrictions which limit foreign investment and the rights of foreign companies to do business in its own economy."
London Financial Times THURSDAY JANUARY 8 1998
The MAI is a blatant attempt by the multinationals, in concert with the OECD, to create a so-called "level playing field" as a condition for the nations of the world to benefit from their investment. It usurps the rights of the people of those nations and leaves the elected members of parliament as little more than caretakers and enforcers of their laws.
This trade agreement, when viewed with the FSIA clearly reveals the treachery of consecutive Australian governments as they have led this country into the financial wilderness.
|
Once a month in the period January-April, the OECD (Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Devleopment-consisting of the 29 most 'developed' countries in the world) will meet to try to come to an agreement on the MAI. The MAI, should it be signed in its current form, will mean the rolling back of existing environmental protection legislation and new legislation and rights which allow transnational corporations to sue governments directly. The MAI will make an end to the last remaining obstacles for large multinationals to invest in any country, in order to maximise their profit, on the basis of bad labour conditions, lack of environmental regulation, destruction of local economies and lack of democracy.
Planned meetings:
|
GO TO Comprehensive MAI links, commentary and background.
"We really do see the analogies to what we have now in the current account, namely, a status like Article XIV status in which your existing controls are accepted, and then another status like Article VIII in which you declare yourself ready to accept the obligations of capital account liberalization; and we would not be pressing every mission to say get rid of this right now, and if you don’t do it by the next six months, we will report you to higher authority."
We see a process getting under way of systematizing—and that’s really important—what is done about the capital account and how it is controlled and what controls are acceptable and how you liberalize it. It has been chaotic so far in many countries.
Quote:
"Another way to deal with the risks of speculative capital flows is to
regulate capital outflows. Chile, for example, requires foreign investors
to keep initial investments in the country for at least one year, although
earnings from the investment can be taken out at will. The Chilean
government has imposed this requirement so that investors cannot come in
for a short time just to profit from currency fluctuations or other forms
of speculation. According to the MAI, the ability to make financial
transfers is considered a core investor right. Under the proposed
agreement, investors would be able to withdraw their investments and
profits without government oversight.
"Changing the IMF's bylaws to expand control over capital account
liberalization."