UPDATE JUNE 2005 PART ONE

CHINA THREATENS US IN TRADE ROW

As reported by Colleen Ryan from Shanghai in the Monday May 16, 2005 edition of the Financial Review.

China has taken on the mantle the of Free Trade champion against a “protectionist” U.S, slamming Washington’s latest decision to restrict imports of Cotton, Clothing and threatening retaliation.

“This is beyond a doubt an extremely bad precedent and will seriously harm the multilateral trading system,” Commerce Ministry spokesman Chong Quan said at the weekend.

“The Chinese government reserves the right to take further measures within the WTO framework.”

Mr. Chong was reacting to the U.S. Commerce Department’s decision on Friday to institute safeguard measures against three categories of products, cotton shirts and trousers and cotton artificial fibre underwear setting a 7.5 percent cap on Chinese import growth.

The U.S. decision comes as the European Union mulls its options to stem the flow of Chinese textile imports, which have surged after a four decade old system of global quotas on textiles ended on January 1.

Australia has not been affected because, unlike the U.S. and the E.U. it lifted quotas during the 10 year phasing in period rather than waiting to the last minute.

Nevertheless, the U.S. reaction and aggressive use of safeguard measures will be watched closely in Australia ahead of a Free Trade Agreement with China, which is expected to hurt textile and clothing manufacturers.

A WTO rule allows members to restrict the growth in clothing imports from China to 7.5 per cent year on year when there is a surge in imports that can be shown to have had a negative impact on domestic industry. Beijing accepted these measures as a term of its entry to the WTO but the measures expire in 2008.

The U.S. Commerce Department says imports of Chinese cotton shirts and blouses have risen by 1350 per cent compared with last year since the quotas were lifted on January 1. Imports of cotton trousers were up 1500 per cent, and cotton and artificial fibre underwear, 366 per cent.

The introduction of safeguard measures came as China announced a $US 21.18 billion ($27.8 billion) trade surplus for the four months to the end of April. However, China has been trying to restrict textile trade, imposing taxes on 148 different types of textile exports and can demonstrate that the pace of growth has begun to decline.

Official statistics show that China’s exports of textile and clothing totaled $US 22,4 billion in the first quarter, up 19.1 per cent, but 5.6 percentage points less than the growth rate over the same time last year.

Beijing maintains that the U.S. has moved too early just four months after quotas were lifted and that the experience in the early months has been influenced by manufacturers pushing out exports on fears of a revaluation of the Yuan and the imposition of import restrictions in the U.S. and E.U.

China’s textile exporters are hesitating to take orders for the second half of the year because of fears they will be stopped at the docks.

Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi met U.S. ambassador Clark Randt on Friday to voice Beijing’s displeasure at the U.S. move and warned Washington to “avoid mixing economic and trade problems with politics.”

The two countries now have a 120 day deadline for discussion of the safeguard measures. They are due to be introduced at the end of May. If there is no resolution the quotas will be in force until the end of the year.

Textile and clothing manufacturers in the U.S. welcomed the decision but retailers said it would mean higher prices for consumers.

The business community fears the textile industry has become a pawn in a bigger debate between China and the U.S. over the Yuan and trade.

“To make a decision affecting billions of dollars in business less than four days after a public comment period closes only shows how little regard there is for our business,” the executive director of the U.S. association of Importers of Textile and Apparel, Laura Jones said, with Sean Aylmer in New York.

PHARMACEUTICAL GENOCIDE?

To allow Ibuprofen, marketed in Australia as Nurofen, to be sold over the counter at Supermarkets i.e. Woolworths and Coles by inexperienced and unqualified shop assistants, is a recipe for a consumer to suffer critical side effects, including Kidney damage and stomach bleeding, due mainly to a conflict with certain prescribed medicines.

Depending on a consumer’s state of health, it could be fatal. One questions the intellect of Dr. John McEwen and his Colleagues of the Therapeutic Goods Administration, who were responsible for de-scheduling (deregulation) of Ibuprofen (Nurofen), thus permitting unqualified persons to sell Pharmaceuticals, fully aware that they would be unable to give professional advice to Pharmaceutical purchasers.

Dr. John McEwen and his Colleagues got Ibuprofen (Nurofen) wrong. Is there any other Pharmaceutical they’ve allowed on Woolworth’s shelves that may have adverse effects when taken with G.P. prescribed medications?

Prime Minister Howard and his Coalition Government’s push for their National Competition Policy to succeed at any cost re; Pharmaceutical sales in Supermarket’s displays a Government with no understanding or compassion and great naivety in not realizing that a high percentage of over 50’s in the Australian Community are illiterate.

SUMMARY

1. Woolworth’s corporate greed for making profits at any cost is exemplified with the Bastardisation of Australian Dairy farmers due to Deregulation. Those to profit were Milk Processors and Major Retailers, i.e. Woolworths, Coles and Aldi. The losers, Dairy Farmers and Australian Consumers.
2. Woolworths and Coles now offer discount petrol to customers who spend $30 or more at their Supermarkets. Once again, corporate greed is attempting to put Independent Service Stations out of business.
3. Our advice to the Community to ensure there is no conflict between Supermarket shelf Pharmaceuticals and G.P. prescribed Medications. Go to the professionals, your local Pharmacist (chemist). For the sake of a few dollars, it could be the difference between life and death.
4. The silence by the Labor Opposition, the Greens and Australian Democrats against the Howard Government’s National Competition Policy is Deafening.