Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Editorial in SMH today | |
Author: David (Australia) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 06:26:45 01/24/05 Mon NZ moving closer apart New Zealand decided against becoming part of Australia when federation was being debated just over 100 years ago. Even so, in a historical quirk, New Zealand still ended up with a place at most of Australia's ministerial council meetings, sometimes as an observer, often with full participation. Nor is this just empty protocol, because senior New Zealand Government officials invariably do attend. New Zealand's place at such meetings is indicative of the unusually close links between the two countries - and some argue those links, both legislative and regulatory, should be closer still. The close economic ties across the Tasman became closer 20 years ago when Australia and New Zealand forged the Closer Economic Relations pact to remove trade barriers. A review of the pact in 1998 produced a push to harmonise consumer and competition law. This suits the ambitions of some groups in New Zealand, including some arms of government, which are seeking greater co-operation and co-ordination. However, Australia's Productivity Commission now argues for caution in any such move. While the suggestion of a single cross-Tasman regulator has found some support in Australia, the Productivity Commission reckons that a single currency and harmonised tax legislation should precede parallel competition laws and consumer protection. (And even if both countries did seek to close the legislative gap in this area, it would not necessarily result in the same legal interpretations and level of enforcement.) Whatever is decided about the competition and consumer regimes, there's no doubt Australia and New Zealand continue to move closer together economically, leading to suggestions that the two should merge politically and economically. If Europe, why not Australia and New Zealand? The Productivity Commission is not alone in suggesting that a logical first step would be to merge currencies, though this ignores the very real long-term pain that has resulted from Europe's monetary union for countries such as France. More importantly, there is no denying that politically Australia and New Zealand have moved steadily apart in recent years, despite the unity of economic interest, with diverging views on a host of issues, from regional defence, to Iraq and the handling of refugees. Similar cultural, legal and institutional roots do not imply that Australia and New Zealand can readily close the widening gap between them. If anything, the differences are deepening. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> Subject: let's see if they publish my letter | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:01:16 01/24/05 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |