Posted on 08/26/2020 6:31:48 AM PDT by naturalman1975
Victoria's controversial Belt and Road Deal with China could be scrapped by Scott Morrison under a proposed new law.
The Prime Minister wants to stop states and territories signing deals with foreign powers that go against Australia's foreign policy and damage the national interest.
An extraordinary new law will give the foreign minister sweeping powers to tear up agreements made by state and local governments as well as universities if they pose a threat.
Victoria made a deal with China under the country's Belt and Road Initiative, a scheme that sees the communist superpower invest in huge infrastructure projects around the world, in October 2018.
Premier Andrews said he made the agreement to increase Chinese participation in Victorian building projects, manufacturing and trade in order to boost jobs.
Several government politicians, fearing the expansion of Chinese power and influence, have urged the Victorian government to scrap the deal but it has refused.
Under the proposed law, the foreign minister will be able to terminate the deal and any private contracts that are part of it.
Once the law is in place, governments and universities will have six months to reveal their foreign deals to the foreign minister, who will then decide which ones must be stopped.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Thought this might interest you, given your comments elsewhere.
We dare not read the post lest we be called Globalist’s
Knowing what’s happening in the world is forbidden by many here
“An extraordinary new law will give the foreign minister sweeping powers to tear up agreements made by state and local governments as well as universities if they pose a threat.”
‘extraordinary’? A bit strong, as I see it as the elected national government of Australia being able to determine foreign policy for the country, and to prevent other domestic entities from undercutting that policy. Unless I’m missing something?
I pity the fools (hats off to Mr. T) that think China is doing them a favor. They want to lend big bucks to build infrastructure only so in the near future China will take ownership of said infrastructure.
Mr. Morrison has indicated that he wants mandatory vaccination in Australia and Mr. Andrews regime has been the most dictatorial in dealing with the coronavirus.
China is bad but Australia’s leaders earn no points for their authoritarianism in connection with COVID-19.
What is in the agreement that the State of Victoria signed with the PRC? It has to be more than just highway funding.
As a general rule, state governments in the US cannot conclude binding agreements with foreign countries, not without US government involvement. So this is, to American eyes, very odd.
I’d trade AUS True-dope and his Lieberal government for Scott Morrison and his government. Even throw in two years of Athabasca Tar Sands royalties to sweeten the pot.
Alas, Aussies aren’t as stupid as Eastern Canadians. They wouldn’t go for a trade like that. Hopefully, Erin O’Toole, the new (not so) Conservative Party of Canada leader actually IS conservative AND wins the next election. Who knows.
Agree - it’s horrible for people who simply want to keep their country from going Third World. You vote-in the wrong government, often for the wrong reasons (such as some corruption...nothing to do with policy) and the next thing you know, the immigration floodgates are open, and PERMANENT changes are being made to the electorate.
Just sickening.
Yes, and no. He did say something about mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 at a press conference, but what he was actually referring to isn't actually mandatory vaccination - unfortunately Australian governments often misuse words in ways that cause confusion (which is why you can walk into a gunshop here and see 'Prohibited Weapons' on the shelves being openly sold). What he was referring to is a policy called 'No Jab, No Pay' where the recipients of certain welfare payments can have those payments withheld if they don't vaccinate. Now, that may, by itself, seem overly authoritarian, but it's not actually mandatory vaccination for the general population - it only applies to people receiving those welfare payments (and there are exemptions available for medical reasons in those cases). It is intended to address the issue of people who don't get their kids vaccinated simply because they cannot be bothered
It is extraordinary in an Australian context because this is simply something Australian governments have always shied away from doing. Our constitution gives state’s primacy over a very wide range of issues (any issue that is not expressly and explicitly reserved to the Commonwealth government) and historically the Commonwealth government has allowed states to do almost anything they like. A decision to intervene like this is almost unprecedented. It is probably Constitutional as Foreign Affairs is under Commonwealth control, but it’s still a very unusual intervention.
Thanks! I’m glad to here people are getting on top of this problems down there. Unlike the United States, in which Congress, instead of engaging in its CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY of reviewing interstate compacts and deals between states and foreign entities — such as California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger made with at least one Canadian province on “Climate Change” — basically sits on its ass.
Interestingly, I began taking interest in Australian news by reading stories about highway improvements down under, such as upgrades to your accident-prone Pacific Highway, as well as the building of the Eastlink toll highway in Melbourne.
It is. While it starts with road and rail funding, the intent is to also encourage more Chinese investment in other areas - biotechnology and agriculture, most notably.
The issue with the agreement is the influence it would give China over the Victorian government and how it might use that influence - once you control the money, you have a lot of power.
As a general rule, state governments in the US cannot conclude binding agreements with foreign countries, not without US government involvement.
It's historical - Australia wasn't formed as a single country as a result of a war of independence - instead, it chose to come together in a voluntary union that was primarily based on creating a better environment for international trade than anything else. And when this happened (discussions in the 1890s that lead to Federation in 1901) some of the Australian states (then still referred to as colonies) had been mostly independent self-governing nations for forty years (London kept control of foreign affairs and defence, but everything else was locally governed). Those governments wanted to keep control of their affairs and only ceded a very limited list of powers to the Commonwealth government. Even today, in their own domains states have power over the Commonwealth government. Strictly speaking they cannot make diplomatic type agreements with foreign governments (which is why the Commonwealth can get involved as in this case) but if you class something as a trade agreement, the states can do a great deal. And that is what Victoria has done with China.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.