Syndicate content Subscribe to the RSS feed
Home
 › 
TRADE

Accountability, partners in the value chain and trans border data flows: looking elsewhere

Malcolm Crompton's picture
Sun, 02/11/2008 - 16:23 — Malcolm Crompton
As information flows ever more easily between jurisdictions, how can effective regulatory protections be put in place for the stakeholders?

This question applies equally to the protection of intellectual property (IP) as it does to the protection of personal information (PI) or any other valuable information assets held by an organisation.  It also applies equally to organisations in the private sector, be they banks or online retailers, as it does to government agencies, be they policing agencies or anything else in various services (Customs, Immigration, national security etc) or even hybrid processes such as the exchange of Passenger Name Records between airlines and authorities or fulfilling anti money laundering obligations.

In the debate about the protection of personal information when it moves between jurisdictions, two camps have emerged - those who think that information should only move between jurisdictions that have "Adequate" laws in place (ie focused on the legal constructs) and those who think that a more direct approach should be taken towards the organisations involved in the movement based on ensuring the "Accountability" of the parties. 

The debate has often generated more heat than light.  It has been documented in great detail by the Australian Law Reform Commission in For Your Information: Australian Privacy Law and Practice (ALRC 108) at Chapter 31.

Gains from trade: vouchsafing the public good of liquidity in financial markets

Thu, 29/05/2008 - 12:50 — Nicholas Gruen

Nicholas Gruen

You may not know it but around 20% of the home loan market has just collapsed - the securitisation market. The banks are moving into the space and, as a result, rationing credit elsewhere. Below the fold is an op ed in the Age about it.  It introduces a theme you'll probably be seeing a little more of from me.

In a paper I published in 1997 (I think it was) I argued that while competitive neutrality was a good thing, it was possible to have too much of it - at least where it stopped us making the best possible use of the specific qualities of the public sector.  But an alternative and in many cases ultimately more compelling principle is the desirability of making gains through trade. There are some things the public sector does better than the private sector, and it should be able to do them - prudently and within appropriate institutional frameworks.  This column outlines one.  I will outline some others if and when I get the time.

Calling all polyglots

Douglascomms's picture
Wed, 19/03/2008 - 13:21 — Douglascomms

We've trained our sights so far out we can't see what's in front of our noses.

There's something funny about the way we do business. 

Take a look at our trading partners for example. Last year Japan bought more of the stuff that we produce than any other country. All in all they spent $32 627 million goods we produce here in Australia. The Chinese follow at a reasonable distance paying us $22 845 million, then came South Korea spending $13 071 million,  India at $10 099 million, and then the US and New Zealand each of whom spent a little under $10 000 million.  

But if you look over to our services sector a very different picture emerges. For starters, the value of our services exports is much smaller than our merchandise exports - our entire services exports only brought in $46 233 million in 2007, compared to $215 850 million for merchandise exports.  

And our principal services customer is the US at $5286 million, followed but the UK, $4356 million, Japan, $3284 million, China; $3169, and New Zealand at $3006 million.  So while our commodities, agriculture and manufacturing sectors are largely focussed on Asia, our services sector remains trained on our Anglo allies the US and the UK.  

Looking for Love in Decoupling World

Douglascomms's picture
Wed, 12/03/2008 - 14:27 — Douglascomms

Can Australia withstand the shocks and blows of the global economy?

Sorry, the heading might have been slightly misleading, I'm not talking about the kind of person to person love that leads to coupling, weddings, mortgages, and occasionally even children. I'm talking about the coupling that leads countries to plunge, lemming like, into and out of economic crises, forming a macroeconomic conga line behind that pinnacle of consumer power the US of A. 

There's a debate currently raging as to whether the USA's economic woes will suck the rest of the world into a global recession, or whether Asian and European consumers have become sufficiently powerful to pick up where US demand is about to fall off.

If the global economy remains tightly coupled, and we're all on the verge of plummeting headlong into a global recession, I hate to break it to you, but it's our own stupid fault. 

For the last few decades open market evangelists have gone forth and multiplied, chanting the mantra that small open economies should focus on exports, constrain wages, and limit government spending on human capital development. 

Creating a Global Compact

Tue, 22/07/2008 - 12:54 — Matthew Tukaki

Matthew TukakiResponsible business practices can in many ways build trust and social capital, contributing to broad-based development and sustainable markets. 

As many of you know, I have been a strong and passionate advocate of the work of the United Nations, as it has applied to matters relating to governance, intellectual property and the protection of rights, particularly for small business. More recently I have taken the decision to align my business interests with those of the United Nations through the signing of the United Nations Global Compact. I am pleased to inform SansGov partners and clients that this morning I signed the final remaining letter of intent from the UN Secretary General in order for SansGov to become a full member of the Compact. You may wonder what the Compact is all about and perhaps, more importantly, what it means to you as a client or as a partner.

The Global Compact is a framework for businesses that are committed to aligning their operations and strategies with ten universally accepted principles in the areas of human rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption. As the world's largest, global corporate citizenship initiative, the Global Compact is first and foremost concerned with exhibiting and building the social legitimacy of business and markets.

Business, trade and investment are essential pillars for prosperity and peace. But in many areas, business is too often linked with serious dilemmas - for example, exploitative practices, corruption, income equality, and barriers that discourage innovation and entrepreneurship. Responsible business practices can in many ways build trust and social capital, contributing to broad-based development and sustainable markets.