President Barack Obama now has the authority to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement without Congressional interference. The Abbott government is reluctant to challenge even the most odious provisions of the agreement, which pretends to be a regional trade pact involving the US and 11 other countries. It is in fact a push for US regional dominance with particular relevance to its rivalry with China.

The Economist says the TPP is not the way to go. Last month, it said: "The exclusion of China is costly ... a more inclusive Pacific free-trade deal with weaker rules on state-owned firms would lift the income gains for the original 12 TPP members, including America, to $760 billion – more than double the boost from the TPP."

In an effort to talk up to alleged trade benefits of the TPP and the recently signed free-trade agreements with South Korea, China and Japan, the Australian government commissioned independent modelling of the three FTAs over the next 20 years by the Centre for International Economics. The fine print showed that the combined agreements would increase GDP by $24.5 billion – or a risible 0.1 per cent a year.

This did not prevent Trade Minister Andrew Robb claiming the economic gains demonstrated by the modelling justified the urgency with which the incoming government pursued the agreements.

The same consultancy undertook a study of the AUSFTA in 2005. It initially forecast a gain of $4 billion accruing to Australia from liberalisation of the US sugar market. That figure was later increased to $5.6 billion, even though it became clear the sugar market would not be opened up to Australia, despite a personal appeal by prime minister John Howard to president George W. Bush.