should always retain the right objectively to scrutinise proposed trade deals to assess whether or not they are in the national interest. So the third great Labor guiding principle is to maintain a separation between trade policy and foreign policy -- the separation principle. As new Trade Minister I have been given a stream of advice that I should initiate so-called free trade negotiations with countries of strategic importance to Australia. It's as if the very announcement of the commencement of negotiations performs the task of affirming a strategic, geo-political relationship, with barely a moment's thought given to the prospects of concluding a successful, truly-liberalising agreement. Criticism by a home government or farming and business organisations of the foreign government's intransigence in negotiations can hardly be conducive to friendlier relations, but by that time, when the trade ministers and officials are slogging it out and industry associations are venting their frustrations, the foreign policy urgers have moved on to the pursuit through trade policy of another strategic, geo-political alliance. Obviously this does not mean that Australia shouldn't conclude trade deals with strategically important countries. That would be absurd. But it's the quality of the deal, not the quality of the strategic relationship, that should determine whether the deal is worth having. The formation of discriminatory trading blocs for geo-political reasons contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War. The application of two great Labor principles of non-discrimination and separating trade policy from foreign policy should ensure that no Labor