E&OE

20 May 2008

Media conference

Subjects: Fiji, Burma, China

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, thanks very much. I'm sorry I'm a bit late. A couple of issues I'd like to make some remarks about today and then I'm happy to respond to your questions.

Firstly, on Fiji. You'd of course be aware of my statement to the House last week, where I indicated that a second serious threat against the Australian High Commissioner had arrived and been received in Fiji. As a consequence of that, I formally, through a third person note, requested the interim Fiji Government to agree to close personal protection so far as the High Commissioner was concerned and requested additional security arrangements from the Fiji police. Regrettably, the Fiji interim Government has advised that it's not prepared to agree to close personal protection and as of this morning I'm still awaiting a response on additional Fiji police measures.

As a consequence of the refusal, to date, of the interim Fiji Government to agree to close personal protection provided by Australian Federal Police and to date, a failure to respond to further requests for Fiji Police assistance, the Australian Government has today decided to allow the families of Australian officials in our High Commission in Fiji, to voluntarily return to Australia if that is their wish. So spouses, partners, dependent children will be able to, if they so decide, to return to Australia on a voluntary basis.

In addition to that, the Australian High Commission, in cooperation with the Australian Government, will be instituting further enhanced security arrangements, both in terms of the premises and in terms of Australian officials and individuals in the High Commission in Fiji.

The Australian Government, of course, remains absolutely determined to continue to pursue its policy so far as Fiji is concerned. The interim Fiji Government gave a faithful undertaking to the 2007 Pacific Leaders Forum, that they would hold an election by the end of March next year. And the Australian Government has been very sceptical about the Fiji Government's commitment to that and very worried by the lack of progress in terms of election preparation.

There is one welcoming development in Fiji. I note that yesterday Mr Bainimarama met, for the first occasion with deposed Prime Minister Qarase. That meeting was facilitated by leaders of the church in Fiji - by the Methodist and Catholic churches - and I very much welcome that dialogue. I note that the two leaders, Qarase and Bainimarama, together with the church leaders, have indicated that further meeting or meetings will be conducted. So I welcome that development. The only way forward for Fiji, is through a return to the rule of law, a return to respect for human rights and in the first instance that requires a democratically held election where there is full, free and fair participation.

Secondly, so far as China is concerned, I'm announcing today that Australia will double its assistance to China for the victims of the earthquake, providing another $1 million. You'd of course be aware that in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, Australia offered the assistance of its urban search and rescue expertise through the Emergency Management Australia. China was very grateful for that offer of assistance, but in the event, for logistical reasons, chose to accept such expertise and help from neighbouring countries, Japan, Korea and Russia.

And when I spoke to the Chinese Foreign Minister Mr Yang in the middle of last week, he was very grateful for that offer. And also appreciative of Australia's initial $1 million contribution which was to supply much needed emergency equipment, in particular blankets, water purification tablets and the like. And that was affected through the International Red Cross and the Red Cross Society of China.

Our announcement today, of a further $1 million, will also provide for emergency humanitarian supplies, tents, blankets, tarpaulins, water purification, and this will be provided direct. This follows on, not just my conversation with Foreign Minister Yang, but Australian officials and Chinese officials both in Beijing and Canberra have been in regular and continuing dialogue about assistance which Australia can provide. And I've also indicated to Foreign Minister Yang, as our officials have, that Australia stands ready to assist if there is any further way in which our - our help can be of assistance at this very difficult time.

I again, on behalf of the Australian Government and the Australian people, extend our condolences to the Chinese people at this terrible time as I did to Foreign Minister Yang last week. And can I also indicate that whilst at all times we've never received any indication that any Australian individual or citizen was in difficulty, we did have a number of Australians who were registered in China, in the effected areas and in the last 24 hours we've now accounted for all of those registered Australians. And so whilst, at all times, we never received any indication or had any cause for concern, we have now accounted for all of the registered Australians in the adversely effected areas.

Can I finish by making some remarks about Burma, and I'm happy to respond to your questions on these and other matters. I very much welcome the decision yesterday by ASEAN Foreign Ministers to take a keen interest in the aftermath of the cyclone in Burma. I welcome very much the decision made by the ASEAN countries in conjunction with the United Nations, and also in conjunction with the Burmese Government, to facilitate the delivery of aid into Burma through ASEAN and the United Nations.

I note that ASEAN and the UN will hold a donors pledging conference in Rangoon on the weekend. We also welcome that development and Australia will be appropriately represented at that donors' conference.

I spoke to Indonesian Foreign Minister Wirajuda on Sunday in advance of the ASEAN meeting and again made the point that Australia has been making publicly and privately, at every level from the Prime Minister down, that the single most difficult issue, so far as Burma is concerned, is getting the international aid and assistance in. And we very much regard this as a positive development and I welcome it very much.

I also note that information from the Australian NGOs overnight, indicating that they are worried about Australian citizen's contribution to Burma. The NGOs are encouraging Australian citizens to contribute. I endorse that. That's my advice: that Australians in the usual way should contribute as they have generously in the past in the face of so many international disasters.

But I think more important than my advice is the advice of Australian NGOs saying that despite the difficult circumstances, a number of the NGOs, both Australian and international, are still getting aid and assistance through on the ground.

So we very much welcome the development that we've seen as a result of the ASEAN Foreign Minister's meeting in Singapore yesterday and welcome the joint statement by the ASEAN Secretary General and the UN Secretary General. And we also, of course, welcome the fact that the UN Secretary General will be visiting Burma in the course of the next couple of days.

I'm happy to respond to your questions on these and other issues.

QUESTION:Well, actually, Mr Smith, isn't it disappointing though that they've taken nearly three weeks to take such strong action?

SMITH: Well, we've been urging the international community, both regionally and generally, to be doing everything that it can to persuade the Burmese authorities that this was not about a commentary on the Burmese regime, it was about getting humanitarian assistance. It may well be that some parts of the international community were a bit slow out of the blocks.

In some respects that's understandable, because in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone I don't think there was an appreciation as to how disastrous the consequences were. And in the days and the week after the cyclone itself, they very much grew an appreciation that this was a disaster on a monumental scale. So, I'm not proposing to reflect on the conduct of others today, other than to welcome very much what we regard as a significant and positive development.

And I note also, for example, that Mr Costello, who's been on the ground in Burma for some time, is also very much welcoming the development.

QUESTION: Do you have any reason to believe that the military, or rogue elements in the military, are behind the threat in Fiji?

SMITH: Well, I'm not proposing to comment upon the anonymous threats other than to say, as I did to the House, the Australian Government regards these threats as credible. I think the best reflection of the fact that they are credible threats is that the Fiji Police, immediately upon the threat being drawn to their attention, instigated an investigation. That investigation is ongoing and I'm not proposing to comment on that investigation, other than to say we welcome the cooperation that we've received from the Fiji Police and their investigation is ongoing.

QUESTION: Mr Smith, ahead of the August Pacific Leaders' Meeting, what is Australia doing to galvanise support around the region to pressure Fiji, the leadership in Fiji, to commit to those democratic elections? Are you lobbying actively other PIF members?

SMITH: Well, can I say firstly, in the case of the obligations that Fiji has under the Vienna Convention and the two threats that have been received, so far as our High Commissioner is concerned, everything that Australia has done, so far as its communications from my level down with the interim Government of Fiji, that has effectively been communicated to our Pacific Island Forum partners and colleagues. That's the first point.

Secondly, at Auckland, at the Fiji Foreign Minister's Forum, Australia, New Zealand, other countries, Tonga, Samoa, Niue, were nominated by the Foreign Ministers' Forum Meeting on Fiji to form part of a Ministerial contact group to assess the progress and movement towards an election, and to report to the August meeting of the Pacific leaders. And Australia has been indicating publicly and privately that we're very concerned about the lack of progress towards an election.

The Fiji interim Government, for example, has not yet appointed an election supervisor. So we've been making these points publicly and privately and I suspect that in the not too distant future there'll be a suggestion that the ministerial contact group start to consider what activity it should engage in in advance of the - of the foreign - in advance of the Leaders' meeting in Niue in August.

But I'd just make this point. Australia will not take a backward step when it comes to pursuing our policy approach, which is the need for Fiji to return to a democratic state, to respect human rights and to respect the rule of law. Which is why Australia has been at the forefront of criticism so far as Fiji is concerned, with recent deportations of media proprietors, and at the forefront of criticism of a lack of progress towards an election and the apparent lack of commitment by the interim Fiji Government. So, we will not take a backward step on our public policy approach.

QUESTION: Do you think there's a chance of sanctions being imposed on Fiji, if, by August the, Australia and other Pacific countries believe that Fiji is not fair dinkum about moving towards a democratic election?

SMITH: Well, Australia has sanctions on Fiji at the moment, as does New Zealand. We're not proposing…

QUESTION: [Indistinct].

SMITH: …we're not proposing t to increase or enhance those sanctions for the time being. But, this is…

QUESTION: Do you think there's a chance by August that other countries might support Australia, New Zealand - is there a chance Fiji might become a bit of a pariah State?

SMITH: I think in this, in this area, as in so many areas in foreign policy, we should cross each bridge as we come to it.

QUESTION: Are you thinking at all about recalling the High Commissioner?

SMITH: Ah, no, we have treated the anonymous threats very seriously. We have already taken additional personal security measures. We are, in the absence of response by the interim Fiji Government, so far as additional Fiji Police assistance is concerned, we are proposing to institute further security arrangements - both in terms of premises and personnel.

And we regard the action that we've taken as appropriate to date to protect the safety, security, and welfare of our people at the mission. But we have indicated, because of the threats, and because of the failure of the Fiji Government to date, to approve close personal protection provided by Australian Federal Police. And in the absence of advice in respect of further help from the Fiji Police, to say to the families of our officers in Fiji - to spouses, partners, and dependents - if you wish to voluntarily return to Australia, then we will facilitate that.

We think, at this stage, that this is the appropriate response, but we remain very concerned bout the threats against our High Commissioner. We remain vigilant, and we will continue to monitor this matter, effectively on a daily basis.

QUESTION: Re Burma - there's been a lot of speculation, both in Australia, but also overseas, about the possibility of a military-backed intervention, whether it be a good thing, bad thing - do you have any sympathy for that argument, and, on the flip-side, do you think that perhaps it's antagonising the regime and perhaps being unhelpful in speeding up the aid efforts?

SMITH: Well, I certainly don't believe that military intervention in Burma is the way forward. That's the first point. Secondly, there has been some discussion about the emerging notion of responsibility to protect. And we've even seen sort of duelling banjos of some of my predecessors, with Mr Evans in the I think The Age in the last couple of days, and Mr Downer last night on, on the ABC, contemplating the, the use of the emerging responsibility to protect doctrine in this type of situation.

And I think, I don't think either of my predecessors have taken it any further than saying that it's an emerging, an emerging debate. So far as military intervention is concerned, I think to be fair to be Mr Downer, if you actually read the transcript from Lateline last night, he wasn't actually suggesting that, he was more indicating that a conversation of the Security Council ought to be conducted.

I think the way forward is the way we've seen from ASEAN and the United Nations. From the very first moment, the Australian Government's position was that we were dealing here with a humanitarian crisis. The key point was to get aid and assistance in, not to reflect on the current regime; to put those issues to one side, and that's been the attitude of the Australian Government from day one. So all of our energy, as I say, from the highest levels, because the Prime Minister has spoken to a number of leaders in the international community, and I have spoken to a number of my colleagues, and our posts have been very very active. The key imperative here has been persuading the Burmese regime that it was essential to open up and to allow the international assistance to be given.

And there's a stark contrast. In China for example, we know that China is a considerable nation, and it has moved very quickly to take its own action. But it has also seen that, in certain tragedies and disasters of this nature, it's beyond the capacity of any one nation to deal with it by itself, and that's why you need an international community response.

QUESTION: Does that mean that a sort of quiet diplomacy perhaps might have been advisable in the case of Burma, or does it still mean that's sort of a vigorous criticism is…

SMITH: Well, I think …

QUESTION: …is warranted?

SMITH: …I think the overwhelming strand of thought from the international community has been to put our views of the regime to one side, and to seek to argue that, that they should open up for international assistance. And clearly part of our strategy has been to put those views to countries who have got a better relationship with the Burmese regime than we do. It's also the case I think that - and I made this point earlier in a different context - in the first couple of days in the aftermath of the cyclone, people could be forgiven for believing this was just another cyclone. Shortly after that it became apparent that this was a disaster on a monumental scale, and all thoughts about criticisms of the regime then were necessarily, in my view, put to one side.

QUESTION: Minister, just in relation to the kangaroo cull here in Canberra, what damage do you think that will do to Australia's image overseas? And is it just empowering the pro-whaling lobby in Japan?

SMITH: Well, can I say firstly that I don't have any ministerial responsibility for the cull, so I haven't been following it in precise detail. That's the first thing.

Secondly, the substantive answer to your question is, no, I don't think it will.

QUESTION: What was your reaction to the images that have come in, do you think that will damage our own image overseas - the one we're trying to foster as a holiday destination?

SMITH: Well, the relevant authorities here have their own cogent arguments as to why the cull is necessary, and that'll stand or fall on its own merits.

QUESTION: There was a huge outcry too from overseas, mainly America, that we're killing something on our Coat Of Arms, sitting just below you there - how does that make you feel, that they're, people over here, especially for tourism…

SMITH: Well, the relevant authorities here have an argument, a scientific and environmental and a sustainability argument which will stand or fall on its own merits.

And culls have occurred in the past in Australia. They may well occur in the future. And the scientific and public policy assessment will stand or fall on its merits.

And to date, Australia has always said, we believe that it'll, that it will stand on its merits.

QUESTION: Just back on China, you mentioned all [indistinct] have been accounted for so far. Have they been removed from the, from harms way, from that area, or are they at risk of aftershocks still?

SMITH: I'm happy to check the detail. My understanding is that some have left the area. Some remain and in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, the advice was effectively to, to stay where one was, that was less dangerous than moving.

But I'm happy to take that on notice and provide you with as much detail as we've got.

QUESTION: There are reports that some of the sons and daughters of the military junta are studying in Australia. Is the Government looking into that and is it seeking to take any action?

SMITH: Well, so far as Burma is concerned there are in existence both financial and travel sanctions on those individuals close to the regime. And from time to time instances are drawn to our attention, where someone from Burma who may well be close to the regime and fall within the category, are present in Australia. When that occurs - and it's drawn to attention - that is considered by Immigration, often by the Minister for Immigration and then considered by me as Foreign Minister with my general capacity so far as visas are concerned, to contemplate the presence or absence of an individual in Australia for foreign policy reasons.

Now from time to time, instances are drawn to attention where someone close to the regime maybe in Australia on a visa. In fact, I actually have one of those drawn to my attention in the last 24 hours and we will have a very close look at that. There's been publicity about a couple of individuals: can I just make this point - and there have been stories in the media, I think the Sydney Morning Herald in the last couple of days - one of those mentioned in dispatches is an Australian citizen, so the question of deportation doesn't arrive. The other is a permanent resident, so the issue, or the question of deportation is very limited, including for example serious criminal offences.

But from time to time, instances are drawn to attention where someone from Burma, close to the regime, is in Australia for temporary purposes, who may well have escaped the ambit of our travel sanctions. When that occurs, we look at them very carefully and respond accordingly.

QUESTION: Mr Smith could I just ask you a question about a Guest Worker Scheme for the Pacific. Can you lay out the benefits for introducing such a scheme; and do you think Australia will be as ambitious as New Zealand has been in terms of its trial - I think it's got something like 5000 people from the Pacific presently in New Zealand on the Guest Worker Scheme. Is that the sorts of levels that we would be looking at in the first instance?

SMITH: What I can lay out for you is the Australian Government's policy position which is as we committed ourselves to do in the run up to the election, to look very carefully at the New Zealand trial and program, which we're doing. I've made it clear in the past that we're having a very close look at that. I'm doing that and when I was recently in New Zealand I took the opportunity of discussing both at ministerial and at officer level, the analysis of their program. Parliamentary Secretary Bob McMullan has done likewise and we've committed ourselves, as you would recall, to going to the Pacific Island Leader's Forum in August with effectively a decision or a policy decision on this point.

So that matter remains under consideration. It was also raised with Australia at the Australia PNG Ministerial Forum and I indicated the same to our PNG colleagues on that occasion. So that matter remains under very active consideration by the Government.

QUESTION: Your own personal view, is there benefits in a Guest Worker Scheme? And how important will it be to have the union movement, which traditionally has been opposed, or very concerned, about guest workers coming in from anywhere.

SMITH: Can I say Mr Lewis that my personal view is inextricably interwoven with the Government's policy position, which I have outlined to you.

QUESTION: Mr Smith, can I just ask another question about Fiji. In Parliament last week I don’t think you outlined the actual nature of the second threat and we were assuming it was against the High Commissioner, but, but it would be fair to say that it's against all staff in the Commission [indistinct] with the…

SMITH: Well, both the…

QUESTION: [Indistinct]

SMITH: Both anonymous threats were vile and repugnant in the extreme. The first threat, in my view, was a clear death threat against the High Commissioner. The second threat was of the same order, but also could be interpreted as a wider threat to Australian officials at the High Commission. But in any event, from the first moment as soon as we received an anonymous effectively death threat to the High Commissioner, we treated that as a threat to our officers and their families and dependents in Fiji and we have responded accordingly.

QUESTION: Was there anything about the threats that - themselves that made you think that they were - they were credible?

SMITH: Well, I think as I've said the best advice as to the threats being regarded as credible was the immediate institution by the Fiji police of an investigation which is ongoing.

QUESTION: Has the interim government explained further why they won't supply the security?

SMITH: No, there was an exchange of third person notes: my request to the interim Fiji Foreign Minister, through a third person note, requesting unarmed Australian federal police, close personal protection. That was refused by a third person note.

My third person note also requested additional Fiji Police assistance and to date the Fiji interim Government has been silent on that point. And that's why I've announced our decision today to open up, for families if they so chose, the voluntary return.

But can I also make this point. If the Fiji Government changed their mind on close personal protection or give us a definitive and substantive response to our further request for Fiji police assistance, then obviously any such response, you know, we will - we will bear in mind as we monitor the safety, security and welfare of our people in Fiji.

Thanks very much. Cheers.

Media Inquiries: Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500