E&OE

4 June 2008

Press Conference

Australian High Commission, London

STEPHEN SMITH: I have just arrived from Rome so I might make some remarks about my visit to Rome. I was there of course for the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation high-level conference on food and food security and I think it is quite clear that the conference itself has been a good start to this issue.

I think it certainly raised international community and public awareness of the need to respond. I think the response has to be at two levels – firstly there is the urgent need for humanitarian assistance. Australia has responded with a $30 million contribution to the World Food Programme which I announced last month.

Secondly there is a need for more longer term public policy responses and these range from increasing yield and production from adapting to the adverse consequences of climate change, greater use of agricultural research and production techniques. Also Australia very strongly believes that this is not now the time to retreat from trade liberalisation so far as agriculture is concerned but it is all the more reason to advance it. And we very strongly believe that generally, but also in the context of high food prices and food security issues, that there is a very important need now for a good conclusion to the Doha round, that all of the problems we see in food security enhance arguments for trade liberalisation rather than detract from them.

In Rome I also had meetings with a range of people. Firstly with my Italian counterpart. Australia and Italy have a longstanding very good relationship, which historically comes from people to people exchanges. But is now much more significant than just the post World War II people to people exchanges which came from Italy being part of our World War II migration program.

Italy is now the second or the third highest economic exchange we have with European Union countries and we also now co-operate quite extensively on security and strategic matters. We both have troops, for example, in Afghanistan, and I made the point to my counterpart that one of the points that we’ve made since coming to office is the need to increase our engagement with the European Union and we had very productive and fruitful talks in that respect.

I also took the opportunity of meeting with Vatican officials - His Holiness the Pope of course travelling to Sydney in July for World Youth Day - and so I was pleased to be able to visit the Holy See and have discussions about that.

I also had a range of bilateral meetings including with UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon. Obviously we spoke about the food conference itself, but also spoke about Burma and the good work being done recently by the UN and ASEAN in trying to get aid into Burma. Australia, of course, remains concerned about the pace at which international assistance is getting into Burma. We also spoke about Zimbabwe and Fiji.

A range of other bilaterals: I was very pleased to be able to meet today with India’s Agricultural Minister to make the point, again, that Australia very much wants to enhance and broaden and deepen its relationship with India. We see our relationship with India in this century as being very significant and very important. The fact that the Indian Agricultural Minister is also the chair of the Indian Cricket Board did extend our bilateral about 10 minutes when we had a conversation about the Test series in Australia and the forthcoming tour in October and also the merits of Test cricket over Twenty-Twenty.

I also spent some time with US Secretary of Agriculture Schafer and EU Agricultural Commissioner Fischer Boel. So it’s a range of important and productive meetings based around the food security conference.

Our assessment of the conference is that there is nothing that we’ve seen emerging from conference deliberations which would be of great concern to Australia’s policy approach. There does seem to be a genuine appreciation of the need not just for short-term or immediate humanitarian responses but also for the longer term public policy changes which we need to offset higher food prices, higher fuel prices, higher input prices, difficulties of production caused either by drought or consequences from climate change, diversion of stocks to bio-fuels and greater consumption in developing nations which sees a diversion of food stocks to animal consumption for production of protein. So, complex issues which require a longer run approach.

I am very pleased to be here in London. I spent about three years here in my youth working and studying here so I am always pleased to return to London. And when I was handing out how to vote cards for the various state and federal elections when I was here I never got invited up this high, so I am pleased to be here.

I will be having a series of meetings, firstly with David Miliband my counterpart, about a range of matters underlining the importance of the Australia-UK relationship. Also, underlining our ambition to effect an Australia-EU partnership framework which the Prime Minister referred to on his own visit to the United Kingdom and Europe.

And in the context of food and food security, I’ll be having a conversation with Hilary Benn, Environment and Food Minister, and when I was in Rome I had a conversation with United Kingdom Development Assistance Minister, Douglas Alexander. I will also be seeing Lord Malloch-Brown, who of course has responsibility for Africa and Asia and United Nations matters and also having a meeting with the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth.

Just on a couple of other issues before I am happy to respond to your questions on those or any other matters, and I am sorry about the lengthy introduction.

Firstly, this the first opportunity I have had publicly to condemn the outrageous attack on the Danish Embassy in Islamabad. As it has been said, this is an attack upon two democracies and we condemn it absolutely.

Secondly, you may have seen media reports emerging in the last couple of hours from Zimbabwe of suggestions that Morgan Tsvangirai has been arrested. I have spoken to our Ambassador in Harare. He’s not in a position to confirm things over and above what we have seen from media reports. The Australian Government has made it clear in the past that we have been very concerned about intimidation and harassment and the very grave dangers of the forthcoming second round election not being free or fair, so we’re very concerned about the reports emanating.

We understand that the suggestion is that Mr Tsvangirai was arrested in Matabeleland North and has been detained for a number of hours but I’m not in a position to be of any further assistance other than to express our very serious concern about what appears to be ongoing harassment and intimidation so far as the brutal Mugabe regime is concerned, and our very worrying concerns about the prospects of a full and free and fair participation in the second round presidential run-off. I’m happy to respond to your questions on those or other matters.

JOURNALIST: Just on Rome, I think you said in your speech that trade reforms are the most important way of achieving some success for long term food security, how are you going to succeed where the previous Government didn’t?

SMITH: Well, we’ve made it clear that we think getting a successful conclusion to the Doha round is very important. No-one pretends that making ground on trade liberalisation is easy, particularly if that’s occurring in the agricultural context. But now that food security and high food prices is there in the consciousness of the international community, it actually adds to the argument that we need to make greater strides and make greater ground so far as trade liberalisation is concerned.

Whilst we think it is a very important part of the package, it’s not the only thing that can or should be done. A serious consideration about how much diversion there should be for bio-fuels: whether we’re better off resorting to the so-called second generation stocks for bio-fuels; the need to utilise agricultural research so far as greater yields are concerned; or adaptive techniques and production techniques and Australia’s got a very good reputation as an agricultural research and development player. So, what you do know about trade reform is that you’ve got to put your shoulder to the wheel to do it.

JOURNALIST: But can you do anything differently to what Alexander Downer was trying to do?

SMITH: Well our criticism of the previous government and I think you’re always best off looking at what we can do for the future rather than an exhaustive assessment of the past, our criticism is this area of the previous government was that it relied too much on bilateral trade arrangements and not enough on multilateral trade arrangements.

We’re happy to continue to pursue bilateral trade arrangements provided they are up to the mark so far as multilateral arrangements are concerned. So our criticism of our predecessors was that not enough effort was put into multilateral trade reform or trade arrangements, and that included the Doha round.

In the conversations I had, the bilateral conversations I had with agriculture ministers or counterparts in Rome, I continually made the point that making ground on trade liberalisation was very, very important generally, but also very important in the context of food security and opening up developing countries to markets and opening up greater production and greater quantities of food to developing nations.

JOURNALIST: Was there any hint in your talks with the American Secretary and the European Commissioner that they might actually lift their game on agricultural trade?

SMITH: Well, I don’t want to put words into their mouths, but in general terms I think there is a view that both generally and in the context of food security that getting a successful outcome out of the Doha round is very important and we should all be acting and working towards that endeavour.

In the past agriculture has often been a complex and difficult issue for Europe, the Common Agricultural Policy has long been a subject of criticism from Australia, and I made that point to the EU Commissioner Fischer Boel. I also made the point to the Secretary for Agriculture that Australia was very disappointed with the US Farm Bill. We didn’t and don’t regard that as a helpful contribution, but we continue to argue our case and it’s not as if we’re alone. There are a range of nation states that I spoke to on the margins of the meeting who, like Australia, believe that trade liberalisation and trade reform and a successful Doha outcome would be a very good thing for the international community.

JOURNALIST: Is there anything that Australia can do, given you’ve said so many things to Robert Mugabe before, is there anything you can do about a particular circumstance with the Leader of the Opposition being arrested?

SMITH: Well the first thing we have to do is to satisfy ourselves of the actual facts. As I say, we are very concerned at the reports that are emanating from Zimbabwe about an arrest of Mr Tsvangirai. This follows on a consistent course of conduct from the brutal Mugabe regime of harassment and intimidation, but the first thing we need to do is to carefully understand the facts.

But Australia is not a lone voice when it comes to arguing that Zimbabwe needs to return to a proper democratic state and the will of the Zimbabwe people needs to be respected and there needs to be a full and free participation in a fair election. Zimbabwe will obviously be one of the issues that I’ll have a conversation with Foreign Secretary Miliband about. But Australia has a longstanding keen interest in Zimbabwe, and I mentioned earlier that in my youth I was here working and studying and I was here at the time of the Lancaster House discussions about independence for Zimbabwe, so I have had a longstanding interest in it myself.

But in Australia we effectively have an expatriate Rhodesian community - and I choose my words carefully - and an expatriate Zimbabwe community, so there is keen interest in Australia. It’s also the case, and I have made this point to my counterparts in a number of Southern African Development Community states that Australia wants to play and take a greater interest in Africa generally. Whilst in the first instance these things naturally fall to Zimbabwe’s neighbours, the South African Development Community states and the African Union states, we have a voice in the international community and we use that voice publicly and privately when we think it will help.

JOURNALIST: The Opposition in Britain wants to close down more of Zimbabwe’s financial links with the outside world, is that a good idea?

SMITH: Australia has its own sanctions, both travel and financial, on Zimbabwe. They’ve been there for some time, we’re not proposing to disturb or change ours, and it makes the point to the Zimbabwe regime. I wouldn’t be proposing to be giving either the United Kingdom Opposition or the United Kingdom Government public advice about what they should do in terms of their own sanctions arrangements. I am happy to have that conversation privately, I am actually seeing Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague, as one does on visits such as this, and I am happy to listen to that view.

JOURNALIST: You talk in general terms about increasing Australian-EU relations, expanding the relationship perhaps with an agreement – is there any substance to that at all? Because you are cutting diplomatic posts across Europe, your three pillars of your foreign policy are America, the UN and Asia-Pacific and now we’ve got the Prime Minister talking about and Asia-Pacific Union, why should we think that you are actually serious about improving relations?

SMITH: Well I think there are a range of areas where frankly Australia’s relationship with a number of countries or a range of areas has frankly been under-done. I mentioned India earlier, I frankly think Australia has been neglecting its relationship with India for about 30 years. I think as well that there’s been not enough effort made so far as ASEAN and ASEAN nation states are concerned.

One of the things we want to do with the European Union is firstly to have a greater engagement and to reflect that with an Australia-EU partnership framework. Often it helps a lot if you turn up and show an interest. We don’t believe for example that our predecessors invested enough in either Europe generally or the European Union. There’s a lot that both from a trade and investment point of view, people-to-people exchanges, from an international security and strategic point of view, and Afghanistan is obviously a very clear example. There’s a lot that we can do with the European Union and with European countries. And yes, our three pillars are there for all to see, but the three pillars reflects our framework, but it’s not the only thing that we will do. So far as posts are concerned, we remain absolutely confident that we are in a position to discharge our foreign policy priorities and an Australia-EU framework agreement is part of that, and we are going to work very hard to get one.

JOURNALIST: Because when you say they didn’t invest enough, you’re the ones actually cutting back in your presence here.

SMITH: Well there is a difference between how many people you might have at a range of posts and what the government of the day wants to do so far as its priorities are concerned. Take the United Nations for example, we were very strongly critical of our predecessors, they didn’t invest enough time, effort and energy into the multilateral forums, particularly the United Nations. We’ve recently announced our candidature for the Security Council for the 2013/2014 period. Turning up and showing an interest in that context is a lot better than standing outside the building throwing rocks. So there is a lot you can do by just indicating that you see a particular country, a particular region, a particular thematic as being important. We think the European thematic is important and we propose to invest a fair amount of effort and energy into it.

JOURNALIST: Will you appoint a High Commissioner anytime soon?

SMITH: Well we’ve got a very competent Acting High Commissioner in whom we have complete confidence and we’ll appoint at High Commissioner at a time of our choosing and announce it at a time of our choosing.

JOURNALIST: What’s the problem, why is it taking so long?

SMITH: Well there is no problem, we’re very happy with the work that the Acting High Commissioner is doing. We’ve seen a very successful visit from the Prime Minister and we hope a successful visit by the Foreign Minister, but we’re entirely happy with our arrangements in the United Kingdom. We will move at a time of our choosing to make an appointment and we’ll do that, as I say at a time of our choosing and announce it at a time of our choosing. But we don’t see any difficulty with that and frankly nor do our UK counterparts.

JOURNALIST: Can I just ask about an issue that has come up at home – what’s your response to those that are wanting to keep the ban on aid money going to programs that give information about abortion?

SMITH: The history of this I think is reasonably well known. The previous government changed arrangements to prevent AusAid from directly or indirectly funding any abortion services as part of its aid program. In the last Parliament, the Parliamentary Committee on Population and Development presented a report which suggested that should be changed. I have instituted a formal process within our Parliamentary Party to enable the Parliamentary Party to express a view about whether we should stick with that current arrangement or change it. That process is underway and in due course we will make a decision about that matter.

JOURNALIST: But you’re personally in favour of scrapping it aren’t you?

SMITH: Well I haven’t expressed a view. The first thing I wanted to do was to give my Parliamentary colleagues a chance of expressing their view for this, I think, very sensible reason. In this issue there are strong views firmly held and often these views are held from a conscientious view point and I don’t criticise anyone for a view that they might have. I certainly wouldn’t describe anyone’s view in this area as being extreme. Often it’s a matter of personal conscientious choice.

There are strong views firmly held and people are entitled to have a different view about this issue. One of the things I wanted to do was not to indicate what my own personal view might be in advance of giving my colleagues the chance to consider the issue calmly in due course and that will help me make a decision in this matter. But I’m not proposing to rush it, not proposing to engage in a running commentary about it, but I would simply make this point – strong views firmly held often at a level of conscious and I am not going to be critical of anyone who expresses a view publicly or privately. In due course the Government will make a decision about whether we stick with the current arrangements or make a change.

JOURNALIST: I just wonder what you make of Barack Obama’s success and also a lot of people in Britain envy the American political process – they see it as being really re-energised by that face off between him and Hilary Clinton, what do you think?

SMITH: The Americans, the United States go through their own political process. It’s clearly the case that Mr McCain will be the Republican candidate. I am not aware yet whether Mrs Clinton has formally conceded, but it’s almost certainly the case we’re looking at an Obama McCain run-off. For those of us interested in electoral contests, any electoral contest is one to watch.

From the Australian Government’s point of view we will obviously work with whatever administration the American democratic system throws up, whether it’s a McCain administration or an Obama administration. In the meantime we work very closely and very well with the current administration and that reflects the strength and the fundamental basis of the alliance between Australia and the United States. It remains an indispensable part of our security and strategic and defence arrangements, and it does make the point.

We will see a change of administration in the United States in the course of November of this year and formally in January next year. Administrations come and go, Australian governments come and go, Republican, Democrat, Labor, Liberal – the alliance goes on. It has served both our nations well for 60 years. So it may well be an interesting electoral observation, but we’ll work with whoever emerges from that as the President. We’ll work with any new administration in the same positive, constructive manner we do with the current one.

JOURNALIST: The idea of an Asia-Pacific union – how does that differ from APEC and are we talking at all about a European Union?

SMITH: When you look at the Asia and Asia-Pacific regional architecture, I don’t think I’d be the first person or the only person who has made the point that it’s often confusing - there’s overlap, it’s diffuse - and whether you talk in terms of ASEAN, ASEAN Plus, the ASEAN Regional Forum, the East Asia Summit, APEC there are a range of pieces of the regional architecture and some aspects of it don’t reflect the modern reality. India for example not being part of APEC doesn’t reflect the modern reality. So there is clearly a need to have a look at the architecture.

The Prime Minister has put out a suggestion and we’ll be doing some work on that in the forthcoming months. We think it’s a sensible idea to have a conversation about the architecture. I haven’t, when I’ve gone around having conversations with my counterparts or colleagues in the Asia-Pacific region, I don’t think anyone has been suggesting that the architecture is perfect. We also, of course, have an interest in the North Asia architecture and what, if anything, might emerge from the current Six-party talks.

So it’s a question of is there a more effective piece of architecture we can strike upon and I think just having the conversation, even if no change comes from that, just having the conversation may well make the current arrangements more effective.

JOURNALIST: Is the European Union any sort of role model here?

SMITH: If you actually look at the suggestion for an Asia-Pacific arrangement, it was part of the original suggestion of the first APEC meeting, so no-one is suggesting it is a novel idea. But I think it is worthwhile trying to have some focus over the next period on the effectiveness of the current architecture and whether there might be a better model or models. I think just having the conversation is of itself of utility.

JOURNALIST: Because the European Union actually share sovereignty, we’re not talking about that sort of model?

SMITH: No.

JOURNALIST: When the Prime Minister was here he raised the question of a Republic, is that something that is on your agenda?

SMITH: Well it’s our Party and our Government’s policy that we move to an Australian Republic, but the Prime Minister has made it clear that it’s not something that he sees as being a first priority. And I think there’s also something of a view in the Australian community that if we are to move to a Republic the appropriate time to do that is when the current Monarch moves off the stage, if I could put it as elegantly as that. So yes, an Australian Republic is inevitable, when that occurs time will tell, but it’s not something that we regard currently as a first order or our highest priority.

JOURNALIST: It’s not an issue you will be discussing on this trip?

SMITH: Oh, I’m happy to have the conversation if anyone brings it up but it’s not on my list of items that I’ve got for conversation with my counterparts, but I’m happy to have the conversation publicly or privately.

JOURNALIST: And just briefly, your major points that you’ll be discussing with David Miliband?

SMITH: Well obviously I want to have a conversation with him about the food security conference, as well as having that same conversation with some of his relevant portfolio counterparts, Mr Benn, as I did with Douglas Alexander, the Development Assistance Minister. There are a range of things that we have interest in – Zimbabwe, Burma, I also want to update on him our concerns in Fiji, but also Afghanistan, and the post Bucharest arrangements in Afghanistan.

So there are a range of issues of mutual interest and those particular matters are of course over and above just the ongoing first class nature of the Australia-UK relationship: not just Government to Government, but nation to nation and people to people; and our desire to be more engaged in the European Union and reflect that with an EU-partnership framework.

JOURNALIST: Britain (inaudible) using Australia to expand its role in Asia, is that something you will be discussing?

SMITH: Britain in its own right has interests and activities in Asia and the Asia-Pacific and we work co-operatively with the United Kingdom on that front, whether it’s development assistance or more generally. I am not going to be proposing anything new or formal, but in the Asia-Pacific as is the case generally, we work very closely and co-operatively and well with the United Kingdom Government.

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