Transcript E&OE
22 October 2009
Question Without Notice
I have not received such advice. The first time I saw a suggestion that the vessel in distress may have been in distress as a result of actions of the people on board was when I read the front page of today's Australian newspaper.
As I made clear on radio this morning, it is very, very important in my view that we take allegations and suggestions like that very carefully and in an appropriate, methodical process.
Let us be very clear about the circumstances of this case. Calls were made to Australian search and rescue authorities indicating that a vessel was in distress. The vessel in distress was in the Indonesian search and rescue area. As a consequence of that, I am advised that Australian officials contacted the relevant Indonesian search and rescue maritime authorities to indicate that a vessel was distressed in an area that was the responsibility of Indonesia.
I am also advised that Indonesian officials indicated to Australian officials that they had no vessels in the vicinity and asked if Australia could help. Australian officials then contacted commercial shipping assets to see whether commercial assets were in the area, and when that inquiry indicated that no commercial assets were in the area the Armidale was sent to the vessel in distress.
I am advised two things occurred when the Armidale made contact with the vessel. One was that a young child on board was ill and may well have required medical attention. Secondly, a conclusion was made that the vessel was not able to go to port under its own steam. As a consequence the people on board, for humanitarian and for safety-at-sea obligations, were transferred to the Oceanic Viking. This was done at the request of the Indonesian search and rescue authorities and with the Indonesian search and rescue authorities being the lead agency.
The suggestion that somehow the vessel was in distress was, as I said, first drawn to my attention when it appeared on the front page of today's Australian, for a very good reason. The obligation and the requirement on the part of the Australian government, its officials and its agencies, and the obligation on Australia, is to discharge our humanitarian and our search and rescue operations on the high seas. That is in the interests of Australia and in the interests of Australian citizens and that was done.
When the suggestion was made that the vessel in distress may have been the subject of distress because of action by those on board. I might say that the only thing I have seen so far is the Australian newspaper, which cites ‘sources' that are not identified at all.
When the article was drawn to my attention, I made inquiries and the sensible advice I received was this: when the people on board the Oceanic Viking have been safely ported in Indonesia then in the normal course of events what will occur will be a review as to the circumstances leading to this matter.
I am not proposing to rely upon or respond to assertions. I am very happy to wait until I receive, and other ministers receive, the expert advice and the expert report from those on the HMAS Armidale and from those on the Oceanic Viking as to the state of the vessel in distress.
I also take the opportunity of drawing to the House's attention that today in Senate estimates the Ambassador for People Smuggling has said that he has not come to a concluded view. That will be done in the fullness of time methodically, sensibly, not emotionally, not in a way which seeks to score political points. But his understanding is that the rudder apparatus of the vessel was disabled.
We have seen examples in the past of where people jumped to conclusions about how things may have occurred on the high seas. And we have seen in the past some people try and take or make political advantage of that domestically in Australia off the backs of the most vulnerable people that we have seen, off the backs of those people at risk on the high seas, off the backs of those people who rely upon not just Australia but other nation states to discharge their obligations for search and rescue on the high seas. The request came from Indonesian search and rescue authorities for Australia to assist.
Of course anyone with any familiarity with these issues would know that when a request came from the Indonesian authorities to assist the vessel in the Indonesian search and rescue area if Australia had acted there may well have been immigration consequences to flow from that. Those consequences were not known conclusively at the time. They are not known now because the people onboard that vessel have not been the subject of the UNHCR procedures, and the Indonesian government has indicated they will be.
But whether there were to be immigration, refugee or asylum seeker consequences or not, Australia had a moral, a humanitarian and a national interest obligation to discharge our duties to rescue people in distress at sea, and that is what we did.
[ENDS]
Media inquiries
Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500