• Home
• Media releases
• Transcripts
• Speeches
• Statements
• Current Minister
• Department

STEPHEN SMITH: Thanks very much for turning up. Can I officially welcome Singapore's Foreign Minister George Yeo to Canberra and Australia. George is here in the course of this week as a guest of the Australian Government. He visits Canberra, Sydney and also Perth, so we're very pleased to host him.

It's not George's first visit to Australia. He was last here as Foreign Minister for the APEC meeting in 2007 but it's his first bilateral visit to Australia since 2005 and we're very pleased to see him here. George is very much a good friend of Australia and we appreciate that very much.

The relationship between Australia and Singapore is very strong. Australia and Singapore have a comprehensive bilateral relationship. It is not just trade and investment, it is also defence cooperation, it is also strategic discussions and engagement - not just bilaterally but also in our region through the ASEAN-related administrative arrangements and also conversations at the multilateral level, in particular the United Nations.

The comprehensive nature of our relationship is reflected by the so called 3+3 meetings where Foreign Ministers, Defence Ministers and Trade Ministers meet every two years. And we had a very successful meeting in Singapore last year and we will meet in the 3+3 configuration in Australia next year.

The economic relationship between Australia and Singapore is very important and very strong. Singapore is Australia's largest trading partner from amongst the ASEAN members and our largest investment partner from amongst the ASEAN investors and our sixth largest trading partner overall.

In addition to that very strong trade and investment relationship, we have very significant people to people links. We have nearly 10,000 Singaporean students in Australia and a high number of Australian tourists visiting Singapore each year and a high number of Singaporeans also visiting Australia each year.

We've had a very productive conversation this morning, a formal bilateral meeting. George met earlier with the Prime Minister but our discussion, as Foreign Ministers, traversed not just our bilateral relationship but also the things we do together in the region, touching upon APEC, touching upon the ASEAN-related regional arrangements and looking to the future of our region, touching upon the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the ASEAN economies combined.

We also touched upon Afghanistan where Singapore provides medical assistance and we value very much our relationship with Singapore in Oruzgan Province.

So, George, we're very pleased to see you here. I invite you to make some opening remarks and then we'll happily take your questions. So, George, welcome.

GEORGE YEO: Thank you. Thank you, Stephen, always a pleasure to come back to Australia, among friends. It's a relationship which goes back to empire days. We'll always be grateful to Australia for all the help it gave us in the early years of our independence, to build up institutions.

I myself had Australians as consultants when I was in the armed forces. Until today the Australian Government affords the Singapore armed forces generous training facilities in the country.

Economically the relationship is going from strength to strength and we take some pleasure in the fact that last year we overtook the UK as one of your major trading partners. Singapore investments in the country are now quite significant and there are over 2000 Australian companies based in Singapore.

I had the privilege of negotiating the Free Trade Agreement between Singapore and Australia some years ago and that has brought our economic relationship to a high level.

As Steve said, on all fronts the relationship is getting closer, denser, deeper and the re-emergence of China and India on the global stage has altered trade flows, altered developmental trends and Australia is more and more integrated into a larger Asian economy and Singapore benefits from that.

I remember when we concluded the Free Trade Agreement, I told Mark Vaile, my counterpart, half in jest but only half, I said this agreement makes us your northernmost territory in Asia and, to some extent, it is true, and it shows also in the way we share common perceptions about the evolving regional architecture.

I had a very good meeting with Prime Minister Rudd this morning and we discussed, among other things, the regional architecture. I thanked him for the contributions he has made towards ASEAN thinking on how to strengthen that regional architecture, taking into account the rise of China and India and the importance of embedding the US in the region for the long term.

We discussed different options, the [inaudible] be enlarged to include Russia and the US or separate configuration, what we call ASEAN+8 but always, as the Prime Minister said, keeping ASEAN at the centre. And he put it very well, he said it's axiomatic, in other words, there's no need for further discussion about this and that, I think, expresses the common perception that Singapore and Australia, that ASEAN and Australia share in our view of the future. Thank you.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thanks very much, George. We're very happy to take questions on Singapore-Australia bilateral relations. If you've got questions in other areas, I'm happy to take those when we've concluded those.

QUESTION: I've got a question for Mr Yeo. You were just speaking about options for regional integration, I was wondering what you think of the Prime Minister's ideas about a new Asia-Pacific community, those particular ideas that he's put forward. Is that something Singapore would support or would you prefer to stick primarily with an ASEAN-based regional integration?

GEORGE YEO: I think our concerns, our preoccupations are the same, which is how to create amidst changing economic trends in the region, how do we create a regional architecture which ensures that new stresses are accommodated, the strategic balance, and we continue to enjoy peace and stability.

If we have peace and stability for another generation, the region will be transformed beyond recognition and the rest of the world with it.

I would say on the big issues, we are almost in complete agreement. There is some question whether in the original proposal, ASEAN was central to it and we, ASEAN, were naturally worried about that. But that was quickly clarified and I think Australia's quite happy to leave ASEAN to discuss how that original configuration should evolve. And the ASEAN Ministers will be meeting in Hanoi next month and this will be an important subject of discussion. I hope we can come to an early decision, but we'll see.

But I will say Prime Minister Rudd, in particular, and Australia generally have contributed much to the discussion in ASEAN about how that original architecture can be improved and strengthened.

STEPHEN SMITH: Can I just add to that. We're very pleased with the conversation that we've had today with Foreign Minister Yeo, both with the Prime Minister and my own discussion.

We're very much now, I think, at a stage where - reflected by the recent ASEAN leaders communique from Hanoi - very much at a stage where we want to see greater engagement by the United States and also Russia in our region through the ASEAN-related architecture.

And as George has said, it's now a question whether ASEAN itself determines whether the East Asia Summit should be expanded by two, or whether there's a new configuration ASEAN+8 and we're very happy to leave that to ASEAN to deliberate over in the first instance.

We've been very pleased with the way in which we've made a contribution to the question of regional architecture. The whole purpose of our contribution, the Prime Minister's contribution, was to make the point that with the rise of China, the rise of India, with economic and strategic, military and political influence moving to our part of the world, we had to get the regional architecture right for the future.

And one of George's and my colleagues said to me recently, when you look at the suggestions that had been made, former Japanese Foreign Minister Hatayama's East Asia community, Australia's Asia-Pacific community, it was very much a case that East Asia community equalled Asia-Pacific community, equals an expanded East Asia Summit, equals ASEAN+8.

So it's very much now, I think, a question as diplomats or foreign ministers would put it, a matter of modalities as to the way forward. But the important strategic point is getting the architecture right for our part of the world into the future with the rise of those significant influences. But also as George has put it, ensuring the ongoing presence of the United States in those arrangements.

QUESTION: So, Mr Yeo, could I just clarify, is Singapore now a supporter of Australia's Australia Pacific community idea?

GEORGE YEO: Let me put it this way, we find elements in the APc proposal which are positive and which are helpful to the discussion within ASEAN as to how the original architecture should be strengthened. And we thank Australia and we thank Prime Minister Rudd for this.

QUESTION: Minister Smith, are you concerned that only 13 of the people convicted over the Bali bombings and the Australian Embassy attack are still incarcerated?

STEPHEN SMITH: We're exhausted on Australia and Singapore? Okay. Sorry go on.

QUESTION: Are you concerned that out of the 70 people convicted for terrorism offences over the Bali bombings, only 13 are still in jail?

STEPHEN SMITH: Let me make some general points. We are very pleased with the relationship that we have with Indonesia so far as cooperation is concerned in the counter-terrorism area. And on any measure, Indonesia has been very successful, indeed if not the most successful country in the last half dozen years, of disrupting and tracking down terrorists. And we have, and continue to work in very close cooperation with Indonesia and we're very pleased with that.

Indonesia has its legal system, and how people are dealt with within the Indonesian legal system is a matter for Indonesia. Australia has its own legal system where people are sentenced and depending upon the judicial sentence are eligible for parole or not, as the case may be. So I don't propose to, and never have made comments on any other country's judicial or legal system.
We know that we have ongoing threats so far as terrorism is concerned. That's central to the reason why we continue to make an effort in Afghanistan and we're very pleased with the cooperation that we get from Indonesia in this respect.

QUESTION: Just on the subject of the Bali bombing, the chief architect of the 2002 Bali bombings - the alleged chief architect, Hambali, is still sitting in Guantanamo Bay detention centre, where he's been for - I think it's eight years now. Might be a bit longer.

But there appears to be absolutely no movement in terms of bringing him to justice. Have you had any conversations with the Americans about what's going on over there and when we can expect to see some resolution, or some accounting with, you know, as I say, the man who is alleged to have killed 88 of our citizens?

STEPHEN SMITH: I've been asked about this publicly before and my response is the same, which is in the first instance, it is a matter for the United States authorities and also in the first instance, a matter for the Indonesia, he being a citizen of that country. And I've had enquiries about the matter in the past and my response is the same.

QUESTION: On another issue, Mr Smith, have the Chinese made any representation to you whatsoever, about the Prime Minster's comments outside Copenhagen?

STEPHEN SMITH: To me? Well, the alleged comments, the alleged comments that I've seen reported in newspapers in an unattributed way, to me, no.

QUESTION: Are you concerned about how it might be received in China? The reporting of those comments?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well they, as I discern them, are alleged remarks, reported in an unattributed fashion in Australian newspapers. That's the first point.

Secondly, we have a very strong relationship with China, both economically and in other areas, and I don't expect that unattributed reports in Australian newspapers will disturb that.

QUESTION: Are you upset that they have been reported on the eve of the visit of the Vice President?

STEPHEN SMITH: If I thought that I could influence in any way what Australian newspapers reported, I might put my mind to that. But I think if I did, I would be unsuccessful. What Australian newspapers publish is entirely a matter for Australian newspapers.

We are very pleased that Vice President Xi is visiting Australia. It's a significant visit. It is another high level visit, which reflects the very strong relationship between Australia and China. I met the Vice President last year when I was, myself, in China, and we very much look forward to a significant visit.

QUESTION: So the Prime Minister, you're saying the Prime Minister didn't make those comments?

STEPHEN SMITH: No, I'm saying that all I have seen is unattributed, alleged comments reported in Australian newspapers. I don't in anyway regard those comments as disturbing the strength - or those reports - I don't in any way regard those reports as in any way disturbing the strength of the relationship between Australia and China, reflected by the pending visit of Vice President Xi, but also reflected in the past by, for example, the signing of the Gorgon agreement, the single largest export contract agreement that Australia has entered into in any area.

QUESTION: With the visit of the Chinese Vice President next week, could you just tell us a bit about some of the hot topics that will be discussed with him, and some of the things he'll be doing when he's here?

STEPHEN SMITH: I'm not the publisher of either his or the Prime Minister's diary, firstly. Secondly, the Chinese authorities have published some aspects of his visit. He will of course be in Canberra, he'll be meeting with the Prime Minister and other Ministers, but I'll leave the formal publication of that to the usual course of action by officials.

STEPHEN SMITH: In terms of topics of conversation, the topics of conversation will, as they always do, traverse bilateral, regional and global issues.

QUESTION: On the mining tax, quickly, there has been a flurry of reports now that the Government is close to securing some kind of deal - finalising its arrangements with the mining companies. Is that the case?

And - sorry if I - sort of double-barrelled question - and are we likely to see some sort of differentiated tax that would make allowances for different parts of the sector?

STEPHEN SMITH: I've seen a flurry of reports and comments about this matter generally, and my advice remains the same, which is the Government is going through an exhaustive consultation process with the industry that commenced with the Treasury process. It now includes the process which the Prime Minister himself has described as a negotiation process with Ministers, in particular the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the Minister for Minerals and Energy, and those conversations and negotiations are ongoing.

And as I indicated publicly yesterday, I'm not proposing to put a time line or a timetable on those matters. The details of those discussions and negotiations are in the first instance, carried by Minister Ferguson and the Treasurer. I think Minister Ferguson has made some remarks earlier this morning and in respect of your second question, I'm very happy to leave it on that basis.

More generally, can I say this, I have seen a flurry of statements and feverish reporting. I have seen a flurry of overblown statements and I think the most effective way through, not just for the Government but also for the minerals and petroleum resources industry, is to very calmly work through the detail of what the Prime Minister has described as generous transitional and implementation matters. To do that in a very calm way behind closed doors rather than in a flurry of media activity. That's been my advice both to the industry and others for the last two weeks.

QUESTION: Nothing's overblown, though, about the political damage it's doing, surely - particularly in your own home state of West Australia. I mean, are you concerned that this is…

STEPHEN SMITH: One of the points I've made publicly and privately is that one of the things which is occurring in Western Australia is a lot of noise. I'd much prefer it if there was more light, and the best way of throwing light on these issues is the industry sitting down with the Government, engaging in the consultation and the negotiation process.

At the moment we're going through a process. In the end, the minerals and petroleum resources industry, the Australian public, the voters in various electorates will judge the Government on the outcome. And what we are indicating very clearly is that we do see a need for the introduction in the minerals resources area, of a profit-based tax. That is the basis of the taxation arrangements we have for petroleum resources, that a profit-based tax is a much better way forward that an ad valorem, or tax on volume, firstly.

Secondly, it's acknowledged by everyone except Mr Abbott that the minerals resources industry does need to pay more tax for the use of the resources, for the access to the resources, the one-off resources that it gets. That's generally accepted. That was the argument of the Minerals Council to the Henry Review itself.

So there is solid ground on the need for a profit-based tax in the minerals resources area. There is solid ground for the minerals resources industry paying more tax. The only person who doesn't agree with those two notions is Mr Abbott.

As for the rest, I'm very happy for the people of Western Australia, and the people of Australia generally, to judge the Government on the outcome. And as I've said to individual members of the industry in Canberra and in Western Australia and said publicly, the best way to effect a sensible outcome is to engage in a calm way with the discussions and negotiations behind closed doors, rather than in front of TV cameras.

QUESTION: Mr Smith, a bit of a disappointing result for the Socceroos over the weekend. Are you sticking with the team? Are you hoping they might redeem themselves in the last couple of games?

STEPHEN SMITH: I'm certainly sticking with the team. I of course, like many others, was up at 2:30am precisely in Perth to watch it. And like everyone, was disappointed. Having watched the whole game, I'm never critical of referees, but I did believe that the Cahill challenge was a yellow card, rather than a red card. So, we certainly hope that his appeal is successful. We always knew we were in a tough group, but I'm sure they will bounce back in the finest traditions of Australian sporting endeavours.

More generally, can I just say that we are very pleased with the arrangements we put in place for Australians visiting South Africa for the World Cup, following the Socceroos. I announced last week in Perth a range of additional consular information and advice. So we certainly hope that they continue to follow our advice: register on Smartraveller; make sure they take out their comprehensive insurance; and follow Facebook and Twitter and the travel advice; and also get any additional instructions or advice from our mobile embassies at the games.

And I'll also continue to be quietly confident that the Australian Soccer Federation is making good ground for its World Cup 2022 bid. It was always ambitious to contemplate three World Cups in a row in the Southern Hemisphere: South Africa, Brazil and Australia. But I think we can be optimistic that we'll get a good run for 2022 and the bringing of the World Cup to Australia would certainly be a terrific event, which George and I in our retirements could watch.

[Laughter]

STEPHEN SMITH: Everyone happy? Thanks very much.

GEORGE YEO: Thank you.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thanks, George.

ENDS

Media inquiries

• Minister's Office: (02) 6277 7500
• Departmental Media Liaison: (02) 6261 1555