Robert McClelland (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

In that context and in the time available, perhaps by opening with a political comment that the minister may or may not want to respond to, we would argue that it seems that the Australian government is almost looking for things to do in Iraq after the Japanese depart and after the British hand over authority in the Al Muthanna province to Iraqi security forces. It would seem to us that we are actually looking for things to do when there are pressing issues in our region. That is not so much a question and the minister may or may not want to respond to it.

In the context of the pressing issues in our region, most urgent of course is our involvement in East Timor. I understand there is a total of some 2,600-odd members of the ADF there. The total number of troops is in the order of 1,400 on the ground. I have questions with respect to East Timor. To what extent has there been an analysis of the adequacy of the skill sets of our troops—that is not to demean their professionalism or dedication—in terms of controlling civil unrest and the capacity to quell riotous behaviour? Has there been an assessment of whether there was a need to, or whether there may be a need to in the future in similar situations, provide troops with riot gear, such as shields, riot helmets and so forth? To what extent will there be an evaluation as to whether we need to focus on that broader crowd and riot control skill set in the ADF? It has recently been pointed out to me that we have a military police battalion in the Victorian police that is trained to a riot control standard. To what extent, if any, has consideration been given to either expanding the capacity of that battalion or creating a similar skill set? That is not simply for a response in East Timor but, presumably over the next decade, may be required should a riot erupt in the Solomons or, regrettably, in some other country.

I acknowledge that this is with the benefit of hindsight—and temper my political remarks by that opening—but it was suggested in the Bulletin of 6 June that the training provided by Australians—we say by the Australian government—to the embryonic East Timorese defence force was inadequate. In particular, there was a reference to an allegedly secret memorandum—which the minister may not want to comment on—suggesting that as early as 2001 there were reports of the risks of the then embryonic East Timor defence force being susceptible to infiltration by criminal elements and also the potential for the former guerrilla fighters to fracture on the basis of ethnic and geographic lines. To what extent will the Australian government review the adequacy of training that we provided to the East Timorese defence force with a view to identifying whether it could have been done better and, indeed, with a view to looking at how we may wish to do it in the future in East Timor or other countries in the region?

See this speech in context