Martin Ferguson (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Resources, Forestry and Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

The fact that the Australia-Japan Foundation (Repeal and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2006 is before the Main Committee does not reflect in any way on its importance; it merely reflects the fact that it is a non-controversial bill in terms of the proceedings of the House. The bill is important because our relationship with Japan, both culturally and economically, is exceptionally important. We should never forget, given the focus on China and India as the new engine rooms of world economic growth, that in recent historical terms Japan has been central to repositioning Australia in the 20th and 21st centuries for the purposes of where we go economically.

The bill abolishes the Australia-Japan Foundation as a statutory authority, but this in no way reflects any diminution of the very special relationship between Australia and Japan. I want to underline the importance of that relationship, not just as a member of the Australian parliament but also as the Labor Party shadow minister with responsibility for resources, energy, forestry and tourism. Just think about those economic sectors and the strategic economic relationship that we as a nation have forged with Japan since the Second World War. Our relationship with Japan is equally as important as our relationship with any other nation in the world. Both sides of the House have worked hard to forge that relationship. Japan has worked equally as hard to forge its relationship with Australia.

In historical terms I note the work of Black Jack McEwen. In the face of hostility from many, he led the decision to forge the Australia-Japan Commerce Agreement of 1957. Since that time Japan has become, without doubt, our most important trading partner. I therefore note that this year we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Basic Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between Australia and Japan, which was signed in Tokyo on 16 June, 1976 and came into force just one year later, on 21 August 1977. I have a notice of motion in today’s Notice Papernotice of motion No. 43, seconded by the member for Rankin, Dr Emerson—which we would love to have debated during this sitting fortnight, but unfortunately the Selection Committee has decided that there are other more important and pressing issues, such as interest rates and petrol, to be debated at this point of the parliamentary cycle.

The bill’s key provisions express the mutual interest of Japan and Australia in being a stable and reliable supplier to, and market for, the other. Japan and Australia have a mutual interest in wide-ranging areas—political, human rights, legal, scientific, technological and environmental. Whilst there are some 18 specific agreements advancing bilateral relations between the two countries, I believe the basic treaty remains the pre-eminent formal agreement in the bilateral political relationship. Just think of the leadership involved in putting that agreement in place. It might only be 30 years ago, but just think of the tension that existed in both countries because of the Second World War, which surrounded the development of the original treaty.

It is interesting to note that the original proposal was initiated by former Prime Minister Whitlam in 1973. In initiating it, he sought to alleviate lingering suspicions in, and a lack of confidence by, Australia with respect to the Australia-Japan relationship. The negotiations were completed by the Fraser government in 1976, clearly reflecting the bipartisan nature of support for the relationship between Australia and Japan across the political spectrum in Australia. The commitment to the basic treaty remains bipartisan today, as reflected by the contributions to this debate to date.

In more recent times it is also important to note that the two countries were founding members of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation group initiated by the Hawke-Keating government in 1989. As we all appreciate, APEC is now the most important focus for dialogue in the region on economic, political and security issues. Australia and Japan were also founding members of the ASEAN regional forum in 1994, which I believe is the leading multilateral cooperative grouping which aims to develop dialogue and confidence-building measures to advance security in East Asia. Each one of these initiatives has been exceptionally important to the security of our region and its economic prosperity.

The relationship was further advanced by former Prime Minister Keating in 1995 with the joint declaration of the Australia-Japan partnership, which committed the two countries to advance prosperity, reduce tensions and advance political stability in the region. Under the Howard government, the relationship has expanded to include closer bilateral discussions involving the United States—a further step forward. I also believe it is wonderfully symbolic that Japanese and Australian soldiers have served side by side in Iraq in the endeavour, however flawed in its implementation, to build democracy in that country.

The foundation will be re-established, as we appreciate and as is reflected in the bill, as a non-statutory body within the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, reflecting the same administrative arrangements as are in place for similar bilateral agreements. That effectively means there is no diminishing of its importance; merely, it is a streamlining of administrative arrangements for the purposes of making sure that this foundation operates in the most efficient and constructive way.

Obviously the focus of the foundation’s work to date has been on increasing mutual understanding through the building of cultural and educational links. Those links, as we all appreciate, are exceptionally important in also strengthening our economic ties. I therefore contend that, at this point, it is also important to reflect on the importance of this work, particularly as we remember the horrendous loss of life and massive destruction caused by the use of nuclear weapons against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 61 years ago last Sunday. I am one who has been fortunate enough to visit the peace park in Hiroshima, and a photo of the dome has been in my office, as president of the ACTU and as the member for Batman and as a shadow minister, for many, many years. Having also visited Auschwitz in recent times, I understand the importance of trying to make sure that we do everything we can in this world to remove international tensions, to establish a sense of peace and goodwill and to live in a harmonious way with the various nations of the world.

I think it is timely to remember these events as we face today the greatest threats to international security since that time, with continuing war in Iraq and Lebanon, with the threat of nuclear weapons proliferations in rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea and with the threat of terrorism made all the worse by recent events in the Middle East. I think we should remember, in debating the importance of this bill, that there is nothing glorious about war. No-one would understand that more right now than the Lebanese Australians grieving for their country and their countrymen, many of whom—both Christian and Muslim—live in my electorate in the northern suburbs of Melbourne. I understand from speaking to them and their extended families their feelings of anguish and upset at the moment as they worry about what is happening in their country of Lebanon.

Having said that, I note that, whilst those who fought for Australia in previous wars understand this experience well, my generation and those that have followed are very fortunate in having been relatively sheltered from the impacts of war. But that was not the unfortunate experience of our fathers and our grandfathers. I am sure it is very difficult for those soldiers returning from Iraq to convey their experience to family and friends who, by and large, have known nothing but 61 years of relative peace and safety in our country. Whilst convention has it that the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought peace to the world, let us not forget that it came at a very great price to the people of Japan—a price, I argue today, that should be avoided at all costs, through diplomacy and a global commitment to nuclear non-proliferation now and in the future. It is a current debate; it is not a debate of the 20th century.

I note that my brother and colleague, the member for Reid, reminded the House of that price in his commemoration contribution on VP day last year. He said:

By August 1946, it was estimated that 118,000 people had already died as a consequence of the bomb, 30,000 had been severely injured and another 48,000 were missing. In the interim, of course, the number of deaths has increased greatly, to almost a quarter of a million people now, of whom 5,000 last year were regarded as victims. Their deaths were consequent upon the destruction at Hiroshima. Just to give one description of it all, it is said:

‘The blast of furnace heat flattened forty-two square miles of Hiroshima, and set what was left on fire. About 78,000 people died immediately, over 40,000 were horribly burned and some 14,000 were missing. Of 76,327 buildings, about 48,000 were completely destroyed and more than 22,000 severely damaged. Some 180,000 survivors were homeless, many of them soon to develop a deadly new illness they called atomic disease.’

I raise these issues because we should always remind ourselves of what occurred and how the foundation upon which we had to work so hard to establish the very sound cultural and economic relationship that now exists between Australia and Japan and Australian allies was set up. Of course, part of the diplomatic effort I referred to earlier includes initiatives like the Australia-Japan Foundation.

I am sure that many in the Australian community would believe that Australia is now a mature country and that the building of mutual understanding is really a thing of the past, as it is something that we have already achieved. I remind members of this place that, sadly, this is a long way from the truth. I believe there is much more work to be done not only between Australia and Japan but among and between many other countries and peoples of the world, including the challenges that exist in our own region. The recent Dean Jones incident comes quickly to mind. No-one in public life can afford to take racial vilification lightly. We need to remember that not everyone who wears a hijab is a terrorist or an extreme Muslim, just as not everyone who wears a cross is an extremist Christian.

This is a time when Australia needs more than ever to promote a culture of tolerance and inclusion. It is our job in public life to do more to denounce fearmongering and vilification of Muslims and any other minority groups in our communities. It is our job to rebuild a more tolerant society and to break down the barriers of mistrust and division that this government has built in the community over the last nine long years. It is our job to reconnect the nation and its people, to foster acceptance and inclusion, and to ease the fear that today divides people of different faiths and backgrounds. That is why the Australia-Japan Foundation and others like it are so important to Australia and the world at large.

I said earlier that, along with diplomacy, never has nuclear nonproliferation been more important. We never want another Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Australia therefore has no greater international obligations and no greater international opportunities than those granted by our position as a nuclear supplier. We are at the centre of a nuclear cycle. We are the second biggest supplier of uranium in the world and, potentially, we are the biggest supplier of uranium in the world with the biggest mine—Olympic Dam in South Australia. It is therefore our responsibility, with likeminded nations such as Japan, to lead the world on non-proliferation efforts, just as we led on APEC and other regional and international initiatives. It is a challenge of today, not a challenge of the future.

The world is threatened by the collapse of the existing non-proliferation regime, and we must do everything in our power to prevent that. A Labor government would forge a new diplomatic initiative against nuclear proliferation, led by Australia, including a review to strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. We believe that Japan would be a trusted ally in those objectives.

Under the nuclear non-proliferation regime, there is nothing illegal about any country having processing or reprocessing technology. Yet the acquisition of highly enriched uranium or separated plutonium is one of the most difficult and important steps towards making a nuclear weapon. If a country with a full nuclear fuel cycle decided to break away from its non-proliferation commitments, a nuclear weapon capability would be within its reach within a very short time. That is why the world is frightened of what is going on in Iran at the moment. And, as the UN struggles to hold Iran to account under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards regime, it has never been clearer that the nuclear non-proliferation treaty must be reviewed to make it more relevant to today’s issues and more effective in a modern world.

None of us wants rogue nations possessing uranium and enrichment capacity. It is therefore disappointing to note that so few nations supported the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s proposal for a five-year moratorium on the enrichment of uranium and production of plutonium at the last nuclear non-proliferation review conference in May 2005. Unfortunately, Australia was one of the many and not one of the few. That is the difference between John Howard’s Australia and Kim Beazley’s Australia. John Howard’s approach to the nuclear cycle is no holds barred. I think there should actually be some caution. But the Labor Party will stop to think about national security, global security, the safety of workers and the protection of the environment. Our position is clear: there should be no new uranium processing or reprocessing facilities anywhere in the world unless there is a review of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in our proper international regulatory framework—and that includes Australia. I commend the bill to the House. It is important that we maintain the strength in our relationship with Japan. It has served both countries well in the past, and there is no doubt it will serve us both culturally and economically well in the future.

See this speech in context