Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On indulgence: I rise to speak on this matter. Recently in both Samoa and Sumatra there have been some great tragedy and natural disaster. Yet this is certainly not something new in these regions. We know particularly over recent years of earthquakes around the ring of fire in the Indian Ocean and also there have been undersea earthquakes around the Pacific ring of fire. These have, for recorded history, inflicted pain and suffering on the peoples that live in those areas—no more so than back on 26 December 2004, when close to 230,000 people around the Indian Ocean lost their lives following an earthquake and then a tsunami that devastated a number of countries in that region.

It was only at the end of September that this most recent tragedy took place. I would begin by talking a little bit about Samoa and what has been called the Samoan earthquake but has wreaked havoc not only on the Samoan nation but also on American Samoa and, to a degree, on Tonga. Following an 8.0 magnitude undersea quake it has been reported by various sources that as many as 143 people lost their lives in Samoa, and 143 is a significant amount of people. There is no doubt about that, particularly when you hear that there were villages wiped out and families very badly affected. Then when you consider that the island of Samoa has a population of only 179,000, to have lost 143 in one event is a major tragedy that will no doubt be remembered for the history of that nation.

In American Samoa they had 32 confirmed dead out of a very small population of 65,000, and on one of the islands of Tonga nine people out of population of 104,000 were lost. These are very small nations but they have suffered greatly. Beyond the deaths we certainly know that the damage to infrastructure and homes has been absolutely devastating. I know, as other speakers have and will, we applaud the efforts of those involved with reconstruction and alleviating the suffering of people, the survivors, and helping those countries get back on their feet. We appreciate that.

We know that Samoa is in the Pacific Ocean and we also know that the Pacific tsunami warning system established in Hawaii has been operating effectively for many years. Apparently at the time, or shortly after the earthquake in Samoa, it was registered by the Pacific tsunami warning system that the ocean rose three inches right above the epicentre of that earthquake. That sounds so small and insignificant, but there were four tsunami waves that crashed into Samoa that were three or four metres in height. They were all from that earthquake under the surface of the sea, and the water rose only three inches. That shows the strength of nature. When the tectonic plates shift and an earthquake occurs, you had better be on your guard.

The Americans and the Japanese have done so much great work in the Pacific to be able to detect and predict tsunamis. I understand that Samoa had about 10 minutes notice of what was going to happen and the waves that were going to arrive. That of course leads us to how that information is communicated to the people on the ground. It is all very well having government informed and the experts knowing that there is going to be a tsunami in 10 minutes, 20 minutes or an hour and a half, but you must have the capacity to communicate that to the people on the ground.

Here in Australia we have not had a very significant history of tsunamis—certainly none that have caused major damage, as I understand. As the commercial radio, the ABC radio and television can be co-opted into giving warnings then we have, to a degree, extra protection. Communication is a real worry in places like Samoa, the Pacific Islands and the Indian Ocean. I think UNESCO has required that the transmission of information from the experts in the warning centres down to the people on the ground be a priority and be looked at. I think there is a fair distance to go on that.

I would also like to speak about the earthquake in Sumatra. As we know, the Sumatrans and the Indonesians have suffered mightily from the effects of earthquakes in the past. In this case I understand that some 1,300 people lost their lives. This is another warning for that nation. As their standard of living continues to increase, their building standards should be as good as they can be. The Indian Ocean rim of fire is an area of great and significant earthquake activity. On 4 June 2000 an earthquake measuring 7.9 was reported. That caused 103 fatalities and 2,000 injured people. The earthquake that caused the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004 measured 9.3 and caused over 200,000 lives to be lost. On 28 March 2005 the Nias earthquake measured 8.7 and caused around 1,300 lives to be lost.

Throughout recorded history there have been earthquakes in the region that have caused damage and loss of life. There is no doubt that there is a great need for governments, particularly the local governments in Indonesia, to look at the transmission of information regarding the threats and to look at the building standards. I imagine that that has been advanced, but it should always be looked at.

The disaster in 2004 was acted on quickly, but, unfortunately, after the event. In January 2005 I think UNESCO convened a conference to look at the need for a tsunami warning system in the Indian Ocean. The Australian government acted quickly and established the Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Centre, which is operated by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and Geoscience Australia. That was developed so that Australia had an independent capability to monitor, detect, verify and warn the Australian community of the existence of tsunamis in our region. It was a four-year project, as I understand it, and it has resulted in basically a state-of-the-art facility enabling Australia to predict tsunamis and earthquakes and model their effects on the Australian coastline.

I also understand there are some 25 detectors around the Indian Ocean which serve to make sure that the threat of a tsunami following an earthquake is identified quickly and that the countries that are most at risk are warned. Obviously, it is a shame that so many lives were lost before the region acted on this, but I would like to think that progress has been very solid since 2004 and that we are in a position now where the people in the region are so much better protected than they used to be.

But I reiterate that there is a difference between detection and the transmission of that information to the people on the ground. While we can be reasonably confident about this country’s ability to make sure people are informed of the threat, the likely impact of a tsunami on the coastline of Australia, I remain concerned that countries in areas such as the Andaman Sea—India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia—are not yet in a position whereby detection is communicated to the people who are ultimately going to suffer the impact of such events.

I conclude by saying that in this world we will always run the risk of natural disasters and their realisation. It was in all our interests to take the actions that were taken after 2004 to be able to identify these threats, model their effects and take preventative action to minimise the consequences of these disasters. To those who are helping out in the most recently affected nations, including Samoa and Indonesia, whether they are locals or from other nations, I add my thanks and appreciation for the work they are doing to alleviate the suffering in those places.

See this speech in context