Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Bonner on presentation of the report entitled Human rights in the Asia-Pacific: challenges and opportunities and endorse particularly her thanks to the committee secretariat, Samantha and Paul, mentioned in particular and her thanks to our colleagues. On 3 September 2008 the Minister for Foreign Affairs asked the committee to inquire into and to report on international and regional mechanisms currently in place to prevent and redress human rights violations with a view to providing options on possible models that may be suitable for the Asia-Pacific region, with a focus on the United Nations human rights system and regional mechanisms and the role of the parliament.

It is very important to understand that, in making this reference, while there may have been expectations that there would be clear and definitive outcomes recommended, the nature of this particular region presents challenges as well as opportunities. Unlike other regions in the world, the report notes that the Asia-Pacific region does not have strong and broad-based human rights mechanisms for preventing and redressing human rights violations and that the Asia-Pacific is diverse and complex, with a mosaic of human rights challenges. While there have been recent improvements, the committee notes the realisation of economic and social rights in some nations in the region, the evidence nevertheless is that there are many human rights issues in this region which need to be tackled.

The committee itself examined the stumbling blocks to that, including geography, resources, lack of a cohesive regional identity, limited engagement with human rights concepts, and the perceived tensions of culture. The lack of shared identity particularly, when considering the Asia Pacific as a single regional entity, is a considerable obstacle for nations and organisations in the region to overcome when seeking to work cooperatively on any issue, be it national security, trade, climate change or even human rights. All of us have a desire, a preference, for focusing on these issues and addressing them, but we certainly came to a view that these subregions in the Asia Pacific were very challenging. There was a common theme which emerged in the course of our inquiry that suggested that human rights issues were better addressed regionally rather than across the totality of the region. This presented the committee with a particular challenge.

The committee also, in looking at the recommendations from the minister that we needed to consider, recognised that bilateral dialogues were important within the region, fostering and strengthening relationships with countries in the region, and that understanding, mutual respect and trust must be a feature of those relationships. The committee recognised that these dialogues are a formal government-to-government mechanism. It did, however, note concerns in the evidence that unaccountable dialogue could lead to a degree of complacency, and for that reason the committee recommended that the government delegations who deal bilaterally with human rights in China and Vietnam include parliamentary representation, particularly through the Human Rights Subcommittee.

The committee also acknowledged that the ratifications of treaties are voluntary and we were mindful that nations already parties to treaties also face challenges. They do not have resources and we believe that there needs to be a targeted approach to dealing with those questions. We suggested a way forward in relation to that.

But I think the most important issue that the committee addressed is the way forward. The committee endorsed the Australian government’s role in enhancing engagement but appreciated that Australia had to be sensitive to the way in which this issue is addressed, and on the basis of the evidence that we received we thought there was no blueprint that we could specifically recommend. That is the reason we came to a view that the model for the Asia-Pacific community that the government had outlined is one that might be suitable here. Richard Woolcott has been a special envoy to engage capitals in wide discussion, and we were mindful that Australia, not being prescriptive in relation to these matters, could move the matter forward if we were able to appoint a special envoy for the Asia-Pacific region. (Time expired)

See this speech in context