David Jull (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, I present the committee’s report entitled Australia’s relationship with the Republic of Korea; and developments on the Korean peninsula.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

On behalf of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, I wish to table the committee’s report: Australia’s relationship with the Republic of Korea; and developments on the Korean peninsula.

For over half a century Australia and the Republic of Korea have enjoyed an important and productive relationship. The RoK is the 10th largest economy in the world and the third largest in Asia. In 2005, the RoK was Australia’s third largest export market and fourth largest trading partner. Our trading relationship is complementary—Australia exports natural resources to the RoK and imports manufactured goods from the RoK.

This report reviews that trading relationship but goes further to include issues such as cross-cultural understanding and relations between Australian and Korean institutions, both government and non-government. The report also includes a commentary on issues concerning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea because of their potential impact on regional trade and security.

The relationship between Australia and the RoK is strong and exists on many levels. While there appear to be no major impediments to the relationship, there are opportunities at the margins to enhance the relationship.

Government-to-government interactions play an important role in setting the agenda in any bilateral relationship. Reciprocal visits by Australian and RoK government ministers are frequent and intergovernment cooperation and consultation exists at many levels.

Australia and the RoK share a number of security interests in the Asia-Pacific region and the belief that cooperation in the areas of peacekeeping, consequence management and defence industry cooperation are key focal points. The report recommends continued defence cooperation and further exploration of defence cooperation opportunities.

Trade is the mainstay in the Australia-RoK relationship. The report reviews trade between the two countries and the challenges facing the economic relationship. Organisations such as AusTrade and the Australia-Korea Business Council provide valuable assistance to Australian exporters. There is, however, the potential to expand the trade undertaken by the small business sector. To this end the committee has recommended that greater support be provided to small exporters, by way of organisations such as the Overseas Korean Traders Association.

Free trade agreements are another way to increase trade. However, any FTA between Australia and the RoK should not be at the expense of Australian and Korean cultural industries. As well, agriculture issues should be resolved early in any negotiations.

The provision of educational services is an important sector in Australia’s economy. The RoK is the second most important source country for foreign students studying in Australia. This market can be developed further through improving the educational experience of visiting students. The committee has recommended an internet based forum be established for Korean students returning from Australia to collect feedback on the performance of Australian educators.

Many students visiting Australia for study purposes are accompanied by a guardian from that country. This may affect the risks presented by those students when they are granted a student visa. The committee has recommended that the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs review the risks presented by such accompanied students and incorporate the result into the overall risk assessments for Korean students.

Cultural understanding enhances Australia’s relationship with the RoK and can be strengthened further. The Australia-Korea Foundation, AKF, is a key body promoting the Australia-RoK relationship. The AKF promotes exchanges and institutional links in many areas and at all levels. The committee recognises the valuable work of the AKF and has reviewed the expertise contributed by board members. This expertise covers the areas of AKF focus and the majority of board members have direct experience working in the RoK. Nevertheless, the committee has recommended that board membership include more members with an intimate knowledge of Korean society and culture.

The committee received substantial evidence concerning the teaching of the Korean language and culture in Australian schools. Unfortunately, there has been a decline in Australian student interest in learning Korean. There are several reasons for this decline and the committee presents a strategy to address this problem. Included in this strategy is the promotion of school exchange visits between Australia and the RoK.

There is a high level of collaboration between Australia and the RoK in science and technology research. The risk, however, is that this activity becomes piecemeal and uncoordinated. The Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training needs to take the lead in providing a strategic direction through the development of an action agenda.

The RoK occupies an important place in North Asia, situated between Japan and China, and has established itself as an economic force in the region and globally. It is important that Australia continues to maintain and grow its relationship with the RoK. I believe that this report, through its analysis and recommendations, will enhance what is already a strong relationship between the two countries.

In closing, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank all those who provided submissions and gave evidence at the public hearings. Finally, I thank my colleagues on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee and the secretariat.

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad to have this brief opportunity to speak on the tabling of this report, Australia’s relationship with the Republic of Korea; and developments on the Korean peninsula. I thank the honourable member for Fadden, Chair of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee, and the other members of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade who took part in this inquiry, and also the highly competent staff of the committee secretariat—who are sitting over there on the advisers benches—who have helped us greatly with their usual efficiency in compiling this report.

There are two completely different matters to be discussed in terms of Australia’s relationships with the Korean peninsula. The first is our flourishing relationship with the Republic of Korea, which in the past 50 years has grown from a war-ravaged backwater to become one of the world’s most prosperous and dynamic economies and a flourishing democracy. South Korea is now one of Australia’s most important trading partners. The report makes some valuable recommendations on the further development of our relationship with South Korea, all of which I support.

I note the very friendly relationship that exists between our two countries. Recently, for instance, I had the honour of taking the South Korean Ambassador to an Australian film showing here in Parliament House. He remarked to me that, in his view, The Proposition was an Australian western—a very perspicacious judgement.

I also note some very good political developments both in South Korea and in the US Congress. At the second session of the 109th Congress, Senator Brownback moved a concurrent resolution which was very similar to the words of the South Korean foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, on 28 July. Both of them seek to integrate not just our strategic concerns but our concerns about human rights and other issues in a wider framework—perhaps similar to the Helsinki framework that had such beneficial effects in Europe—in North Asia.

The other matter that we need to consider in relation to North Korea—apart from the security question, which I will address in the Main Committee—is that of human rights. I recently discovered the wonderful Google Earth website, which provides detailed satellite photography of the entire surface of the earth. If you zoom in on the border region between North and South Korea, you will see a remarkable thing. On the south side of the border, right up to the border fence, you see neat, well-tended farms. On the north side, there is nothing but wasteland. This is the same country with the same soil, the same climate and the same people. Also, there are lights at night on the South Korean side and complete darkness on the North Korean side.

We are sometimes told that North Korea cannot feed itself because of natural disasters. This is nonsense. The reason there is famine in North Korea is simple: the imposition of an irrational political and economic system that makes it impossible for the country to grow enough food. There has been no greater disaster in Korean history than the reign of Kim Il Sung and his son Kim Jong Il, who for 60 years have subjected 23 million people to one of the worst types of Stalinist oppression in history, including the collectivisation of agriculture. Collectivisation has produced food shortages everywhere it has been attempted. Only in North Korea has it been persisted with to the point of mass starvation.

The report draws attention to the critical human rights problems which flow from the situation inside North Korea. The first of these is the determination of the regime to control and manipulate all foreign aid so that it benefits the regime itself and feeds only those that the regime wants to feed—the party, the army, the security apparat and the elite. This poses a dilemma for government aid agencies, which naturally want to help the suffering people of North Korea. But just handing over food aid to the regime does not achieve this; it merely feeds the regime’s supporters, as I have said, while the workers and peasants go hungry. If Australia is to provide aid to North Korea, it must be targeted at those who need it and it must be directly delivered to them by aid agencies.

I understand and respect the urgent desire of aid agencies to give direct aid to the people of North Korea and their request that aid be delinked from political considerations. But the fact is that there is no way that aid and politics can be delinked, because of the nature of the regime itself. The regime does not care whether people in North Korea starve; it only cares about its own grip on power. To give aid to such a regime on its terms does not help the people of North Korea; it only prolongs their misery.

The second issue is the question of North Korean refugees. As the regime has grown more corrupt and less efficient at controlling its borders, hundreds of thousands of people have fled into China and a smaller number into Russia. Both governments refuse to recognise these people as refugees and, when they catch them, hand them back to North Korea. The UN estimates that 100,000 Koreans are living illegally in China—I have seen figures as high as 300,000—and, because of China’s attitude, they cannot be helped by the UNHCR.

This is an issue on which Australia can and should be doing more, given our much vaunted human rights dialogue with China. We should be raising at the dialogue the issue of Korean refugees being moved to South Korea in an orderly way. We should be protesting to both China and Russia about the forced repatriation of Korean refugees, which usually leads them straight to a labour camp and frequently to a death sentence.

I commend the report. I am very pleased that the ongoing relationship between our two countries— (Time expired)

Phillip Barresi (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the member for Fadden wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debate on a future occasion?

Ian Causley (Page, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

In accordance with standing order 39(c), the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour this day.