Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unless there is a major outbreak such as the Ampatuan massacre of December 2009, where 58 people, including between 20 and 34 journalists, were gunned down in relation to the attempt of an opposition candidate to file election papers in Mindanao, the Philippines essentially receives a very good press in this country. It has the vestiges of a democratic system, with the exception of the Marcos period. However, the situation is far more complex, particularly in the area of industrial relations. As recently as 8 March Celito Baccay was shot down after arguments with the human resources officer of the Japanese corporation Maeno-Gikan. On 11 February armed forces intervened in a recognition fight at a Dole Philippines plantation. Amongst the actions undertaken by the military in support of management to stop union activity were closed-circuit TV installations in all polling places, visits by the military to families of pro-union activists even beforehand and dismissal of workers with the same family names as people who were agitating for union recognition.

As I say, the situation, except for the complete coverage of the Moro Liberation Front, a pro-Islamic group in the south of the country, is that we have an image in Australia of a very competitive democracy. For 50 years the New People's Army has been waging a struggle in the Philippines. The very reputable International Crisis Group has commented on the dispute on 14 February this year that the government of the Philippines was 'unable to control and develop large parts of the country'. They further said that neither side could win militarily. They went on to say that 12 agreements and 25 years later they have scarcely touched on substantive issues. They were speaking of negotiations that have been on at various stages in the process.

The new government of the Philippines did indicate a preparedness to enter into negotiations to try and finish this dispute. The comments of the International Crisis Group in the same document in February were:

The monitoring committee must hold the NPA commanders to account for their actions. Likewise, the Philippine military and police should avail themselves of this opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to human rights by cooperating fully with the joint investigations that the committee will undertake once convened.

We have a situation where negotiations did commence in Oslo with the active support of the Norwegian government and some progress was made in relation to that. There was a ceasefire that operated throughout those peace discussions and there was an agreement that they would move forward to further discussions this year. It is of concern that the government of the Philippines has not complied with one of the major agreements reached in the Oslo meetings and four months later has not released 17 consultants and protected people who are still in detention in government prisons. Overall in the Philippines there are estimates of about 340 political prisoners awaiting concrete action by the government of the Philippines in accordance with the comprehensive agreement in respect of human rights that was arranged back then.

At the end of those peace talks in February the agreement was that there be the reconvening of a joint monitoring committee to oversee the implementation of a comprehensive agreement in respect of human rights, the agreement to form working groups and committees on political and constitutional reforms to conclude in February 2012 and an agreement that measures would be undertaken for the release of those political prisoners. Both sides at that stage released a few individuals in compliance with the agreement. There are perhaps more confident projections of a worthwhile outcome to these negotiations than in prior incidents. The government did release 43 people, mainly health workers, who had been held for over a year in a situation where their guilt was very much questioned. That was a good sign but there were agreements to release another large number of people. One would hope that these negotiations can be facilitated and that an end is made to a conflict that is ravaging significant parts of the country.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ever since Ferdinand Magellan was speared to death on Mactan Island in 1521 the 7,107 islands that came to make up the Philippines have faced problems with law and order. The Philippines is a nation that has a history of conflict and turmoil from the period of Spanish rule to the Spanish-American War to the atrocities of war crimes committed during the Second World War by Japanese occupation forces to the ongoing Marxist and Islamic insurgencies to the dictatorship of the Marcos regime with its crony capitalism. Even since the return of democracy and government reforms after the people power revolution of 1986, the country has been hampered by national debt, government corruption, coup attempts, a persistent communist insurgency and also the problem of Islamic separatists.

Currently the Australian government travel warning notes:

… violent crime still remains a significant problem in the Philippines …

We continue to receive credible reports indicating terrorists are planning attacks against a range of targets, including places frequented by foreigners …

We strongly advise you do not travel to Mindanao … due to the very high threat of terrorist attack, including kidnapping and related counter-terrorism operations.

The Global Peace Index has the Philippines ranked today in the bottom 20 nations classified as the 'least at peace' at 136 out of 156 nations.

Against this background I am sure all Australians wish the new Philippine President Benigno Aquino III the best as he attempts to lift the living standards of all Filipinos, rid his nation of violence and end hostilities with both the National Democratic Front and Islamic separatists in the south. President Benigno Aquino III is no stranger to violence for he was just 23 years old when his father was assassinated at Manila International Airport upon returning home from exile in the United States.

It must be recognised that the National Democratic Front is a coalition of far left leaning political parties controlled by the Communist Party. We hope that the members of the National Democratic Front of the Philippines realise that in every country where it has been tried communism has failed and, while communism may promise a socialist paradise, history has shown it only delivers poverty, hunger, misery and economic stagnation. Some may say a leopard never changes its spots and even our current Prime Minister was a card-carrying member of the Socialist Forum. We hope that for the benefit of all Filipinos the National Democratic Front comes to the realisation that their leftist ideologies will only harm the Philippines.

Ultimately what will bring peace and prosperity to the Philippines is not a signed piece of paper but a strong economy and the provision of equality of opportunity for all Filipinos. The greatest weakness of the Philippines democracy and its economy has been that the country has had no comprehensive anti-trust policy or regulations. In the past this has assisted to promote excessive concentration of economic power in the Philippines. It has stagnated its economic growth and has denied opportunity for its small business sector to compete and, in doing so, has created the breeding ground for anti-democratic forces to fester. It is therefore very encouraging to see that the Philippines has recently drafted anti-trust laws similar to the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act and especially the Robinson-Patman Act.

As the current Senate President of the Philippines, Juan Ponce Enrile, recently said:

We need to foster an environment that is conducive for the development of micro, small and medium enterprises.

President Aquino said in his first State of the Nation address:

... it is the government's duty to ensure that the market is fair for all, put an end to monopolies and cartels by giving the Philippines antitrust laws; that this will give life to these principles, to afford Small and Medium-Scale Enterprises the opportunity to participate in the growth of our economy.

By drafting these laws, the Philippines government is sending a message that it wishes to foster an economy where an individual who wants to be an entrepreneur rather than a member of a socialist collective or unionised workplace will not have his opportunities restricted by unfair trade practices and discriminatory pricing. We wish the Philippines well and we hope the peace negotiations between the government of the Republic of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front are successful.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support my colleague the member for Werriwa and thank him for bringing forward this motion regarding the political situation in the Philippines. It is an issue I had a keen interest in when I was formerly the member for Werriwa and I am really pleased to see how the new member for Werriwa is engaging with the Filipino community in the south-west of Sydney. I would particularly praise the efforts of people such as Rey Monerto and Lourdes Kaiser. I know Laurie is working very closely with them. In my own electorate of Fowler—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Proceedings suspended from 20:00 to 20:08

Before the suspension, I was saying that in my own electorate of Fowler I also have a growing Filipino community, many of whom worship at the All Saints church in Liverpool. As a matter of fact, I was there only last Sunday with the member for Werriwa for the Liverpool Catholic Club mass. Ray and Lolita Abbott, who fundamentally coordinate the Filipino community in Liverpool, also attended. It gave us a good opportunity to have a talk. Part of that was about the special relationship between Australia and the Philippines and the interest there is in having both countries play a significant part in the Asia-Pacific community. As with any conflict, the vast majority of Filipinos are no different; they do not want to have endless hostility in their land. They simply want to get on with their lives and provide the best opportunity for themselves and their families within their local community.

Living in such a fortunate country as this, I find it hard to imagine the ongoing hostilities which have engulfed the Philippines since the 1960s. While the casualty figures are not exactly accurate, because they are not always available, from a quick search that I did, indications are that in the vicinity of 120,000 Filipino citizens have lost their lives during this conflict.

All Filipinos have been affected economically and socially by the ongoing conflict. It is simply a fact that no nation can truly develop its economy, its education, its health system, its commitment to an independent judiciary and the emotional health and welfare of its citizens while it is under such a cloud of hostility, as is the case in the Philippines. Hence the poverty levels that currently exist in the Philippines and why people are only too willing to sell a kidney in order to fund a family. These conflicts started, as I say, in the sixties and a whole generation of Filipinos have lived with nothing other than this conflict for their entire lives. Regrettably, unless a breakthrough is made the next generation will be exposed to the exact same thing.

Australia, as a strong voice in the region, should do all that we can to assist all parties to come to a peaceful resolution of these hostilities. This is not only in the best interests of the Philippines; quite frankly, it is in the best interests of the whole of the Pacific region. For Australia directly, a safe and secure region means not only stronger ties with our neighbours but also a lesser burden for our region, particularly when it comes to the unsafe aspects of their homeland and the need for people to, as they do from time to time, seek asylum. I do note that there has been progress in the Philippines of late and, as alluded to by the member for Werriwa, there seems to be a willingness by all participants to try to resolve the ongoing conflict.

In 2010 and 2011 the Norwegian government acted as a broker between the government and the National Democratic Front. As the member for Werriwa outlined in his motion, negotiations occurred earlier in the year between the two parties. There is a strong interest in pursuing this dialogue and, hopefully, to a point of resolution. I also note that Norway has taken a leading role by joining the International Monitoring Team, which is overseeing the ceasefire between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

I join with the member for Werriwa and all those who are wishing the Philippines well. It is in our interests and it is in theirs to obtain peace and stability. It is important not only for our region but for all mankind that we settle down the position in the Philippines where there is not only a suitable and lasting ceasefire but peace of which I think all of us can be duly proud and something that we should keep in our prayers.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of this motion about peace negotiations in the Philippines. The pursuit of peace should be at the forefront of the foreign policy of all nation states. Even in terms of our military operations, peace remains the ultimate objective. There is no contradiction between having a strong military capacity and the pursuit of peace. There is no contradiction between committing troops to battle in a just cause and the pursuit of peace. Sadly, in today's world, we as a nation must commit our troops to war to achieve that very objective. Once again, I pay tribute to our brave and committed servicemen, who, at our direction, go to war and risk so much.

In particular, today I pay tribute to Sergeant Brett Wood, who gave his life in service of this nation. We owe him and his colleagues so much. They are also true peacemakers. It is against that background that the report of the resumption of peace talks in the Philippines offers so much hope because, even after years of conflict, the opportunities presented by negotiation are invaluable. These peace negotiations mark a new effort by both parties to bring an end to their 40-year conflict. The insurgency in the Philippines formally began in 1969, pitting the Filipino regime against rebels including the New People's Army and separatists of both the Moro National Liberation Front and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. It continues to be one of the least resolved and least reported conflicts occurring today, despite the World Health Organisation estimating that 16,000 Filipinos are killed by violence in a year. The conflict itself is said to have claimed tens of thousands of lives throughout its 40-year duration.

It is appropriate at this significant time in the history of this conflict to offer some cautious words of congratulation. We should recognise the courage of the parties to those negotiations—not courage in battle but rather the courage to put aside the passions and indeed hatreds generated by war and to talk. The Philippines government and the National Democratic Front should be congratulated because, as Sir Winston Churchill famously said at a White House lunch in June 1954, 'To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war' But also today I want to pay particular tribute to the peacemakers—those governments and people who go out of their way to resolve conflict and to assist in negotiations. In this instance it is the royal Norwegian government and diplomats who have acted as third-party facilitators in peace discussions for over a decade.

It is also timely that we acknowledge and support Australia's proud record in this regard, because particularly in our neighbourhood we have an enviable track record of peacekeeping and peacemaking. Australia can look with pride to our sponsorship with New Zealand of the long-running but remarkably successful peace process in Bougainville. The contribution of diplomats like Nick Warner, the then Australian High Commissioner to Papua New Guinea, John Hayes and Nigel Moore of New Zealand, and so many others is a tribute to diplomacy at its best, as are the contributions by Norwegian facilitators in the Philippines. Equally, in East Timor and the Solomon Islands Australians can look with pride to our contribution towards peacemaking. I refer to people like Leo White, a Brisbane barrister who has always been willing to go out of his way to selflessly support peace building, be it in Bougainville, in the Solomon Islands or on the Thai-Burma border.

At ANU's State, Society and Governance in Melanesia program, Anthony Regan has brought to bear a remarkable understanding of law and practical common sense to assist in peace negotiations around the world. In my electorate of Ryan, the former Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Queensland, now the Peace and Conflict Studies Institute Australia, provides much needed support in our region. People like Volker Boege, Anne Brown, Serge Loode, Anna Nolan and Morgan Brigg have all contributed to peace around the world, just like those in the Philippines are striving to achieve. It is important to give recognition to our peacemakers. They truly make the world a better place. As prominent Norwegian political scientist Barth Eide commented, 'Dialogue is not a sign of weakness. It is the strategy of the brave.'

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.