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

I present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 61st Annual Session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Stavanger, from 10 to 12 October 2015 and ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.

Leave granted.

I am pleased to present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 61st Annual Session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, which was held in Stavanger, Norway, in October last year. The Australian parliament sends a delegation to the assembly's annual session every second year, but there was no delegation in 2013 because of the timing of our election. The 2015 delegation was therefore an important opportunity to renew ties with delegates from other parliaments and to engage in discussions, many of which picked up themes from earlier meetings and considered recent developments. I had the honour to lead the delegation and was joined by Senator Stephen Conroy.

The assembly brings together legislators from NATO countries to consider security related issues of common concern and provides an important link between NATO and the parliaments of its member nations. There are 257 delegates from 28 NATO member countries and a number of associated observer delegations such as our own. Each delegation is based on country size and reflects the political composition of its parliament so that there is a wide cross-section of opinion. The assembly takes place over three days. During the first two days the five committees of the assembly meet to hear from a range of civilian and military experts on particular subjects and to consider draft reports prepared by the committees over the previous months. As the five committees meet simultaneously and as Senator Conroy and I were the only Australian delegates, it was not possible to cover all the meetings.

As a participant in the 2011 delegation to the assembly I note that many of the issues considered by that meeting continue to be of concern. The issues that dominated discussions were the threat from terrorism, particularly decentralised home-grown terrorism; increasing radicalisation of young people; the situation in Syria and Iraq and the threat from IS; the refugee problem; the reconstruction of Afghanistan; and Russia's increasingly aggressive foreign policy. To place the meeting in context, the assembly met only 10 days after the murder of police worker Curtis Cheng in Parramatta, and as the assembly opened on 10 October news was breaking of the bombing of the Ankara railway station, killing 102 and injuring 400. And a month later the Paris attacks occurred, leaving 130 dead and nearly 400 injured. Security issues and the threat of terrorism were never far from the discussions in the various meetings.

It was gratifying to hear that Australia's contribution to the ISAF mission in Afghanistan, and to the reconstruction effort, was acknowledged. The postwar situation in Afghanistan was the subject of a number of discussions. The delegation heard a compelling presentation from the Global Organization of Parliamentarians Against Corruption. It was noted that corruption has a direct impact on security by delegitimising the state; arousing public grievance and unrest; supporting radicalism; and damaging the state's ability to detect or respond to threats.

In Afghanistan one-third of households have to pay bribes for public services, totalling $1 billion annually; and four times as many Afghans as think the Taliban are the greatest challenge facing the country think corruption is the greatest challenge. Losing the battle against corruption inevitably means losing the battle in the field, and a short-term acceptance of corruption as a tactic to gain local cooperation will always rebound negatively.

Anti-corruption must be an intrinsic part of the objectives of any engagement, and governments and international institutions should only enter into an engagement if there is a political will to enforce meaningful oversight. Anti-corruption tools should be included in foreign policy and defence apparatus. State building should be a priority from the outset of any engagement, and participants should enter a conflict with a realistic and precise vision of the departure conditions.

A recurring topic in different meetings was Russia's increasingly aggressive foreign policy. To some extent this focused on the situation in Ukraine but also on what has come to be called Russia's 'borderisation' of other neighbouring republics as well. In addition Russia's increasing activity in the Arctic is of concern to neighbouring countries and more generally.

The discussion of the situation in Ukraine was of particular interest to our delegation given the shooting down of flight MH17 in July 2014; and, by chance, the report of the Dutch safety board into the causes of the crash was released the day after the assembly concluded. We took the opportunity to meet the Dutch delegation to discuss the recovery process and the investigation. Dutch delegates expressed great appreciation of Australia's role in the process and of the work of Foreign Minister Bishop and Australian officials.

The third day of the assembly is a plenary session, which is addressed by the president of the assembly and the Secretary-General of NATO, among others. Resolutions forwarded from the committees are also considered. The Secretary-General of NATO provides a response to all assembly recommendations and resolutions adopted in plenary sessions.

The three-day program was very intense but it was very worthwhile. Senator Conroy and I value the opportunity to participate in the discussions and to offer an Australian perspective on the issues being considered. Parliamentary perspectives are not always the same as the perspectives of government, and meetings such as this are an invaluable opportunity to strengthen relationships with colleagues from around the world and to improve our understanding of issues, which we can then pass on to our colleagues and constituents.

I would like to thank Paul Jeanroy of the parliament's International and Parliamentary Relations Office for his assistance in making the necessary arrangements and Ambassador Damien Miller and Second Secretary Rebecca Marshall for their advice and assistance in Stavanger. I would also like to thank our committee secretary, Richard Selth, for his efforts. Richard has been involved with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly on several occasions. He uses that experience to great effect, and his excellent contribution to the report is greatly valued. I would like to thank the parliament for the opportunity to attend the NATO parliamentarians conference.