Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I will not speak at length to the opposition of this schedule—I think the views were pretty broadly canvassed during the second reading debate—except to say that in Senator Bishop’s remarks, which I listened to with great interest, there was emphasis on global terrorism, on arms control and on tracking illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world. Obviously discussion of these things is welcomed. In fact, the kinds of people who would normally be seen demonstrating at Pine Gap are entirely supportive of these roles, but we must not allow these aspects or these roles of the base to detract from the fact that this is a military installation.

Senator Bishop did mention in his remarks that this facility exists to guide ballistic missiles, that it is in fact a nuclear weapons war-fighting facility. That was one of the original intentions upon which it was established. It remains so to this day. So it is all very well to be emphasising these rather wholesome sounding aspects whereby Pine Gap is used to detect missile launchers or nuclear weapons tests around the world, and obviously this is very welcome. This facility exists to help the United States fight nuclear wars. It is a Cold War relic. These aspects of the base and the base itself should certainly be closed down. Before putting this to the vote—and I indicate that I will be seeking to divide on this matter—I would just ask senators to consider for themselves whether they are aware, whether they know and whether they could find out if they asked what this base actually does.

Question put:

That schedule 3 stand as printed.