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

Minister, before we move on—and still on the subject of interoperability—I want to take us back briefly to some of the questions I put to you before. I can recall fairly clearly asking you to take on notice whether or not the RAAF had flown support missions for US ground troops that were using these weapons during the invasion of Iraq.

I also seek your advice, on notice, whether overnight the department could examine the Human Rights Watch report that I am citing and describe for us whether they support its conclusions or whether they believe those conclusions are in error. Those were the figures I cited before about the number of weapons that were used, and I gave you a list of places—metropolitan areas and regional cities—into which the weapons were fired on the way towards Baghdad. I am seeking your advice as to whether the government supports the basic premise of that report or whether it rejects the conclusions that were made there.

In particular, I seek the minister's advice as to whether the Australian government agrees with a four-month study by USA Todayperhaps at the conclusion of this debate I can provide the precise citations for the documents that I am reading from, which may assist the officers—that nearly 11,000 of these weapons were used during the invasion, containing between 1.7 million and two million submunitions, and the use by the British government of another 2,000. I will take all of those in sequence on notice, if I could. What I am seeking, unless it is more complex than I am making it sound, is simply a yes or no as to whether the Australian government believes that these reports are credible.