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

Minister, I thank you for your detailed answer and also the patience and grace with which you have responded to the questions that Senator Xenophon and I have been asking. I do not know that we are going to get too much further, but I strongly object to the counterargument that we are somehow seeking to rip up the military alliance with the United States or prevent us from invading countries on the other side of the world at the behest of the United States, if they should call on us to do so again—heaven forbid. But I wonder whether the minister is aware that New Zealand implemented legislation in 2009 through the parliament in Wellington which allowed for joint military operations while preserving the convention's prohibitions. I believe this would serve as a good model for Australia.

The minister may or may not be aware that the huge number of civil society groups that are up in arms over what this chamber is perpetuating tonight were very happy with how the government of New Zealand upheld its obligations. It found a different way of balancing the two obligations that the minister is seeking to represent. I respect, Senator Feeney, that you believe that we have struck an appropriate balance between the articles of the convention and our commitments to joint actions with the United States military. Somehow the New Zealand government managed to criminalise all activities prohibited by the convention's article 1, but also created the kind of balancing provisions that, for example, allow the government of New Zealand to have a deployment in Afghanistan at the moment that no doubt undertakes joint operations with the United States forces, as our contingent in Oruzgan does.

The drafting did not raise concerns by groups like the ICRC, on the cluster weapons convention and so on. Will the minister consider evaluating the drafting of the provisions around interoperability that found their way into New Zealand legislation to see if there is a compromise way forward that could satisfy the civil society groups that Senator Singh spoke so eloquently about and that you yourself, Senator Feeney, have acknowledged in the debate tonight? Will the minister consider looking at ways that other countries have managed to get the balance right?