Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will begin by congratulating Senator Coonan on her appointment as Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate and will ask her a question in her new capacity representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Trade. I ask the minister: given the recent AWB case, does the minister now agree that it is time for Australia to introduce a corporate code of conduct to ensure greater regulation of overseas business practices exercised by Australian companies?

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you to Senator Stott Despoja for the question. It is not entirely clear from Senator Stott Despoja’s question what kind of regulatory regime she has in mind, or indeed how one would seriously go about introducing a corporate code of conduct in relation to such matters. But insofar as her question, by inference, relates to AWB, let me make it perfectly clear—and this has been said, I think, over the past couple of days—that, in relation to the particular contracts that are sought to be impugned by the opposition, these contracts were certainly not with the government. In fact, they were administered by the United Nations, and AWB was not a party to any contract with the government that might otherwise be the subject of the kind of regulation that Senator Stott Despoja seems to imply should apply.

The important issue in relation to AWB is that there is an inquiry, the Cole inquiry, and the real issue here is that the Cole inquiry can get to the bottom of these allegations. Certainly, on the available evidence to date, there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that any minister of the government knew or was involved. Given the fact that the contracts were not with DFAT, with Mr Downer’s department, it is very difficult to see that they had any active knowledge of any of these matters. The code of conduct that Senator Stott Despoja refers to would probably not avoid, would not prevent—if indeed it is the case, and I am not suggesting this for one minute—any concerted action for deception.

Once again, while it is not entirely clear what Senator Stott Despoja has in mind, I do not believe that the matters surrounding AWB would have been either prevented, or indeed improved, by such a code of conduct—if in fact there was any fraudulent conduct involved. We have had this debate in this place for many months in relation to corporate conduct: that you can do what you like about codes but in the end it comes down to the actions that individuals undertake. There is an inquiry under way and it is appropriate for the Cole inquiry to run its course, particularly as it has access to all documents—and certainly the department did not.

Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for her answer and ask the minister, given there is a precedent in place for enforcing Australian laws for offences that are committed overseas—in particular, in relation to child sex tourism and those particular crimes—is there now a very strong argument for extending that to include offences of bribery, and would that be one key component of any corporate code of conduct that could be implemented by the Australian government?

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Stott Despoja for the supplementary question. As she knows, and indeed everyone in this place knows, this government has taken a very active part, where it was appropriate, in making certain conduct that takes place outside the jurisdiction of Australia unlawful for operatives of Australian corporations. But certainly facilitation payments as such under the current arrangements are not bribes. But, while AWB is accused of a number of things, nothing yet has been established in relation to what AWB did. In fact, the Volcker inquiry very specifically found that there was insufficient evidence to make any findings of that kind. The opposition should pause for a moment before continuing this line of inquiry when there is a proper inquiry constituted and affecting Australian farmers. (Time expired)