Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Minchin. Can the minister confirm that the proposed treaty and agreement with China to be signed during Premier Wen’s visit will provide for export of uranium to China and also allow the involvement of Chinese companies in the exploration for uranium in Australia? If so, how can the government grant any such right to explore given that the Commonwealth does not have power over the states in that regard? What is the rationale for such a treaty and agreement, given that China is a nuclear weapons state which is already failing to fulfil its obligations to disarm under the non-proliferation treaty and that there can be no guarantee that Australian uranium will not displace limited Chinese supplies and facilitate the Chinese nuclear weapons program?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Milne for that pertinent question. It is timely and appropriate that that matter be raised. I say, on behalf of the government, as we have said on every occasion that this issue has been raised, that negotiating a nuclear safeguards agreement with China is a fundamental precondition to any sale of uranium to China. Any agreement that was to be concluded with China would be entirely consistent with our strict safeguards requirements. It must ensure, as do all our agreements on this matter, that Australian uranium, nuclear technology and expertise are used solely for peaceful purposes. That is fundamental to any negotiation that we undertake with China on this matter. It is hoped that we can negotiate agreements that could be signed during Premier Wen’s visit, and that would include the two agreements on nuclear safeguards and nuclear cooperation issues. As I said, they have to be consistent with our nuclear safeguards requirements.

You have also raised the issue of exploration, and I note that that has been canvassed. At the moment, any private company, domestic or foreign, is at liberty to seek to explore in this country and strike commercial arrangements to do so, but that would be, as is the point of your question, Senator, subject to state and territory legislation, which is the primary vehicle for regulating exploration and mining in this country. It would be subject to consideration by the Foreign Investment Review Board. Any uranium mine that flowed from any successful exploration would be fully subject to Australia’s very strict—probably the strictest in the world—policies in relation to exports and conditions set out in our bilateral safeguards agreement.

We are approaching this negotiation with China on the same basis that we would approach it with any other country in the world. We have probably the strictest regime in the world. It is a regime that ensures that any uranium that is exported from Australia can only be used for peaceful purposes. It requires compliance with IAEA inspections to ensure the verification of peaceful uses and to ensure that there is absolutely no possibility of any diversion to any nuclear weapons programs.

In relation to exploration, as I said, it is a fact that there are many entities exploring and mining in Australia at the moment that have a degree of foreign ownership. The point is that they must comply with Australian law. As I said, much of that is state law. To the extent that the federal government is involved, it is a matter of both the export policies that it applies and the Foreign Investment Review Board consideration in relation to any investment.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for his answer. In view of what he said about Australia setting the highest standards, will he now confirm that the proposed safeguards to be applied to China will not require mandatory permanent compliance with the current full scope of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, including the additional protocol, which would provide for the IAEA to nominate which sites they require to inspect and to conduct a wide range of chemical and environmental assay testing? Will the minister now confirm that that additional protocol will not apply and that mandatory permanent compliance is not going to be part of the agreement?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is rather technical. I would prefer to take advice on it before answering it in this chamber. I undertake to get that advice as soon as possible.