John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that the President has received the following letter, dated 17 March 2008, from the Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Bob Brown:

Dear Mr President,

Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today I propose to move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

The bloodshed in Tibet and the need for strong, decisive action by the Government to insist that international laws and norms, including those safeguarding human and political rights and media access are observed by China.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:The bloodshed in Tibet and the need for strong, decisive action by the government to insist that international laws and norms, including those safeguarding human and political rights and media access, are observed by China.

While we enjoy the democracy of this great country of ours, seven million Tibetans live to our north stripped of their democratic rights, stripped of their right to freedom of speech, stripped of their right to freedom of religious observance and generally made noncitizens in their own country. The last week has seen an outbreak of violence in Tibet unparalleled for at least the last 20 years, when a crackdown in Lhasa under the now President of communist China, Hu Jintao, involving the shooting of many people in Lhasa led to the end of civil unrest at that time. Now we are seeing a huge outbreak of feeling by Tibetans in Tibet proper and in the other Tibetan provinces to the north and east of Lhasa.

One only has to reflect on the danger for the monks and nuns who began marching from Sera monastery and other monasteries into Lhasa last week to understand the strong feelings of the Tibetan people, who have such a record of devotion to freedom and nonviolence, which must be exhibiting itself in their own hearts. I have been to the monasteries from which many of the monks and nuns come. I have been in Tibet and have seen the suppression of the ability of people to speak up for their rights. And I can only imagine the horror and the fear and the terror in the hearts of those Tibetans who have decided to make a stand for the country they love and for the religion which they believe so wholeheartedly in.

The reports from Tibet vary. The official news agency Xinhua says that 10 people have been killed and that these were Chinese shop owners and hotel owners. The reports coming out of the exiled government of Tibet indicate 80 to 100 Tibetans have been shot or otherwise killed in the last few days. What is at stake here is the international community’s own standing in upholding the rights of people who are cruelly suppressed. Let me put this from the outset: we are dealing here with a repressive, dictatorial communist regime in Beijing. It is a police state. Since the events of last week, for example, internet communications to do with Tibet have been shut down by the 40,000 internet police who routinely on behalf of that police state intervene in the communications of people within Tibet. CNN, the one outside entity which has the right to broadcast in and from China, whenever it goes to the Tibet issue is blacked out currently in China. Internet service providers are shut down if they try to facilitate traffic on the matter. That is one half of it. On the other half, we can know from past performance that those good and true Tibetans who have, through the anguish of their hearts, taken the courage to stand up against this brutal regime in Tibet and elsewhere in China have been and are now in pretty horrendous circumstances.

I call on the government of this country to take some reasonable action against the repression by China and in support of the seven million Tibetans. So far we have had the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, say that he is disturbed by what is going on in Tibet—and who isn’t—and that he has had diplomatic communications go to and from China, whatever that means. And he has called for restraint, whatever that means. But we have seen nothing here from our own Prime Minister demanding that the Chinese government allow access for the free media, that it guarantee the rights of the Tibetans and indeed all Chinese under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which China has signed, and that Tibetans’ rights are guaranteed as they are written under the Chinese Constitution, a part of the Constitution which has been observed in the breach by this government.

The difference is non-existent between the Howard government’s failure, its acquiescence to the dictatorial government in Beijing, and the Rudd government’s now. I ask this, Mr Acting Deputy President Forshaw: why has Prime Minister Rudd not called in the Chinese ambassador, Zhang Junsai? Is this not so important that the Chinese ambassador should not hear what the Australian nation feels about the repression of Tibetans and about the need to uphold their rights right across the board? What are these diplomatic exchanges that Prime Minister Rudd tells us about but will not reveal? What we have here effectively is the Rudd government resorting to diplomatic niceties while blood is flowing in the streets of Lhasa. We have the Rudd government failing to take a stand for the rights which we as Australians not only take as central to our democracy but have had our own blood shed for.

Let me say this unequivocally: we are now a globalised society and when governments fail to stand up for the basic tenets of freedom of speech, freedom of religious observance and political rights anywhere in the world, they are failing to do it domestically as well. We are part of an international community, and the Australian people expect better. When it came to the monks and nuns protesting in Rangoon last year, under the Howard government, Mr Rudd said:

It’s important for the international community to unite in their condemnation of the Burmese regime.

Why is he not saying it is now important for the international community to unite in their condemnation of the Beijing regime? He said:

I noticed Mr Downer, the Foreign Minister, said the other day that these sorts of sanctions—

that is, targeted sanctions on the Burmese leaders—

were not effective. Labor’s view is that they are useful and they should be adopted ...

Where are you now, Prime Minister Rudd? Why will you not now consider targeted sanctions on the repressive, dictatorial regime in Beijing so that the leaders in Beijing will know that we are standing up for the rights we believe in? Mr Rudd said of Burma:

That policy of constructive engagement with the Burmese regime has conspicuously failed.

But that is a policy he has adopted himself now towards Beijing. He said:

When it comes to Burma and the abuse of human rights, the international community, including Australia, must speak with one strong, united voice.

I say to Prime Minister Rudd: how about calling on the international community, Australia included, to speak with one strong, united voice against the abuse of human rights in Tibet? You will have the Australian people with you, Prime Minister, if you get the backbone to stand up, look the Beijing communist regime straight in the eye and say, ‘We do not support the brutal military occupation of Tibet.’ The Dalai Lama, long ago—in the 1980s—took the middle road and said, ‘Give us genuine autonomy.’ The brutes in Beijing have turned their back on that, and the Dalai Lama has not got the support from the Australian governments that you would have expected to have come behind that, all the way down the six contacts with the Chinese authorities since 2002. What the Tibetans have found is that every time they go to ask Beijing to make some concession, they get trodden on. The Australian government and the Australian Prime Minister should do better. (Time expired)

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on behalf of the opposition to support the motion put forward by Senator Brown relating to the current situation in Tibet. It is indeed very disturbing that events have degenerated to this point. There are reports of up to 80 deaths, of serious injuries and of numbers of arrests occurring. Some reports, unconfirmed—and that is an aspect of this upheaval which makes it difficult to know what is going on; the lack of information and the lack of communication, as Senator Brown has said—indicate a number of arrests are continuing to be carried out.

These are the largest protests to have occurred in Tibet since the pro-independence demonstrations of 1989, which of course resulted in the implementation of martial law over the area. We are very concerned by the images and the reports out of Lhasa over the weekend. The opposition leader, Dr Nelson, has made his views very clear on this matter and has said quite clearly—and it is an observation I support—that the Prime Minister must protest against this crackdown on activists in Tibet when he visits China next month. I have read the words of the Prime Minister at his press conference today. I asked a question myself of Senator Evans in the chamber here this afternoon about whether the Prime Minister would specifically raise these matters on his very imminent visit to China—it would seem to be propitiously timed in at least that regard. I am not reassured that we received a clear enough answer to those questions, and it is very important that the opportunity is taken at the time it becomes available. Given, of course, the Prime Minister’s much vaunted expertise in Sino matters, it would be indeed very important for him to exercise that expertise on this visit.

The protests themselves, we understand, began around 10 March when hundreds of Buddhist monks marched in Lhasa calling for an end to religious restrictions and the release of imprisoned colleagues. That date itself marked the anniversary of an earlier and failed uprising against Chinese rule in the late 1950s which marked the point at which the Dalai Lama left Tibet and went to India. At stake, as Senator Brown observed, is one of the rights which so many peoples of the world take for granted but which so many more are unable to even contemplate. That, expressed under the universal charter of human rights, in article 20, is that everyone has the right of peaceful assembly and association. It is no small right held as an enjoyment by many but in this case clearly not.

We support the comments made by Foreign Minister Smith in calling for the Chinese government and authorities to act with restraint and for those protesting to be allowed to demonstrate peacefully. We would also acknowledge that it is also about peaceful demonstrations both overseas and here in Australia. At the same time, I do understand the levels of frustration and anguish which may have led to some of these activities, particularly as communications fail and people are unable to determine the health and safety of members of their family and we are unable to be provided with perhaps accurate reports of events. So I reiterate my comment that I really do hope that the Prime Minister will raise these latest events specifically with President Hu Jintao during his upcoming visit to China and, as he noted in his remarks this morning, will raise Australia’s other human rights concerns.

It is worth noting that the eyes of the entire world are focused on China in 2008. The Chinese government, in hosting the Olympics, finds itself under the world’s spotlight—not just under the world’s sporting spotlight. I have gleaned from certain statements and observations that have been made in recent times that they are aware of that. In my most recent visit to China in 2007 as part of the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue, it was quite obvious to me that the focus on China was a matter of no small moment, so approaches to these events will be closely observed—there is absolutely no doubting that. That has already been raised in public discussions.

It is also important to note for the record that, internationally, very serious concerns about the approach to these recent events in Tibet have been raised by both the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, and her counterpart in Britain, David Miliband, both of whom have made observations about how the protests should be dealt with. They strongly urged restraint and urged all sides to refrain from the exercise of violence. They are admonitions importantly made.

I want to take the opportunity to make a few comments about the previous government’s engagement on human rights issues with China, which were of course based around the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue, which was initiated over 10 years ago now. There have been 11 dialogues, if I recall correctly. They had become very important forums for exchanges on human rights and for identifying areas where Australia could help China to pursue the implementation of internationally regarded human rights standards.

I know that there are sceptics about the human rights dialogues—and probably more than one in the chamber right now. But what I had the opportunity to observe—and members of the opposition were also invited to participate on those dialogues and did on occasions—were the advances in the approach, the attitude and the relationship between our two countries in these discussions on issues that we regard as fundamental in relation to human rights, whether they be child labour, matters around the treatment of Falun Gong, the exercise of the death penalty or a whole range of other issues. It is no secret that those key aspects were discussed. We had also backed that previously with the Human Rights Technical Cooperation Program, which the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission takes very seriously. It makes very significant endeavours in a range of areas in China to address practical aspects of human rights training including helping Chinese organisations make reforms to their laws and practices, particularly in relation to women and children, and to ethnic and minority rights. That did include Tibet. One of the human rights dialogues of which I was not a member included a field visit to Tibet. I understand that there are also critics of those exercises, but I think the engagement side of that process was a very important part of the dialogues.

I say quite seriously that I did see change over five or six years. It had become a very valuable process. I am not sure whether there has been an indication from the current government that they intend to continue with the dialogues—not just those in China, because there are of course several others.

The dialogues did make progress. For example, in some provinces the Human Rights Technical Cooperation Program has led to the passing of anti domestic violence laws, which were previously unknown and not contemplated either. It also led to the distribution of ‘know your rights’ pamphlets that were distributed to prisons, and even to a series of model UN human rights councils that introduced students in universities across China to international human rights norms and UN processes.

I hope that, as we continue to watch events in Tibet, we can have in the back of our minds that we have made some progress in regard to that level of engagement with China, but that we can also urge the Chinese government to deal appropriately with these events and urge Prime Minister Rudd to most emphatically and specifically take these matters up during his visit. (Time expired)

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I say to the Senate that the government remains deeply concerned at the tragic developments in Tibet and neighbouring areas, and, as other senators have expressed, greatly regrets the violence and loss of life.

Precise details of the events remain unclear. We understand that protests began on 10 March, when Buddhist monks gathered in Ramoche Monastery in central Lhasa. Some 60 were arrested, prompting other monks to protest against the initial arrests. Sadly, events turned violent last Friday, 14 March. The international media has reported fires; the destruction of government buildings, Chinese owned businesses and vehicles by Tibetan protesters; and shooting and the use of tear gas by Chinese security forces.

The situation in Lhasa is quiet but tense, as protesters and authorities await China’s deadline for Tibetan protesters to cease activity and surrender by midnight, which is 3 am Australian eastern summer time on 17 March, or face ‘stern punishment’. Media reports suggest that protests have spread to the Tibetan areas of Qinghai, Gansu and Sichuan provinces. There are conflicting reports regarding the number of fatalities, with estimates between 10, which are the official Chinese estimates, and 100 from the Tibetan government in exile. The actual number may well remain unknown.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has contacted all Australians currently registered in Tibet. Our embassy in Beijing and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s Consular Emergency Centre are in contact with, and monitoring the welfare of, 14 Australians in or near Lhasa as of 1330 Canberra time of today’s date. Since the start of significant unrest on 14 March, we have also been in contact with and assisted another four Australians, who have left Lhasa.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s travel advice for China was updated on 17 March. It continues to advise Australians to reconsider their need to travel to Lhasa and now advises Australians to exercise a high degree of caution in the rest of Tibet and in the Tibetan areas of provinces bordering Tibet—Yunnan, Sichuan, Gansu and Qinghai—following reports of demonstrations there. The travel advice notes:

Several days of protest activity by Tibetan monks in Lhasa turned violent on 14 March, with reports of rioting and property damage. The situation on the streets of Lhasa remains tense. In these circumstances, you should reconsider your need to travel to Lhasa.

There have been reports of demonstrations and violence in other areas of Tibet and in Tibetan areas of provinces bordering Tibet (Sichuan, Gansu, Qinghai and Yunnan) and of an increased military presence. You should exercise a high degree of caution if travelling to these areas.

The overall travel advice for the rest of China remains at ‘Be alert to your own security.’

The government calls for calm and constraint by all parties and for the violence to end quickly and without further casualties. We are at a crucial juncture as we approach the deadline China has set for protesters to turn themselves in to authorities, which is midnight Lhasa time on 18 March. We call for restraint by authorities and by protesters. We call on China to ensure media freedoms in Tibet and elsewhere, so that the Chinese people and the international community have an accurate understanding of developments. We call on China to implement policies that will foster an environment of respect and tolerance and safeguard basic human rights.

On 16 March, the US Secretary of State, Dr Condoleezza Rice, called on China to engage in substantive dialogue with the Dalai Lama and urged all sides to refrain from violence. On 14 March, the French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, said:

We asked for restraint on the part of the Chinese authorities. We asked for human rights to be respected.

The UK Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, added:

There are probably two important messages to go out. One is the need for restraint on all sides, but secondly that substantive dialogue is the only way forward.

Of course, fundamental respect for human rights is a key platform of this government. We believe that human rights are a legitimate subject of international concern. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Stephen Smith, raised the government’s concerns, including those over Tibet, Falun Gong and fundamental freedoms, with China’s foreign minister, Mr Yang Jiechi, in February. We do not believe that in raising these issues we will damage our strong friendship with China. Indeed, we see such discussions as a vital component of continued bilateral engagement. Nor do we see raising human rights as inconsistent with our efforts to promote our bilateral and trade ties. On the contrary, strong economic and political relations with China can only increase Australia’s standing to conduct meaningful dialogue on human rights.

We believe that an open and transparent approach to human rights issues would greatly assist China to strengthen its standing in the international arena. We will continue to pursue our concerns about human rights in China through high-level visits and dialogue, through bilateral representations and through the annual Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue. Our human rights dialogue is underpinned by a practical program of human rights engagement managed by AusAID and the Human Rights Technical Cooperation Program. In collaboration with a range of Chinese agencies, the HRTC program promotes the protection of human rights in China through training, capacity building and other practical projects. To date, over 60 activities have been implemented.

Australia recognises the challenges China faces. In recent years, China has made remarkable achievements in improving the social and economic rights of its people in the face of tremendous challenges. The World Bank estimates China has lifted 400 million people out of extreme poverty since 1981. The United Nations Development Program estimates that the number of Chinese living in poverty decreased from 85 million in 1990 to 26.1 million in 2004 and that China’s infant mortality rate decreased from 32.2 per cent in the year 2000 to 19 per cent in 2005. Increasing communications access, particularly the internet and mobile phones, has bolstered China’s growing civil society. Some progress has also been made in labour laws and in legal reform, and Chinese people are increasingly aware of their rights and increasingly willing to exercise them.

But human rights abuses continue to occur in China, and China continues to fall short of international expectations, including with regard to the death penalty, torture, non-judicial detention and restrictions of freedoms of expression and information. Beyond the latest disturbing developments, we also remain concerned about persistent and serious inadequacies in the protection of human rights in Tibet, including in the protection of Tibetans’ religious, civil and political rights. We are of course also concerned about Tibetans’ cultural and environmental heritage.

Australia does not question China’s sovereignty over Tibet. Successive Australian governments have recognised China’s sovereignty over Tibet, as does every country that has diplomatic relations with China. We believe that it is in China’s best interests to implement policies which will foster an environment of greater respect and tolerance. At this time, we urge China to take the opportunity to enter a process of dialogue with Tibetan groups, including the Dalai Lama. China would do well to encourage the non-violent elements of the Tibetan minority that the Dalai Lama represents, as it would be a tragedy were Tibet to continue to go down a path where violence is the only means for the expression of grievances. The year 2008 could be a watershed for Chinese and Tibetan history. We of course hope for increased tolerance and understanding.

Some have suggested that Australia should boycott the Olympic Games as a political statement against the reaction to protests in Tibet. The Australian government does not support a boycott of the Olympics. A boycott of the Olympics would not assist the human rights of the Tibetan people. The greater international focus the Olympics will bring can serve only to give the international community a greater understanding of China, including its diversity and its complex challenges, and give China a deeper appreciation of international norms, ultimately assisting in a better human rights situation in China.

I should say that the government is troubled by the actions of some protesters at Chinese consulates in Sydney and Melbourne over the weekend. I take this opportunity to say that the government takes its responsibilities under the Vienna convention for the protection of diplomatic premises very seriously, as I am sure you would appreciate. I can say to the chamber that we are deeply saddened by the tragic loss of life in Tibet and we reiterate our call for restraint by all parties. We call on China to show leadership to overcome the challenges it faces in Tibet and to resolve this issue peacefully.

In relation to the urgency motion that is currently before the chamber—while, needless to say, any criticism of the government made in this debate is certainly not accepted, and I do not want this to be misinterpreted in any way—I will make absolutely clear that the government will support this urgency motion.

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make comment on this urgency motion and use the opportunity on behalf of the opposition to express concern over the events that have taken place in recent days in Tibet and note that the situation there appears to be extremely serious. It has resulted, apparently, in the deaths of dozens of people, the burning of shops and businesses, as well as the destruction of homes and public infrastructure there. I say ‘apparently’ because it is true that information about exactly what occurs in places such as Tibet is not easy to obtain and is not necessarily reliable, and we need to be very careful about what assumptions we make about the events that are unfolding there.

What is clear, I think, is that there is a very powerful undercurrent of dissent within the native-born Tibetan community and that, for whatever reason, this has surfaced in recent days in a violent way. The precise causes may be difficult to ascertain, but it is clear that the people who are citizens of Tibet, particularly those who are ancestrally related to the people of Tibet, feel great concern about the affairs in their country and, for whatever reason, that concern has been welling up in recent days. The 50-odd year history of Chinese control of Tibet obviously is closely related to that tension. Given the heightened focus on affairs in China and in Tibet, particularly given rise to by the lead-up to the Beijing Olympics, it is not surprising that more focus should occur on events all over China, particularly in a place like this. Nonetheless, whether this is the kind of event that relates to that additional international focus or whether it is simply a reflection of an ongoing and deep concern by people who live in Tibet about the conditions of Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, it is always disappointing to see these sorts of events—particularly bloody events—unfold.

I want to join with my colleagues today in this place to call on the Chinese government and its representatives in Tibet to act with sensitivity and restraint. I particularly hope that they will treat those people who have been apprehended as protesters in Tibet, and perhaps elsewhere in China, to be treated with great care. I would urge the Chinese government to allow those protests to take place without undue or violent intervention and to use only the minimum amount of force required to prevent the loss of life or damage to property. I appreciate that there are different rules operating in China with respect to demonstrations and expressions of opposition to the government, but I also urge the Chinese government to be aware that there are different values and different norms accepted outside of China and that, to a significant extent, the world will judge China by the extent to which it exercises restraint in the circumstances.

I understand that the Chinese government has offered leniency to protesters who hand themselves in to authorities by Monday night of this week. I particularly express the hope that those protesters who do hand themselves in are treated with due respect for their human rights, and I am sure that the Chinese authorities are aware that the world will be watching to ensure this is the case. I urge the Australian government in particular to keep a very close eye on this aspect of what is happening in Tibet and to make it known that it will not tolerate any form of human rights violation of those protesters.

It is unfortunate, I think, that in many respects these events are happening in the lead-up to the Beijing Olympics and, indeed, just a few weeks before the Olympic torch is due to arrive in Lhasa prior to being carried to the top of Mount Everest. The Olympics is, of course, about bringing the world together in celebrating, at least for a few weeks, those things which unite us as human beings rather than those things which divide us, through highlighting the sporting abilities, skills and achievements of individuals all over the world.

I hope that, when the Olympic torch does make its way to Tibet, both the Tibetan and the Chinese communities will take this opportunity to focus on what they have in common as a people and to use that torch’s arrival as a chance to restore some form of dialogue—which, I appreciate, is perhaps a focus that is not there at the present time. I would also encourage those communities not to turn on each other in the name of political expression. I appreciate that many shops, businesses and even homes have been burnt in Lhasa over the last weekend and that these have mainly belonged to people of Chinese descent. It is important to acknowledge that those people, for the most part, are not to be blamed for the policies, however viewed, of the Chinese government and that it is extremely dangerous when communities turn on innocent representatives of the policies of governments as a way of expressing some kind of dissatisfaction with the policies of those governments.

In Australia, we expect protesters to behave in a way which is tolerant of the rights of other people and, therefore, particularly to eschew the use of violence. I have to express, as I think Minister Faulkner expressed, some concern about the use of violence by some protesters in Australia in the last few days. I hope that this Senate can unite with the clear message to those people that, however justified the basis for their protest and however valid the reasons for them to be expressing strongly a point of view about what is occurring in Tibet, the use of violence in that context is not justified and should never be supported or tolerated by Australians.

I appreciate also that there will be views taken, particularly by the Chinese government, about the right of other nations or citizens of other nations to express points of view about what might be regarded as the internal affairs of China. I want to finish by saying that I think it is very well established here and internationally that the rights of citizens of any nation are the concern of democratic societies everywhere. (Time expired)

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the five minutes available to me I would like to express the Democrats’ support for this motion. It is a matter of urgency that the Chinese Communist government observe international laws and norms and cease the bloodshed in Tibet. But, of course, another point does have to be made. I appreciate that governments and people in major parties do need to be diplomatic in their language. I think it is part of the role of those of us on the crossbenches to be more explicit about expressing the deep concern that many people feel.

The simple fact is that the Chinese government has flagrantly and repeatedly breached international laws and norms with regard to human rights in a wide range of ways for a long period of time, and this is just the latest example and one that happens to have got international attention. This is a totalitarian regime that practices serious repression and oppression on its own people and supports serious repression and oppression in many other countries around the world. It is not alone in that, but it is certainly up there as one of the most serious, and this point does need to be made.

The oppression in Tibet is serious, particularly at present, but oppression is not isolated to there. This Chinese communist regime executes more people each year, by far, than every other nation on earth combined. Some of those people—quite a large number—are convicted via very dubious legal processes, some of them for offences which should not be offences. The opportunity for basic freedom of belief, freedom of speech and freedom of religion is seriously curtailed. The persecution of groups such as the Falun Gong practitioners is extreme, and it is clearly established as being extreme. In addition to executions, there is widespread torture and forced labour on an enormous scale. These things continue. They were happening before the current unrest and violence in Tibet, and they will continue after the world’s attention inevitably—as it always does—shifts somewhere else.

As was pointed out here today, I think in question time, there is a real prospect that some of the people protesting in Tibet at the moment will face the death penalty if they are captured and convicted of offences against the state. These sorts of things cannot just be swept aside by saying, ‘We’ll continue on with the dialogue.’ Dialogue is important—I support dialogue—but we also need to make clear much more strongly, I think, what is not acceptable.

The point has been made about the Olympics. I appreciate that boycotting the Olympics is not going to instantly reverse all of the human rights abuses in China, but we also need to look at what the Olympics are meant to be about: the international celebration of our shared humanity. We also know that the Olympics can be, and have been in the past, used as major propaganda exercises by particular governments in the country in which they are held. If we asked ourselves today the question, ‘Would we, in hindsight—should we, in hindsight—have participated in the Olympics in Berlin in 1936?’ I think most people would say, ‘No.’

I appreciate that there is an argument that coming together in Beijing at the Olympics—I am paraphrasing Senator Faulkner here; I think this is broadly what he said—will give opportunities for greater understanding of China and its challenges and give China a deeper appreciation of international norms which should ultimately assist the situation. That is an argument that can be put, but I do not see much evidence of it. All of the evidence I have seen—human rights reports from around the place, including from the US congress, Human Rights Watch and other bodies—is that, in the oppression leading up to the Olympics, things are actually getting worse. I think the Chinese communist government is well aware, frankly, of what international norms and requirements are, and believes it is in a position to ignore them. The simple fact is that if the Olympics were being held in somewhere like Zimbabwe we would all be boycotting them in an instant. It is because of the political clout of China. We all need to look at that.

I do not think this is just an issue for government; it is an issue for all of us. It is an issue for the corporate sponsors of the Olympics as well, I might say—people like Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Visa and Kodak. The Olympics are not actually about governments; they are about people. I think this is an issue that all of us, as people, need to think about more strongly, and we need to look at ways we can make our horror and concern more strongly known to the Chinese government. (Time expired)

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the deep concerns expressed by previous speakers about the current situation in Tibet and to express support for the motion moved by Senator Brown and the comments made on behalf of the opposition by Senator Payne and Senator Humphries. All senators would be concerned about reports and images of the unrest and the security crackdown in Lhasa, and reports of casualties and arrests. While we do not know the exact extent of what has occurred, all Australians would be concerned, along with people around the globe, about the current situation in Tibet. Of course we are all concerned that demonstrations in Melbourne and Sydney turned violent over the weekend. We support the comments of our foreign minister, expressed on behalf of all Australians, calling for the Chinese government and authorities to act with restraint and for those protesting to be allowed to protest peacefully. Finally, we support the government’s call for violence to end quickly and without further casualties.

The peaceful expression of dissent is a critical and fundamental human right. It is a critical human right, which we appropriately take for granted in Australia. We need to continue to press the importance of human rights in general, and the importance of the right to the peaceful expression of dissent in particular, with the Chinese government. Australia of course has a record of expressing its views directly to the Chinese government in a constructive approach based on regular dialogue rather than public confrontation. Australia has a record of encouraging dialogue between the Dalai Lama and Chinese authorities. In that context we support a continuation of the Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue. Senator Payne outlined very eloquently the advances that have been achieved in the field of human rights through that vehicle.

The Rudd government will no doubt continue, and indeed ought to continue, down that path pursued by the previous government. Senator Payne very appropriately called on the Prime Minister to raise Australia’s concerns about these latest events directly with the Chinese government during his visit to China next month. In light of his particular affinity and relationship with China, he is likely to be in a better position than perhaps anyone else to press the point in a constructive and outcomes focused way. The reality is that something has to be done to achieve positive change in Tibet, and this should be a good time to do exactly that. The world currently approaches the Beijing Olympics with great excitement and anticipation. The eyes of the world are and will be on China like never before. Of course that necessarily includes a clear focus on China’s human rights record. While the government is right to refuse to call for a boycott of the Olympic Games in Beijing, it is right to say that, by the same token, this is a time when China ought to reflect on the image it wants to project to the world. Incidentally in that context I commend the Dalai Lama for his restraint in not calling for a boycott of the Olympic Games either. In line with all previous speakers, I express my support for the urgency motion and hope that those reported events in Tibet will come to a peaceful conclusion at the earliest opportunity.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the speakers in this debate for their support for this very important motion. I know it will be taken seriously by the government, and the contents will be conveyed to the Beijing authorities. I note that there are travel warnings, which Senator Faulkner informed us about. However, the reality is that all plane and rail access to Tibet has been shut down by the Chinese authorities and it is very unlikely that anybody can get access to the country. The control over the flow of information—including access for the world to see what is going on in Tibet—is one of the problems that indicate the authoritarian nature of the Beijing authorities. The authorities are still failing by a long way to meet the standards that we take for granted in this country.

The Beijing Olympics are coming up later in the year. This will put the spotlight on China, but that spotlight must also spread to the people of Tibet and elsewhere in China who are left out. There ought to be a Tibet team marching with the rest of the world in the great stadium in Beijing but there will not be. There will not be, because since the 1950s the world has failed to stand up for the Tibetan people and the Tibetan nation. We are now, again, seeing the consequences of that failure as well as the brutality of the regime in Beijing. Australians have consistently, as shown by the polls and through their own activities, been horrified by the repression in Tibet.

One proposal I hope the government will consider is a request to the Chinese authorities to allow a high-level independent government delegation from this country to go to Tibet as part of the dialogue to see what is happening in Tibet. The Chinese authorities have put a different spin on the events there to that coming from the government in exile. Let us see. I would propose to the government that the Prime Minister be requested to take, or that he consider formulating, a high-level government delegation to Tibet to see for themselves what is happening in this beautiful country, which culturally has given so much to the world—not least through the extraordinarily peaceful philosophy of the Dalai Lama—and which still suffers such brutality and repression.

Question agreed.