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

I would like it noted that this is not my official first speech. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and is in a similar vein to the previous question. In the light of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s suppression of human rights and intimidation of political opponents in Russia, does the government consider former Prime Minister Howard’s rush to sign an Australia-Russia uranium deal at the APEC summit last year to be ill considered, irresponsible and against the national interest? On the minister’s comments that the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties is considering this matter, in the light of the facts that there have been no inspections in Russia in at least seven years and that such inspections of Russian facilities will not have been carried out by the time the committee meets, will the government now repudiate this agreement?

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

I thank the senator for his question. I am not sure that I can add a great deal to what I have said in outlining the government’s position on this important issue. The position of the government on this matter is clear. In relation to the comments made by the Russian ambassador, Mr Smith has made clear that he did not intend to get into a public debate with the Russian ambassador. The government wants to continue to see a strong relationship between Australia and Russia. The government recognises the potential benefits for Australia in the agreement. But I commend to you the qualifying comments I made in answer to Senator Trood’s earlier question.

I can say that the government will be taking into account the recent and ongoing events in Georgia and Australia’s bilateral relationship with Russia when it considers its approach to ratification of the agreement. I pointed out for the benefit of the Senate the comments that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs and the former Prime Minister made when this particular deal was signed. Perhaps Senator Trood, in asking his question, may regret not having those comments at the front of his mind. I think that Mr Smith’s approach on this issue has been very responsible and very appropriate in the circumstances and I would certainly commend it to you.

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I would like to remind the minister that in January this year the chief of the Russian armed forces, General Yury Baluyevsky, claimed that Russia maintained the right to use nuclear weapons preventatively. I would hope that Australia could form a strong relationship with the Russian government without exchanging nuclear materials. If the government will not immediately repudiate this deal, are we not sending a signal to Russia and to governments around the world that revenue from uranium sales is more important to the Australian government than nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and international peace and security?

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

I think, Senator, you need to keep in your mind that Australia and Russia already have a bilateral nuclear safeguards agreement, which was concluded in 1990 and is still in force. That agreement does of course meet all of Australia’s key policy requirements: uranium can be used only for peaceful, non-military purposes; it must be subject to Russia’s safeguards agreement with the IAEA; and it can only be used in facilities that are mutually acceptable to both Australia and Russia. That is the situation we have at the moment with the agreement that is in place. Of course, prior to ratification of any new nuclear cooperation agreement— (Time expired)