Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Evans, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Is the minister aware of the recent article in the Australian reporting that the Prime Minister’s plan for a new Asia-Pacific Community has been politely but firmly rebuffed by the majority of countries in the region? Will the minister now inform the Senate which of the 21 or more APEC countries that discussed Prime Minister Rudd’s proposal at the weekend APEC meeting have agreed to join Mr Rudd’s Asia-Pacific Community?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Coonan for the question. I am not aware of the article she refers to; I have not seen that particular article. But it is true that the Prime Minister has been keen to engage nations in the Asia-Pacific region in stronger ties and stronger joint activity in pursuit of our mutual interests. To that end he has had Mr Richard Woolcott AO, a former senior diplomat, lead a process by which he is engaged with those countries about the architecture, or potential new architecture, for enhancing that greater engagement in the Asia-Pacific region. As I understand it, that is a matter that is still in progress. No doubt it is a matter that the Prime Minister is also discussing at the various international forums with leaders of those nations. Senator Coonan, I thought you would support that—

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order, in the spirit of trying to cooperate in relation to how these new question times work and in respect of direct relevance. The question was: which of the 21 or more countries have actually agreed to join Mr Rudd’s Asia-Pacific Community? That is a very specific question that is susceptible to a ruling relating to direct relevance. Similarly to Senator Abetz, I am not suggesting that you should rule now, but that seems to me to very fairly and squarely raise the issue of direct relevance.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Evans was directly relevant to the question that was asked. Senator Evans was dealing with the engagement of the Australian government with the Asia-Pacific area, which is exactly on point in respect of this matter. He has minutes to go to deal with the issue. Of course, what the question is asking for is a specific answer to a specific question, but the question is: is Senator Evans being directly relevant to the question? The answer is yes. He is dealing with the question and he has a minute to run in respect of the question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. Senator Evans, you have 52 seconds in which to continue your answer to the question.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. That implies that I had only got one minute and eight seconds into the answer when Senator Coonan interjected and took a point of order. I am trying to do my best to answer the question she directed to me.

As I was saying, that diplomatic initiative is continuing. Mr Woolcott is visiting a range of countries to discuss with them the potential new regional architecture and the Asia-Pacific Community proposal. That is a diplomatic initiative that obviously involves confidential discussions with those countries, the development of the proposal and countries’ responses, and no doubt those countries will also want to discuss among themselves the initiative. So, as I understand it, that process is continuing and the engagement is occurring. (Time expired)

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I noticed that Senator Evans was unable to say which of the 21 or more APEC countries have agreed. Will the minister advise the Senate whether any regional country at all, even one, has clearly committed to progressing the Prime Minister’s APC plan—or has it been reduced to a community of one?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand Senator Coonan is new to the Foreign Affairs portfolio, but I would suggest to her that it is highly unlikely that, in trying to develop new regional architecture, you are going to have individual countries responding individually as the whole question and approach is discussed. Clearly that is not the way international relations work. As I understand it, the initiative that has been led by Mr Woolcott is continuing. He has been travelling extensively through the Asia-Pacific region discussing the Prime Minister’s suggestion, discussing responses with our counterpart countries. It is something that is being actively considered by those countries and, when a consensus or results emerge from that, I am sure the Prime Minister will be reporting to the parliament.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given that Senator Evans has been unable to nominate even one country or any countries collectively—none have responded collectively or individually at all—and regional neighbours have poured cold water on the proposed Asia-Pacific plan, when will the Prime Minister abandon this poorly thought out and ill-conceived proposal?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I find Senator Coonan’s attitude disappointing in that she takes such a negative approach to what I thought was a fairly broadly supported desire to improve the engagement of the Asia-Pacific region, to ensure that we work more cooperatively with our neighbours in our mutual interests. We on this side, on the government side, actually think that such engagement is in our mutual interests, and we would urge you to provide the support that I think is warranted for that greater engagement. We face a number of global challenges, be it the financial crisis or climate change, and the government believe working closely with our neighbours in the Asia-Pacific region is in our national interest. I would urge you to join us in that approach.