Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution on this motion, as it relates to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. The treaty was established in 1996, and the core provision of the treaty is the prohibition of all nuclear explosions by all nations. When the treaty was created, there were 44 nations specifically mentioned as having nuclear capacities. The treaty must be signed and ratified by all those 44 nations. Unfortunately, nine of those nations are yet to ratify the treaty, meaning that nine more ratifications are needed before it can come into force. Those nations are China, North Korea, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan and the USA.

Australia has a proud record on this treaty. It should be recalled that the treaty in its draft form did not receive the consensus agreement required at the Conference on Disarmament. Disregarding the Conference on Disarmament, the Howard government went forward on this issue and submitted the draft treaty to the General Assembly of the United Nations. The treaty was sponsored by Australia and attracted the co-sponsorship of 127 other nations. The treaty was adopted by a very large majority. Australia was a signatory on the day that the treaty opened for signature, 24 September 1996, along with the five declared nuclear weapons states. The treaty was signed by the Howard government and it was also the Howard government that ratified the treaty in 1998. Whilst it is true that we have a good record on this treaty and on disarmament as well, there is still much to be done. The coalition remain fully supportive of the aims of the treaty and continue to call on nations to ratify it. We also urge the government to use its influence to encourage other nations to ratify the treaty.

Further to that, I serve on the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which is undertaking an inquiry into nuclear nonproliferation. I share the strong interest of other speakers on this motion and note that we are all members of the committee. With regard to further action by Australia, it is certainly my view that every time one of our committees, delegations or individual study tour participants travels overseas the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, along with other treaties that relate to issues of key importance to Australia, should be raised as a matter of course. Australia can send a very clear and consistent message to the world in this way.

I spoke before about the actions taken by the Howard government in stepping past the Conference on Disarmament’s inability to achieve consensus in 1996. Having had the opportunity to recently observe the Conference on Disarmament, I wonder whether that organisation has become any more effective in the intervening period. It is my view that it has not. Yet it is not the Conference on Disarmament that stands in the way of this treaty. That is now about the nine countries that have not ratified it.

The final resolution of this matter represents a very complicated scenario if one considers that this is as much about foreign affairs as it is about weapons. We already know that France, the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation have not stood in the way and have ratified the treaty. We now face a situation where the future of this treaty depends on unreliable nations that play completely by their own rules. It is hard to see Iran or North Korea signing up to the treaty. It is open to speculation that the key to getting most of these nations to ratify the treaty is the USA. If the USA ratifies then it will be all the more difficult for the other nations, such as China, Egypt, Indonesia, Israel and Pakistan, to stand back. That of course brings it down to whether President Obama is able to get the US Senate to agree to ratification. It has been suggested that if China made a supportive statement on the treaty that would also assist in providing the domestic goodwill that would ease the opposition in the USA. The harsh reality is that there is great doubt whether nations like Iran and North Korea can be negotiated with and whether they can be relied upon to honour agreements. The other point is that what these countries may ask for may be too much to give.

In closing, I will say that Australia has an excellent record regarding the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. We have a good history of work at the Conference on Disarmament. We can use this history for effective negotiation and advocacy in the ways that I have previously described. Every elected representative at federal or state level, together with every official in the service of Australia, must take the opportunity to speak for and advocate for the treaty and for every other treaty that Australia wishes to see in force. We have great potential and we must achieve that potential. I commend the member for Fremantle for bringing this motion forward and I commend the other speakers for the strong and bipartisan support that exists in this place for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.

See this speech in context