House debates

Monday, 2 June 2014

Private Members' Business

Prime Ministerial Visit to Papua New Guinea New Guinea

12:34 pm

Photo of Laurie FergusonLaurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I indicate at the outset that, despite the comments I am about to make, I deeply respect the member for Ryan's commitment to, knowledge of and genuine interest in this area. However, I cannot agree with the tenor of this resolution. I guess it reminds me of my father's comment that you should always be thankful for small mercies. This visit—the longest in 25 years—is, indeed, in that vein. It is a small mercy given this government's foreign affairs performance since coming to power. Looking around the world, we had to issue an apology in Malaysia because of a rather clubfooted earlier approach there. We have had Indonesia complaining about infringements on its sovereignty. We had a situation where ASIO raided the lawyer representing our close neighbour, East Timor. We had a situation where, when West Papuan asylum seekers approached one of our posts, the Prime Minister of this country said they were grandstanding against Indonesia. We had a situation in regards to climate change action where we could not find a senior MP who could bother to get on a plane to Warsaw. In relation to torture, the Prime Minister made the resounding and internationally recognised comment that, 'Sometimes in difficult situations difficult things happen.' That was kind of his defence of torture.

If we look at our ability to gain friends in this world, the current government were not content with us abstaining in regards to non-member observer status for Palestine when the UN vote was 138 to nine. They went on from the settlement vote to be in a minority of eight against 158 and associated ourselves with a very small minority of countries around the world. So I think to make so much of this visit—that it was the longest in two decades—is a small mercy for this government's foreign policy position.

Even then, one has to be somewhat dubious of where things lie at the moment and the basis on which this relationship now stands. Michael Gordon, on 23 March this year, talked of a recent controversy over the inquiry into the death of a person in detention. Amongst other aspects of this relationship he talked about the closing down of the human rights inquiry with Australian agreement and a joint agreement to deny access to a human rights lawyer to Papua New Guinea. He spoke of immigration minister Pato's very kind support of Australian foreign policy. And he is an expert on this, apparently. He was apparently previously a tribunal member somewhere in the world. He knows so much about these claimants! He has examined their personal cases! He came out and said they were economic refugees. At a press conference with the Prime Minister of Australia, when speaking of close, constructive and candid talks, he certainly was not constructive and candid in regards to questions, because be closed down the discussion.

If the relationship is that good, I am a bit interested in Deputy Commissioner Simon Kauba's comments last week about the Australian inquiry into what happened in the detention centre. He said the inquiry was 'inconclusive', 'cannot be depended on to prosecute the case' and 'hampers our ongoing investigation'. We know that Papua New Guinea is very dependent upon Australia. We know that there was no reduction in the foreign aid to that country in the budget—one of the few in the world that did not have a reduction. I think we have to be suspicious as to the motivation there. They are very dependent. They are very compliant with Australia's needs in regards to offshore detention. As I say, I think this country should be more concerned with an under-five mortality rate in Papua New Guinea of 75 per 1,000 and the fact that the primary school enrolment rate is just 53 per cent, lower than all but a few African countries. The primary school completion rate was just 45 per cent in 2007 and has not improved much since then. This is a situation where the United Nations in looking at the Millennium Development Goals has made the following comments:

Papua New Guinea's progress … has been slow. Uneven economic growth and distribution of wealth, high levels of violence … deteriorating law and order, poor governance … undermine the nation’s stability.

It has spoken of serious challenges in achieving the MDGs and of working to strengthen the MDG based data collection. It has spoken of the need for an accountable civil service.

As I say, they may have been there for a very long visit; however, one has to question the minuscule role of that visit in the overall failure of this government in foreign policy. We are essentially very isolated on a variety of fronts. I forgot to mention earlier the complete isolation of this country in regards to human rights in Sri Lanka.

Comments

No comments