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

I would like to speak tonight on the subject of Burma, a nation in South-East Asia. I would like to begin by just applauding the federal government for its decision to revert to the name of 'Burma' rather than 'Myanmar' in the case of our relations with that country.

I say that because Myanmar is the name that was selected by the military regime that still maintains power in that country. Many people believe in some sort of romantic delusional state which suggests that everything is great now in that country. But the reality is that the oppression of the ethnic minorities in that country remains and it continues to this day.

We should be aware that 70 per cent of the population of the nation of Burma is actually from the ethnic minorities, so the Burmans themselves are not a majority in comparison to the non-Burmese. The ethnic nationalities are: Karen, Shan, Arakanese, Chin, Kachin, Mon, Lahu and Palaung. They are, as I said, still under oppressive terms and they are not being treated fairly. In fact, the reality is that within the parliament, the assemblies of Burma, it is the case to this day that in the People's Assembly 110 of the 410 seats remain reserved for military officers. It is funny—well, it would be funny if you could joke about such things—that they call it the 'People's Assembly' and yet the constitution imposes military officers just being placed into that assembly without being elected.

Similarly, in the National Assembly, of the 224 seats there, 56 of those seats, again, go to military officers. It really does say something about the legitimacy of that government and the legitimacy of the reform program that is allegedly going on and that there is a willingness in some areas internationally that they should just neglect that what is very much a part of a legislative process is an imposition of uniformed army officers onto the mechanism of government.

So I do cast doubt on the progress that has taken place in the nation of Burma. I referred before to the name of that country, Burma. When you speak to representatives of the ethnic nationalities, the Karens and the Chins, of which there are very many in my electorate, they talk about how they find the name Burma acceptable but acceptable up until the time when there can be a genuine agreement from all the occupants within that nation to come up with a name that properly reflects the ethnic nationalities, the ethnic diversity of that country. So whilst I do appreciate that the federal government has re-embraced the name of Burma—as much as can be done—over Myanmar, I do look forward to the day when there will actually be a consensus within the nation itself on a name that properly represents all the people of that country.

It is also important that with Aung Sau Suu Kyi, the head of the National League for Democracy in Burma, visiting Australia next month that we do talk a little bit and we think a little bit about these issues.

I am also very pleased that there are a number of projects where development aid will be used to support refugees on the Burma-Thailand border. Back in 2011, I was fortunate enough to visit the border region and visited a refugee camp to see the conditions.

There are many people in those camps who will look forward to the day when their homeland can be safe again and where the persecution will have stopped. Until that is possible and until repatriation to a good and a fair country can be achieved, then it is good that we are fulfilling our obligations and looking after the genuine refugees who are found in those camps.

Once again, it is great that we have reverted to the term 'Burma' and I hope for a better future for that country.