Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I want to talk about space policy. As honourable members may be aware, I have brought this up over the years in this place. It is an issue that we tend not to discuss in federal parliament. Madam Acting Deputy President, as you know, I represent the state of South Australia, as do Senators Hurley and Kirk, my colleagues from South Australia. They would know that we have a proud history as one of the key hubs of space related activity in this country, so of course part of my motivation in drawing attention to the issue of space policy is a hope that any new activity in this area may provide further opportunities for the expertise and capability within my home state.

More broadly, however, I have come here with the firm belief that the exploration of space presents a number of exciting opportunities that could fundamentally transform our long-term future in a way that arguably few activities can. I am unashamedly excited when I think of the possibilities that a more proactive space policy could bring. I raise this issue in the knowledge that there is a bit of a giggle factor associated with space policy. Any politicians who go out on a limb to call for more action in this field are often accused of being ‘space cadets’ themselves—not being really focused on the real issues. I reject that notion. I think space policy is a real issue, something that we should be discussing in the halls of power. I will highlight some of the reasons later on in my remarks.

For the moment I do acknowledge the unfortunate truth that it is actually quite easy for policymakers to ignore space policy. That is partly because existing efforts around the world to understand, explore and exploit space suffer a bit of an image problem. One reason is that progress has been painstaking. It is telling that humans have never been so far away from the Earth than they were when Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin touched down on the moon more than 30 years ago. We have come to expect smooth and regular progress in science and technology, so it does seem counterintuitive that in many ways the pinnacle of manned space flight was so long ago.

Although some amazing feats have been achieved since, and I particularly note the efforts by NASA and the European Space Agency to explore Mars and Titan and the incredible data that those missions have sent back, nothing seems to have captured the imagination of the public quite so much as the Apollo landing all those years ago. I am also conscious of those who consider space exploration a bit of an unnecessary extravagance. I reject that view but I do understand where it comes from. It is true that space exploration is a risky and expensive exercise, from the perspective of both the financial investment required and the safety of the people taking part in it.

While science and technology are likely to make great advances in this area, I suspect that space exploration will always be a fundamentally risky activity to undertake. When faced with this level of risk, the public are right to question what they actually get out of it. So I want to outline my views on why I feel that a new focus on space policy is so important now and will be in the future. I will begin by outlining some pretty indisputable facts.

Firstly, space exploration is not some flight of fancy; it is happening now. Yes, some significant technical challenges stand in the way of a permanent human presence in space but, given the history of human innovation, is there anyone here who really does not give us at least an even chance of overcoming some of these obstacles?

Secondly, our efforts to conquer space provide many tangible benefits right now. Imagine what global communications would be like today if Sputnik had not been launched in 1957, an event that pioneered the widespread use of satellites. Without that effort we would not have Google Earth or global positioning, and our ability to monitor the weather would be much more limited. Indeed, a number of everyday products have their origins in space related research and development, including smoke detectors, barcodes and cordless tools, to name just a few. Many thousands of people all over the world are employed by government space programs and the companies that supply them. These are highly technical jobs that lead to significant knowledge spin-offs throughout the economy. I also believe that there is great value in exploration and discovery, both because it transcends our everyday life and because the knowledge and resources that may await some determined steps on our part are virtually unfathomable.

What can we, as legislators and politicians, do in this vast and complex area? I think there is an opportunity for us to do a great deal. In some ways it is hard for us in this place to take long-term strategic views on a number of issues when we are faced with so many immediate priorities; for example, so many pieces of legislation that have an impact on everyone’s day-to-day life. I do not for an instant suggest that the importance of our day-to-day work here should in any way be diminished, but I do not necessarily see these two debates as mutually exclusive. I think we can have a long-term strategic perspective on some of these bigger issues—and, to quote Douglas Adams, space is big.

We in this place are blessed with the opportunity to change things for the better, and on the issue of space policy I actually think we can do a lot better than we are currently doing. One particular issue that is calling for attention is the need to work with other nations on devising an effective international approach to regulating space activity. At the moment there are a small number of treaties managed by the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs—yes, that really is an office. The most important of these is the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. The treaty contains in its pages a number of worthy goals, including:

• the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;—

I am sure they mean ‘humankind’—

• outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;
• States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental activities;
• States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
• States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.

As you could imagine, the problem is that under existing mechanisms these tenets are quite difficult to enforce. As one example, I draw the Senate’s attention to the levels of so-called ‘space junk’ in the Earth’s orbit. These levels are increasing rapidly, posing a threat to government and commercial assets in orbit both right now and into the future. We need an effective regulatory mechanism that governs the management and disposal of space based assets in the interests of all users.

Other regulatory issues for space policy include the use of military systems and the gamut of potential commercial activity, including satellite airspace, space tourism, and, in the future, the pressing issue of access to resources. There is an American company called SpaceDev. They are looking at the feasibility of building an unmanned probe to claim ownership of a potentially resource rich asteroid orbiting between the earth and Mars. That is technically in defiance of the UN Outer Space Treaty, but the company’s founder was quoted in 1998 as saying:

There’s really no entity to which such a claim of ownership can be made. Therefore I believe it just needs to be made to the public in general.

I found another interesting quote by this man. He said:

If the U.N. doesn’t like it, they can send a tank up to my asteroid, which of course they can’t …

No kidding—he actually said that! This is a serious, publicly listed company that supplies the United States government. Yet the approach of its founder and then CEO exemplifies the Wild West attitude that may arise if our ability to conduct activity in space outstrips the regulatory environment. While it is tempting for sovereign nations and companies to revel in what seems to be a regulatory free-for-all, an appropriate, unambiguous and effective regulatory system is essential to provide the certainty necessary to maximise the level of public and private investment in the long term.

Another issue that could confound space policy in its current form is the possibility that future missions may be beyond the resources of any one nation acting on its own. It must be said that space exploration already benefits from significant international cooperation, but more could be done to leverage the resources of those nations, including Australia, that do not have a space program of their own. Space, after all, should not become the inheritance of the United States, China or the European Union. I guess our current approach is a bit of a no-man’s-land with a group of national space programs, often duplicating each other’s efforts with the limited resources available, and a regulation-free zone that may currently suit the small cadre of nations and companies that have a presence in space but in the future may only result in increased uncertainty and investment risk for all.

Ultimately, I think the challenge for space policy makers is to devise a framework that facilitates a truly international approach to space activity and its regulation—a framework that acknowledges the efforts of nations and companies who invest in space activity but also allows all nations the opportunity to be equal partners in this exercise. Obviously, there are going to be some countries that are more able or more willing to invest, whether it is in a public or private fashion, in space activity, but that does not mean the rest of the world should miss out on the exciting discoveries or access to space.

So, Madam Acting Deputy President, I put you on notice and make it very clear that this is one of the issues that I will be working on between now and the end of my term. I think it would be really exciting for members to be involved in the development of a space policy proposal. Certainly, I will be doing that and hopefully putting it on the political agenda in the new year. As with some issues that come before this place, I hope this is one that can transcend political boundaries and, again, will be approached by government, honourable members and the public with an open mind. As I acknowledged in the beginning of my remarks, I do recognise that there is a bit of a giggle factor when talking about space policy. But I also think it is an extraordinary and exciting area, as well as a complex area, when we are taking into account the idea of frameworking not just some kind of regulatory mechanism—and I understand we have the space activities law, just in case anyone was going to remind me of that. I am more than aware of that; I was involved in the debate on that legislation—that is a little more sophisticated in the sense that it takes into account the needs of other nations and ensures that we work together as a global community to get the best out of space in a way that does not involve negative exploitation.