Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 19 October 2012:

(1) What military and civilian response plans, if any, does the Australian Government have in place to respond to a nuclear attack against Australian territory?

(2) What such plans have been in place in the past?

(3) Will the Government release the sections of the Force Posture Review prepared along with the 2009 Defence White Paper that relate to the issue of attacks on Australian and joint Australia­ United States (US) military and intelligence facilities in the event of major conflict between the US and China?

(4) What sites in Australia does the Government believe are likely nuclear targets in the event of major conflict?

(5) Does the presence of joint US military and intelligence facilities in Australia increase the risk of a nuclear attack against Australia?

(6) Does the presence of US nuclear-armed submarines in Australian waters and at Australian ports increase the risk of a nuclear attack against Australia?

(7) Does the Government have any casualty estimates resulting from nuclear attacks against Pine Gap and other facilities in Australia that are likely nuclear targets?

(8) How many designated bums beds would be available across Australia in the event of a nuclear attack against Australia?

(9) What general advice, if any, does the Government offer the Australian public in case of a nuclear attack against Australia?

(10) How would the Government attempt to protect medical and other emergency response workers from radiation effects in the aftermath of a nuclear attack?

(11) What research and preparations has the Government conducted on the effects of nuclear weapons on health and the environment?

(12) What are the likely effects of a regional nuclear war in South Asia on agricultural production in Australia?

(13) To what extent do the humanitarian and environmental effects of nuclear weapons inform Australia's policies on nuclear disarmament and non proliferation?

(14) Will the Australian Government participate in the conference in Oslo in March 2013 on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons?

Bob Carr (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

(1) and (2)

Emergency Management Australia has provided the following information:

Under Australia's constitutional arrangements, State and Territory Governments have responsibility, within their borders, for coordinating and planning for the response to and recovery from disasters and civil emergencies. When the total resources (government, community and commercial) of an affected State or Territory cannot reasonably cope with the needs of the situation, the State Government or a Territory Controller can seek assistance from the Australian Government.

The Australian Government has plans for providing Australian Government physical assistance in response to such requests. The Australian Government Disaster Response Plan (COMDISPLAN) describes the arrangements for centralised coordination of the provision of Australian Government physical assistance within Australia. This plan can be activated for any disaster or emergency regardless ofthe cause. COMDISPLAN was first adopted in December

1997- it replaced the AUSDISPLAN (Australian Disaster Plan) which was first issued in July 1992.

The arrangements for provision of Defence resources for the performance of emergency or non-emergency support within Australia and its territories that are primarily the responsibility of the civil community or other government organisations are outlined in Defence Instruction (General) OPS 05-1: Defence Assistance to the Civil Community -policy and procedures (DACC).

The Attorney-General, the Hon Nicola Roxon MP, is designated as the Minister with responsibility for disaster-related matters. Emergency Management Australia, a division of the Attorney-General's Department (AGD EMA) is responsible for planning and coordinating Australian Government physical assistance to the States and Territories under the Australian Government Emergency Management Policy Statement. Coordination of this assistance is carried out by the AGD EMA Crisis Coordination Branch.

(3) A Force Posture Review was not prepared along with the 2009 Defence White Paper (2009 DWP).

The Force Structure Review (FSR) that informed the 2009 DWP was not prepared with any specific threat or nation in mind. It is about the array of challenges we might face over the next generation and the role of Defence in meeting those challenges. The FSR is a classified review and the Government is not considering releasing sections of the FSR Report. The 2009 DWP noted that in the event of Australia making contributions to conventional combat in the region, our planning would need to take into account retaliatory action being taken against us (paras

7.15-7.18).

Consistent with its Terms of Reference, the ADF Posture Review did not consider an attack on Australia and Australia-United States Joint Facilities in the event of a major conflict between the US and China.

(4), (5), (6) and (7)

As stated in the 2009 Defence White Paper, Australia is one of the most physically secure countries in the world and Australia will most likely remain a secure country over the period to 2030 (paras 3.7 and 6.23). In the event of a crisis, Australian defence policy acknowledges the value to Australia of the protection afforded by extended nuclear deterrence under the US Alliance. Under extended nuclear deterrence, as long as nuclear weapons exist, we can rely on US nuclear forces to deter nuclear attack on Australia. The Government does not intend to speculate on hypothetical scenarios but will continue to regularly consider its judgements concerning the risk of nuclear attack, including in the 2013 Defence White Paper.

Successive Australian Governments have acknowledged that joint facilities could be targeted in conflict, but also emphasised that Australia's hosting of these facilities contributes to a stable system of global deterrence.

Successive Australian Governments have acknowledged US policy to neither confirm nor deny the presence or absence of nuclear weapons at any location. US officials have stated that it is not US practice to carry nuclear weapons on training flights, and US Administrations have previously stated that in normal circumstances US naval aircraft and ships no longer carry nuclear weapons.

(8) (10) and (11)

As with any disaster or civil emergency, appropriate resources would be made available. Under Australia's constitutional arrangements, State and Territory Governments have responsibility, within their borders, for coordinating and planning for the response to and recovery from disasters and civil emergencies. If further resources are required, the State Government or Territory Controller can seek assistance from the Australian Government. Further detail should be sought from the Minister for Health.

(9)

The 2009 DWP judged that Australia is one of the most physically secure countries in the world and that Australia will most likely remain a secure country over the period to 2030. Defence's current advice is that the 2009 DWP judgements remain sound.

(12)

The Government is aware of research quoted by the report of the independent International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND) on the likely effects of a regional nuclear war in South Asia on agriculture worldwide with potential relevance to Australia, but is not aware of any substantial body of research on the subject of any specific effects on Australian agriculture arising from use of nuclear weapons.

(13)

Humanitarian and environmental consequences of the use of nuclear weapons inform the Government's policies on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. Australia is committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The Government acknowledges that nuclear attack would be potentially devastating. Australia is a party to, and fully implements non-proliferation and disarmament treaties, including those prohibiting weapons of mass destruction and inhumane conventional weapons.

Australia has made a sustained contribution to the international consideration of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, including through the 1996 Report of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination ofNuclear Weapons. More recently, the independent International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND), established by Australia and Japan, reinvigorated international efforts on the issue. The Commission's report made a significant contribution to the success of the 2010 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference. Australia has since established-with Japan-the ten-nation Non­ Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative (NPDI) to take forward the NPT Review Conference outcomes.

The humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons is a subject on which Australia, as part the NPDI, has previously made a joint statement on:

Recognizing that nuclear weapons pose a grave threat to humanity we express deep concern at the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons and reaffirm the need for all states at all times to fully comply with applicable international law, including international humanitarian law. (para 4 of the 22 September 2010 Joint Statement by Foreign Ministers on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation).

(14)

The humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons is an important subject on which Australia, including as part the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative (NPDI), supports discussion. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is considering Australia's participation in the conference.