E&OE……………………….……………………………………………………………
PRIME MINISTER: It’s good to be here at the National Museum with George Brandis the Minster for the Arts.
It was an honour to help to launch the Defining Moments series, but in particular to celebrate and honour the life and works of Governor Arthur Phillip. Governor Arthur Phillip is really the founder of modern Australia. We don't know enough about him. We don't acknowledge his contribution sufficiently. He really is to modern Australia what George Washington is to the modern United States and it's good that in a small but important way he has been honoured as part of this Defining Moments series.
Obviously, we have just finished up another week in the Parliament. I just want to stress that every week in the Parliament, this is a Government which is honouring its fundamental election pledge to build a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia. These are uncertain times. This is a difficult and dangerous world, but there is no country with more fundamental strengths and decency than this country of ours and the Government that I lead is absolutely pledged to economic strength and national security, our objective is to build a strong Australia and a safer world.
It is good to be here with George Brandis and I might ask him to say a few words.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Thank you indeed, PM. This morning the Prime Minister has launched the Defining Moments project. It's a very important project which over the next two years will see some 100 defining moments in Australian history recognised and memorialised.
It will, among other things, start a national conversation about what the 100 defining moments in Australian history are. That is a contestable issue and I think it's a good thing indeed that this project will kick off that national conversation.
As the Prime Minister said in his remarks, what he hopes, what all of us in the Government hope, is that in the near future another defining moment will be marked and that is the recognition of Australia's indigenous people in the Australian Constitution, something that I and others in the Government are working over the next years to achieve.
PRIME MINISTER:Do we have any questions?
QUESTION: On this safer world, it doesn't look that safe this morning in the Ukraine or Syria or Iraq. The images of the latest apparent massacre in Syria, doesn't that mean that if ISIS is pushed back from Iraq, they will just go within the borders of Syria and we have a more concentrated problem and one that will be more difficult to deal with within those borders?
PRIME MINISTER:Well, let's acknowledge that there is a very, very serious problem here. It's a humanitarian catastrophe and it's a security nightmare. While what's happening in Syria and Iraq in one sense is a long way away, these conflicts reach out to us because there are at least 60 Australians who are known to be involved with these terrorist groups. We have seen what they can do. We have seen the beheadings, the crucifixions, the mass executions.
This is pure evil and it does need to be dealt with as best we can. Australia has been assisting with humanitarian efforts, including the air drop on to Mount Sinjar. I applaud what President Obama has done. American air strikes did raise the siege of Mount Sinjar, they did prevent the further advance of the murderous hoards of ISIL into the Kurdish areas of Iraq and we are continuing to talk to the United States about what we might do in partnership with our allies.
The point I make is that any action by Australia would have to be part of action that had a clear and achievable overall purposes. We would have to have a clear role within it. All of the safety risks would have to be, and the overall risks would have to be, carefully assessed and there would need to be an overall humanitarian purpose. I suppose the most humanitarian purpose of all would be to prevent the slaughter of innocents because the slaughter of innocents is what we have seen on a gargantuan scale in Syria and northern Iraq in the last few months.
QUESTION:There has been extensive debate in the United States about a doctrine whereby the United States has a moral responsibility and a national security interest in preventing mass atrocities and genocide. Is that a doctrine that you would embrace on behalf of the Australian Government or the nation as a whole?
PRIME MINISTER:I'm very reluctant to embrace doctrine because doctrine can easily become doctrinaire behaviour and I don't believe that any Australian Government should ever find itself caught up in doctrinaire behaviour. But it is important to do what we can to help, where there is something useful that we can do and that is what we are talking to the United States and to our other allies and partners about.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, President Obama said they don't have a strategy yet, they are still working on it. What is your reaction to that, that he doesn't have a strategy yet? Would we completely rule out combat troops on the ground if they decide the only way to protect people is to move?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, both President Obama and everyone else who has been asked to discuss this issue have said from the beginning that no-one is talking about combat troops on the ground and no-one is talking about what might be described as trying to bring Liberal pluralist democracy to a part of the world which hasn't experienced very much of that. We have to accept that the Middle East is a witch’s brew of complexity and danger but where there are clear evils that can be averted through international action, well then I think the international community does have a responsibility to consider that action.
QUESTION: Is the best option still using our Air Force and involving our Super Hornets?
PRIME MINISTER:I'm just not going to go into detail about what is being discussed, suffice to say that Australia is a significant member of the international community, we are not the most powerful country on earth, but we are not the least powerful country either.
We have a long history of doing what we can for international peace, order and good governance. We have a long history of doing our fair share when it comes to the burdens that are required to be lifted in this difficult and dangerous world.
QUESTION: Can you give us a timeframe, Prime Minister? There seems to be daily massacres. The death that you talked about, that is so appalling to the international community, is happening every day. So, is there some sort of timeframe for a decision to be made about what action will be taken?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, clearly there are two fundamental considerations here. One is the position of the United States, which inevitably will be the leader in any international action. And the other is the position of the Iraqi Government because whatever is done needs to be done in accordance with law. It needs to be done with the consent of the Iraqi Government. It needs to be done to help the people of Iraq and other countries in the region. These are the sorts of things which obviously are being worked through at the moment.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, would you characterise the Russian activity in Ukraine as an invasion and, if so, is there a role for the international community in that place?
PRIME MINISTER: Clearly, if, as seems to have been the case, Russian armed forces have simply moved across the border, that is an invasion and it is utterly reprehensible. It is an absolutely clear-cut case of a larger country bullying a smaller country, and this should have no place in our world.
You cannot have an international order if might is right. You cannot have a safe and secure world if powerful countries are able to take what they want. Plainly, what we have seen in Ukraine over the last six months or so, is an increasingly aggressive role by Russia and it seems that Russia is now stepping out of the shadows and overtly trying to achieve its objects of domination in Ukraine and it is completely, absolutely and utterly unacceptable.
QUESTION: Does Australia have forensic evidence that Russia was involved in the shooting down of MH17?
PRIME MINISTER: It's almost indubitable that the weapon used to commit this atrocity was Russian supplied. So, it was a weapon that was fired by Russian-backed rebels from what was effectively Russian controlled territory – a Russian supplied weapon, Russian-backed rebels, Russian-controlled territory. Obviously, Russia has a very heavy share of responsibility.
QUESTION:That said, is it reasonable to still have Vladimir Putin in Australia?
PRIME MINISTER: This is a very important question. Because he would be coming for a critical international gathering, it's not a decision which Australia really has a right to make unilaterally. Nevertheless, it is an important question and it's one that I'll be weighing and I suspect a number of other countries will be weighing in the weeks ahead.
QUESTION: Is it one you’d discuss with their leaders?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, there is currently a man being detained – an asylum seeker being detained – on Christmas Island. He has written requesting that the Labor Party and The Greens accept Temporary Protection Visa policy, but he arrived after July 19 last year. Would you be willing to allow people that arrived after July 19 to access Temporary Protection Visas?
PRIME MINISTER: We want to see our policy implemented, because our policy is the most humanitarian policy of all. It's a policy which is proving to be successful in stopping the boats. If you want to advance human welfare, if you want to preserve human life, the best thing you can do is stop the boats and I'm really pleased that that's been the practical effect of our policies. I'm not aware of this gentleman's particular circumstances, but what I want to see is good, strong policy implemented and I want to see the obstacles to that policy removed, because the more effectively its implemented, the more fully it's implemented, the more surely the boats won't just be stopping; they'll be stopped.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, do you agree with Dick Warburton that the clean energy industry's reaction to the RET review is an extreme exaggeration of the situation?
PRIME MINISTER: I'm not really familiar with all the details of reactions to the RET review. The Renewable Energy Target review was something that we promised prior to the election. We said until we were blue in the face, prior to the election, that there would be a review of the Renewable Energy Target, that we support renewable energy, but we also want to try to ensure that we use renewable energy in ways that don't lift the price of power, don't result in unnecessary costs to the Australian people and we'll be carefully studying the review. There are a number of courses of action that the review puts forward, some it recommends, some it doesn't. We'll be carefully studying it. There will obviously be a debate in the community about it and we'll be responding in coming weeks.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, do you regret your explanation to the Party Room for your trip to Melbourne saying that you had to justify it?
PRIME MINISTER: That's not even yesterday's issue, that's the day before yesterday's issue.
[ends]