PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING MP, AND
THE NEW ZEALAND PRIME MINISTER, THE RIGHT HON JIM BOLGER,
DOORSTOP, WILLIAMSTOWN, VICTORIA, 22 JULY 1995
E& OE PROOF COPY
PJK: Well, you all know that the Prime Minister and I both made remarks for the
launch of the Anzac class frigate, Te Kaha. But I would like to just
endorse the remarks that the Prime Minister made and repeat the remarks
I made to and to say that I thought it was a very clear manifestation of the
cooperation between Australia and New Zealand. The fact that we work
together collaboratively on a single class of ship, like this, that bears the
name the proud name of Anzac, the history of which and the culture of
which we share says something I think about the modern relationship in
peace and how we can develop ourselves, develop a defence capability
here. How we can see technological spin-offs in both of our countries.
How, by improving and building on our defence material capability, we
can, at the same time, support other industries and while giving ourselves
a stronger defence posture. These are all sensible things and I made the
remark earlier, in the Cold War of course everything was internationalised
and all regional problems were subsumed into the bipolarity of the
Cold War environment. With its cessation, of course, we see much more
obvious regional tensions in the world. You can see it in many places and
therefore the solutions for these problems are tending to come regionally.
In this region of the world, we have taken that lesson I think and we are
doing things together and I was very pleased to be here on this significant
occasion and very pleased to have Jim Bolger in Australia for the launch
of Te Kaha. As you know, we have had a meeting together. We ranged
over a number of subjects. CHOGM which the Prime Minister, of course,
will be hosting later this year. APEC which we are collaborators in and
where we have another meeting coming up to advance the Bogor
Declaration, that is the Osaka meeting later this year. Of course we
discussed the testing program of the Government of France in the Pacific
and I think we have made it clear to ourselves, we are determined to
maintain the pressure on France to modify its program, that is to desist
from testing weapons and also to encourage further international focus
upon France. We have seen the South Pacific Forum already exercising
some substantial pressure on that country and as you know, the Forum
2
will be also meeting later in the year and we will be having a continuing
dialogue with Forum partners about how we advance that pressure.
J: Will you be sending a warship?
PJK: I will just come to that in a moment. And I think that probably covers the
great majority of the things that we have spoken of. I would be happy to
take questions, but before I do I might invite the Prime Minister to say a
few words.
JB: Thank you, Prime Minister. And can I repeat my thanks that I expressed
at the launch that you came to Melbourne today to be associated with the
launch of the first New Zealand Anzac ship. We believe, as I said there, it
has been a very good project. There were a lot of cynics around that New
Zealand would not gain any material advantage in terms of construction
components being offered to New Zealand industry. We have, in fact, had
a very substantial spin-off into our industry from the Anzac ship project
and we think it has gone very, very well. The progress that we have made
since the agreement was signed in 1959, I think, has been very positive. I
think it has been an excellent example of a Anzac project, drawing on all
those elements of Anzac, and I was delighted to be able to announce
today that New Zealand will, in fact, construct a memorial in Canberra
recognising the shared sacrifices of our two countries. But in particular, of
course, the New Zealand component to that. So I will be very pleased to
put that together, obviously in consultation with those in authority in
Canberra. In terms of the meeting that the Prime Minister and myself
have just had, as Prime Minister Keating said, we looked at the three
major conferences coming up the South Pacific Forum in Papua New
Guinea; then we will have the CHOGM meeting, which I will have the
privilege of chairing in Auckland; and, almost immediately after, the APEC
meeting in Osaka. And there will be some commonality and, of course,
some unique elements to each of those conferences. Clearly, the Forum
we both expect will want to take a* v-ery strong position in expressing its
total objection to France on its proposal to recommence testing in the
Pacific. We will also want to maintain pressure on France to get the
firmest possible commitment and from other countries of a nuclear
weapons state, on agreement to sign up to a Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty. That is what we must have if the world is to stop the proliferation
of nuclear weapons and we have no difference, at all, between the
positions that we want to take in terms of those goals. And, as I have said
in New Zealand, that we also want to see the closure of the Mururoa
testing facilities, so that there is no possibility of France coming back to
test in the Pacific and the signing up to the protocols of the South Pacific
Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. So, in that area, we can see some progress I
think internationally. There seems to be a second wave coming through
with governments and Parliaments around the world now taking a stronger
position. Japan has come out very strongly in recent days in its proposal
to seek a resolution from the United Nations and we would certainly want
to support that. The Russian Parliament has come out condemning the
tests. Many of the European Parliaments have and so on. So there is a
second wave coming through of criticism, rejection, of the French proposal
and we hope that President Chirac and his Government will be taking
some note of that. Both countries, both Governments, are certainly
looking forward to maintaining the momentum that was in the APEC
meeting in Bogor, where quite a historic agreement was reached in terms
of moving towards free trade, or freer trade, in our part of the world. We
want to maintain that in Osaka as well. Now those are the substantive
ones. We obviously expressed our satisfaction with the days events and
how they had gone and, you know I think in a very real way, underpins the
unique relationship between Australia and New Zealand and just the way
in which it was done there today, I think, is very practical in terms of the
business of developing a defence capacity. But, I think, very symbolic in
the way that the two countries have been able to develop these
procedures. That is about it.
J: Mr Keating, what specifically will New Zealand and Australia be doing to
stop the French?
PJK: Well we have already made, I think, well let me say, we have both led a
substantial campaign against the Government of France in this policy they
have, this needless policy. I mean I think the main object of both of our
Governments would be as the Prime Minister said, that is to stop the
spread of nuclear weapons. I mean the thing that matters most in the end
is how we deal with the end of the Cold War? How we deal with the
proliferation risk that the world faces from both the dismantling of old
nuclear programs and also the much freer availability of expertise and
materials, keeping the materials tight, keeping a check on the expertise,
are all the things material to containing proliferation and the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is one of the ways that we can limit that
proliferation. But actually dismantling these facilities and dismantling
Mururca is just another example of that. In terms of how we go from here,
as you know the Government of Australia has proselytised on this issue in
Europe. I have published letters in French publications and we will be
now I think with Japan making its point of objection clear, a number of
other European Governments having done so, I think that President
Chirac would be now somewhat surprised by the reaction to the testing
decision and that sort of support I think we'll see how the debate goes in
the Pacific Forum. But within the Pacific Forum, we may be able to
advance further support, maybe for some United Nations resolution, some
United Nations action on which Australia and New Zealand participates.
J: Will you send a navy ship up to Mururoa?
PJK: No, we thought about this originally. You send navy ships when you want
navy ships to do naval things. And I don't think any of us want this on this
occasion.
J: Will you join New Zealand in going to the World Court?
PJK: Well I didn't know that New Zealand was necessarily going to the World
Court and we have looked at some of the issues with the International
Court of Justice. But there are two matters. One, it is not certain whether
or not any proceedings could be dealt with before the testing program was
completed. And, secondly, where the law of the matter lay.
JB: Can I just say on that for the Australian journalists perhaps. We are
looking at the details of how a case might be taken to the World Court and
I am working in collaboration with the other political parties in
New Zealand. But it is a very narrow opportunity and it may not be
possible and I think from what I have heard, the Australians who already
looked at this prospect have found it a difficult one to fight. Just to find the
legal standing to take a case that will have some weight. But we are still
pursuing that and, if it is possible, we will. But we have to determine that
there is a realistic prospect there.
J: Mr Keating, how disappointed would Australia be if New Zealand did not
exercise its options to buy frigates 3 and 4?
PJK: Well this is for the Government of New Zealand, exclusively, to think
about. In terms of its defence procurement program over time and, of
course, that is some time out from here. There was no need and isn't a
need at this point to be coming to any resolution about that. But I think,
you know, the obvious point I would make and the Prime Minister in a
sense has joined me in this today, as we have a single class ship which
we are building together. So whatever option there is for New Zealand to
purchase ships in the future, this is obviously a strong point of the Anzac
program. But, again, that has got to be seen against the background of its
own defence force requirements and its own procurement program.
J: Prime Minister Keating, are you concerned with signals sent out yesterday
by the French Ambassador in Wellington that France is unwilling to sign
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and that there might be more than
eight tests in actual fact?
PJK: I didn't see that.
JB: If the Prime Minister hasn't seen it, I think we should say there seems to
be some confusion as to the message the Ambassador to Wellington was
conveying. In the morning it seemed to be a very considerable measure
of doubt as to whether France, if there wasn't a Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty, wouldn't actually just continue to test. In fact there seemed to be
some enthusiasm in the presentation from the Ambassador that France
would want to test. But, by the end of the day, they had released a
statement to clarify, or to re-state, that they only had intention for eight
and they would sign up to the Test Ban Treaty. So I am really saying I
think there has been some quite confused message come from the French
Ambassador based into Wellington.
J: Are you satisfied by that [ inaudible]?
JB: Well I made my view very clear early yesterday that we would be
astonished and we would be outraged if there was a suggestion that there
was going to be any additional testing. We are totally outraged there is
going to be eight and if that isn't a firm position, then it would be a worse
position. But I have some surmised that, in fact, the Ambassador's
presentation may have been inaccurate in the morning and hence the
correction later in the day.
J: Mr Keating, the New Zealand Government is saying that it wants no more
[ inaudible} in relation to the CTBT, whereas I understand that
Australia's position is to support the possibility of micro-yield or so-called
bench top tests? If that is correct what is the rationale for Australia?
PJK: Well I don't think we have yet articulated what elements we would like to
see in a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Although, we have very clear
ideas about it. I think that we would like to see is, that we see the
post-Cold War era as an opportunity to rein in the proliferation risk and
that comes by way of testing weapons. But also, as I said earlier, the
diversion of materials and expertise. What is particularly objectionable
about France is that it is a democracy. This is not a totalitarian regime, or
a military regime, doing this or testing within its own metropolitan area.
This is a democracy affronting other smaller States distant from it. That is
the essential point of objection. Beyond that is the notion that right when
we are all trying to get a better non-proliferation regime, when this historic
opportunity has arisen at the end of the Cold War, a democracy is out
there testing weapons. I mean that is the problem and that is what we
object to. The French have as great an interest, a greater interest, than
we have in fact in seeing these proliferation risks diminished, given the
fact that they are situated in an area where there are a lot of weapons
battlefield weapons and strategic weapons. And, not only that, there are
14 reactors of the same design as Chernobyl sitting in the Ukraine and in
other parts of Russia, which have inherent design faults which are going
to have to be overhauled and decommissioned and there is no way those
States are going to go to coal or other fossil fuels. So there is going to
have to be a replacement reactor program. Now that is something the
Government of France, and all the West European Governments for that
matter, have got to deal with. So it is these sorts of issues that go beyond
simply a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. It goes to the opportunity and
a democracy flouting the opportunity.
J: But you are not ruling out the possibility that Australia would allow the
with some degree of physical testing?
PJK: Well I am not answering the question at all. I am not here to discuss
design issues in the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty whatsoever.
J: Was there any discussion on John Major's response to the nuclear testing
issue and what pressure Australia and New Zealand, combined, might
bear on Britain to speak up?
JB: I just noted in our discussion, Catherine, that Prime Minister Major had not
come out. Whereas a number of European Governments had come out
strongly against the French position and I presume the reason is that he is
also, of course, the leader of a nuclear power. They have their own
nuclear facility. But no as I said before I am disappointed that John Major
hasn't come out, but I have to say that Prime Minister Keating and myself
didn't spend much time on that at all.
Malaysian journalist]. This collaborative venture represented by this
Anzac project breaks some new ground in this part of the world.
Transfield is proposing to do the same thing between the Australian and
Malaysian navies. Can I ask the assessment of both of you what this
means in terms of industry collaboration and what this collaboration can
contribute to its regional defence and regional security and its regional
relations?
PJK: Well maybe, perhaps, I will begin. The obvious thing is that we would
have a regional core naval design construction and repair facility, which
means that any defence arrangements within the region must be stronger
if the vessels are designed for tropical waters, if they are designed to
suit our particular naval requirements and their weapons systems and
their repair are not subject to long voyages to other countries of origin
obviously, it is stronger here. And I think we would see any program with
Malaysia being an adjunct to that sort of strength. And I think Prime
Minister Bolger will attest to the fact that we are seeing a fairly broad
spread of capability here. He made in his public remarks, references to
New Zealand industry for instance, the spin-off for New Zealand industry
from this program. There would be, of course, a similar spin-off for
Malaysia and we would all be the better for having a stronger naval design
and construction capability in this part of the world, in this region of the
world. So I think we are seeing something new. We are seeing the very
clear development of this facility and, of course, in Australia's case we
have also got the submarine facility in South Australia, where we are now
completing these 3,500 tonne, state-of-the-art, world class submarines.
So together we are building some real capacity and, of. course, were
Malaysia to choose the Australian design, then it too would benefit from
these arrangements.
JB: I think the judgement we have made-has gone very well, as I said earlier.
The New Zealand participation has been positive, it has been significant
so the work that has come back to New Zealand firms has been across a
range of areas and quite large in terms of the size of the contracts that
have been put into New Zealand. So all I can say is that from a New
Zealand perspective, working with Transfield here in Melbourne, we have
had a good relationship, our industry has had a good relationship.
Last question.
JB: Yes, I want to go and see the rugby.
J: Was there any discussion on the civil aviation market?
JB: Very briefly and in essence we agreed that if the two commercial
operators that are in discussion, which is Ansett Australia and
Air New Zealand, can find a commercial resolution that makes sense to
them, we would both welcome it. That is where it is.
J: Mr Bolger, are you happy about the degree of cooperation between New
Zealand and Australia on the nuclear testing issue?
JB: Yes I am. I have had no difficulty at all with it and I feel certain, following
our discussions today, that we are going to see that cooperation move
forward in the various forums that are open to us to advance the objection
of this part of the world, but really I think the objection of the world, or the
great majority of the world opposes France breaking its moratorium and
recommencing nuclear testing. I am absolutely certain that is true. The
great majority, overwhelming majority of the world, wants to see a halt to
the proliferation of nuclear weapons. You only have to reflect back a few
months at the concern, almost fear, that has been generated at the
prospect that North Korea was going to develop nuclear weapons. The
only way we can prevent that is in fact to have a very strong test ban
treaty and for the nuclear weapons states to continue with a program of
reducing their nuclear arms and that is what we want to see happen. We
don't have any difficulty in pursuing that in tandem, wherever the options
are open to us to pursue it in tandem. Don't you reckon we should go and
see the rugby?
PJK: Thank you indeed.
JB: That will be the biggest battle of the day. Win it for us, well I have said I
think the All Blacks will be about ten in front, but Paul has got a different
view.
J: What is that Mr Keating?
PJK: Well what do you expect me to say.
JB: I mean the All Blacks have now got to sort of lift New Zealand's honour
after the Australian netballers beat the New Zealand netball team by one
goal yesterday. I mean I am sorry, Paul, we have got to win this one, we
are under some pressure now.
PJK: You have had too many wins lately.
JB: Thank you all.
PJK: Thank you.
ends T~ I