PM: First of all if I could congratulate and thank the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown for convening this conference. This series began back in 1999 through President Bill Clinton and has continued since then.
It is important in bringing together heads of government from across the world as well as heads of important international and regional organisations. And today the fact that you have had the British Prime Minister, the Italian Prime Minister, heads of South Africa, Chile and other countries like that and New Zealand, is important in coming to grips with key challenges in the global agenda. And on top of that, to also have the heads of the International Monetary Fund and also the head of the World Trade Organisation and other key UN representatives such as the UNDP. Not to mention the High Commissioner for External Relations for the European Union.
It is a useful gathering of people, an important gathering of people. Secondly the agenda itself is substantive. The big challenges which the world economy, the world society, is now facing is the global financial markets and the future of the Doha Round as part of the global economy. Development challenges against the Millennium Development Goals for the poorest countries in the world and thirdly, climate change.
This was a useful agenda, not just globally, but a useful agenda for us as Australians, participating in each of these deliberations as we do across the world. What I have found in discussions with so many of these leaders yesterday afternoon, and last night over dinner at Chequers, and again today. There is a useful opportunity to nudge some of these agendas forward. Let me talk specifically about Doha. Long discussions, informally over dinner last night, but again today on how to advance the Doha round.
The Doha Development Round, critical for Australia's economic interests, critical for the world economy. Critical also for the interests of developing economies needing to get a boost from greater access to global agricultural markets.
We received a good briefing from the Head of the World Trade Organisation Pascal Lamy and also a lot of exchanges about how we can urge, directly, some greater flexibility on key participating states to get a good outcome.
This thing is not in the bag by any stretch of the imagination. But we are closer than we were a week ago. And I think it has been important for Australia, but also more broadly than that, to have spent so much time on this subject recently in Washington as well, this is a critical piece of work for the international community now and for the global economy and I believe that a good outcome on Doha is a good outcome for the global economy when it needs a confidence boost. And that is a good outcome for Australia.
Secondly, I have just come now from 45 minutes or so with Tabo Mbeke, talking of course about Zimbabwe and Australia's bilateral relationship with South Africa.
It was the first opportunity I have had to meet with Tabo Mbeke so it was a good discussion and he congratulated the government on its election. We talked about a range of matters that we can pursue together over time as well. Including some of the development needs of the African continent.
Beyond that, on Zimbabwe itself, I indicated to Tabo Mbeke that Australia wanted to see, as does the international community, an early declaration by the Zimbabwe election commission, of the outcome of the Presidential elections. Tabo Mbeke has indicated that his understanding was that that declaration would occur soon. He indicated that he was surprised it had not happened just now but his understanding was that it was going to happen soon.
Secondly, we then discussed the possibility of there being a run off election, noting the position of the Movement for Democratic Change, that they would be willing to participate in such a run off election.
The position I put to Tabo Mbeke was that if that occurred, that is, if there was a run off election, which was warranted as a result of the outcome formally of the election which has just been held, and then we in Australia and the rest of the international community, would want that election to be held rapidly. Zimbabwean law provides for that to occur, as I am advised within a three week period, we would be very concerned if that was extended beyond that. Tabo Mbeke's response was that he was supportive of the view which I put, and that is that such an election, such a run off election, should occur within that narrow time frame.
Furthermore, he indicated that that was the view that he was expressing and will be expressing to both sides of Zimbabwean politics.
Happy to take your questions.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd, is it too early to speak about the possibility of sanctions or further steps against Zimbabwe if such a run off election (inaudible) was not conducted in that (inaudible) period?
PM: Dennis, I think wisdom suggests at this stage that we ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that the Zimbabwe election commission does its job, by providing maximum external encouragement for that to occur and direct encouragement also through countries with such a close relationship with Zimbabwe and the current government as the Republic of South Africa.
I would rather not speculate on actions beyond that because what we are trying to get to at this stage is a free and fair outcome for the Zimbabwean people. And without any side of Zimbabwean politics being able to point, however wrongly, to accusations of external interference.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) that Britain and other nations would be prepared to substantially lift their aid to Zimbabwe, post Mugabe. Is that the Australian position?
PM: Our view is that if the Zimbabwean election results in a Government which properly and fairly represents the rule of the Zimbabwean people, then Australia of course in partnership with others in the international community would through the World Bank and by other means, participate in a reconstruction effort for Zimbabwe. And that is the conditionality.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd you are going to China soon, do you intend to attend the Olympics? Secondly what more pressure other than rhetoric can Australia put on China to (inaudible) improvements in Tibet and what briefing have you got (inaudible) ?
PM: Firstly on the question of the Olympics and Olympic boycotts, I have said before and I will say it again, I don't believe that Olympic boycotts are productive. Secondly, on the question of Tibet -
JOURNALIST: Are you going to go?
PM: I will come to each of your questions in sequence. Secondly, the situation in Tibet, we would urge restraint on the part of all parties. Violence has occurred. It is plain that it has occurred. Restraint is necessary and I repeat what I said most recently in Washington, it is time for dialogue between representatives of the Chinese Government and representatives of the Dalai Lama.
On the question of the Olympics, as you all know the President of China Hu Jin Tao has extended an invitation to myself and to my family and what we have said to the Chinese consistently since then is that we are not in a position to confirm whether we would go. It would depend entirely on time constraints as we get closer to the event and that remains our position. Sorry, and there was one other part to your question?
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: On the, I would rather come back to you on that, because I saw an early report of the diplomat's report and I would rather brief you further once I have had an opportunity to read it more closely.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible - re Olympic boycotts)
PM: My reflection is just about boycotts in general. I mean you look at the history of 1980, I mean, let's be, there is nothing new in my position there. It was just a long standing view that they don't add up to too much. They key thing is to ensure that we have an effective diplomacy which produces a better outcome for the Tibetan people. That is why I have been pretty up front and blunt about this from day one.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Well obviously, obviously consistent with the remarks I made at the time when the Chinese President extended an invitation to me, not as a matter of principle. And as I have said consistently since then, it really does depend on logistics and timing and other commitments at the time.
JOURNALIST: On the financial crisis, and the future of the Doha Round, are you more optimistic now after discussing this with international institutions?
PM: With the global financial crisis, I believe that the IMF, when it meets soon in Washington, has significant challenges ahead of it. We are by no means, as a global economic community, out of the woods yet. This is, as reflected in the comments I think you would have heard today by the Director of the IMF in his remarks to this conference. Furthermore, when it comes to the core challenges of liquidity, transparency and evaluation of assets, papers prepared for that conference by the Financial Stability Forum, which Australia participates in, will be quite crucial.
That is on the global financial markets front. On the question of global trade negotiations, it is fair to say, not based just on what Pascal Lamy has had to say here publicly from the WTO but also in discussions I have had in recent days on this in Brussels and with some bilaterals in Bucharest, and also earlier in Washington, and certainly through our own reporting from Geneva that, this deal on trade lies within our grasp if there is political will. Everyone is going to have to give a bit. Everyone is going to have to give a bit
But the dividend to the global, and Australian economies, for a decent outcome on agriculture, on industrial products and on services, would be significant and substantial, therefore leadership is going to be required.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd this morning when you chaired the session on climate change you mentioned some numbers which you believe that represented a consensus from the meeting of reductions in carbon emissions I think by 2020, but I am not sure. Could you be specific for us, what do you believe was the consensus of the meeting, in terms of the size of carbon emissions that should be adopted (inaudible) and the date by which they should be achieved?
PM: Well firstly I think what I said this morning in my summation of the session which I chaired, was that the targets we set for ourselves should be significant and substantial. I do not believe I referred to any particular number or by any particular date. What I also said was, in terms of achieving whatever target, we as a global community set, should be driven by both the science and available technology.
I think the interesting thing about this discussion today was, both from Bill Clinton and from others, was that the absolute importance of acting on the technology front to reduce overall electricity consumption through better demand size management and what we do in renewables, and CCS technologies on the supply side front. So there was no explicit discussion of a consensus number and a consensus timetable, but lets face it, when it comes to making a carbon market work, when it comes to making an emissions trading scheme work, you must have a long term target, you must a have a medium term target, hence why we are going through the Garnaut process and it must be anchored into a system which is a capping trade system, which is globally compatible, and able to be rolled out as a global carbon market.
I thought it was a very good discussion.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd, just to clarify your position on the Olympics. You said that you don't know whether it suits your diary for time. But will matters of principle regarding Tibet (inaudible)
PM: By the way I have said that consistently to the Chinese since that time. There is nothing new in that.
JOURNALIST: But, will matters of principle over Tibet or other issues (inaudible) your thinking or your thought process over whether you decide to go?
PM: Not at this stage, but as I said, that is a question of practicality and timing. But I think the important thing for us all, discussions I have had with the Prime Minister of the UK and others is to pursue an integrated and effective diplomacy with the Chinese to try and make the situation in Tibet better. Let's not delude ourselves, this is very, very difficult. It is really very difficult. Helen Clarke, the Prime Minister of New Zealand heads from here to Beijing. The Prime Minister of Chile with whom I have just been speaking is heading off to China.
The Prime Minister of Sweden who I met in Bucharest the other day, is heading off to China. And everyone in the international community is confronting similar challenges at present. The core thing is to have an integrated diplomacy which has the best prospects of yielding a better result for the people of Tibet.
JOURNALIST: On Zimbabwe, the British government (inaudible) was considering a package around a billion pounds (inaudible)
PM: All of our officials across the international community are at work at the moment. I have spent some time in Zimbabwe in years past as an election monitor on behalf of the Commonwealth. I was in a town called (inaudible) in the Mashonaland East for more than a week and I have seen some of the ugliness on the ground, ok. Therefore, if through this election process, we can have a government of Zimbabwe emerge which properly and fairly represents the will of the Zimbabwean people, then I am confident the international community will rally round in terms of an appropriate reconstruction package.
On numbers, no we are not at that stage.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd after your discussions with the Europeans, are you convinced that they are committed to the concessions on Agriculture like you?
PM: I think what we are seeing all around, and it is quite important at this stage not to drill down in to the detail, sub-detail and subtext of where negotiating positions lie in Geneva, because they change all the time. That is just the nature of a negotiation.
But I think what it is fair to say is, for those in Washington, or in Brussels, or elsewhere, around the world, there is evidence of some political will to move in this direction. If I have had a core mission in coming abroad at this time, to argue Australia's economic interests at a time of global economic uncertainty, to work with our global partners on how we respond to the challenge of global financial market crisis and instability and associated with that, what we can do to boost confidence through a successful outcome of the Doha Round.
This has been a continuing theme of these discussions and I think just through jaw boning, a bit, don't overstate it, just through jaw boning a bit, with the Europeans and others, we may have helped nudge this process along. Just may have helped this process.
JOURNALIST: So there is not a major sticking point on the Doha Round?
PM: I would say Michelle, there are dozens of sticking points on the Doha round right now. Let's just be blunt about it. But where it was before, which was in a pre-glacial position, we are now moving rapidly down the glacier. Ok. Except, unlike moving most glaciers, we have five weeks to arrive at the end point. You know, it is going to take a bit more to gelignite this thing into gear. But given where things were frozen up until last time.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Everyone is working towards a constructive outcome. Again, I won't comment on our negotiating posture, in its detail and sub-detail in Geneva.
But remember, and the reason why we have strong views on this, apart from, the global economy, giving a shot of confidence to the arm. The national economy, in terms of the long standing interests, of not just our farmers, but also those who are exporting manufactures and those who are exporting services, is that it has been absolutely essential to put our shoulder to the wheel to get a decent outcome. Everyone is engaged in that process at the moment. There are still some nation states which are sticking points, but each of us in our own ways are working on those various states around the world. It is not productive to name them.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) the issue of the salute Mr Rudd, Brendan Nelson said (inaudible)
PM: Look, I think, perhaps people don't, not everyone fully understands my slightly quirky sense of humour, but I don't think that is likely to change in the future. I am not about to behave like some sort of robotical (inaudible) in dealing with people, whether they are heads of government, or heads of state or anyone else. And I think the other thing I would say is this. When it comes to our relationship with the United States, perhaps I could sum it up in these terms. We the new Australian Government, have successfully negotiated withdrawal of Australian troops in Iraq while preserving the vitality of our alliance with the United States. I seem to recall that the Liberal Party was in favour of keeping our troops in Iraq without an exit strategy and therefore consigning them there potentially indefinitely.
I think in the substance of these matters, that speaks for itself. Thank you.