PM: It's impossible to visit Hiroshima and not be moved by what you see.
It is a graphic human story of the horrendous impact of nuclear weapons.
And as I said in my speech before, what happened with that bombing, 140,000 dead out of this city of 340,000, occurred with a single 15 kilo tonne bomb.
Across the world today we have some 10,000 nuclear warheads currently in operation, and some 20,000 in storage.
Many - in fact probably most - of greater capacity of that bomb which took out Hiroshima all those years ago.
So, the question is, what do you do about it. The question is, can the international community act, and what do you do about it. The question is, can the international community act in a more effective way than we have in the past when it comes to the big challenge of nuclear proliferation.
We know where the debates lie on North Korea. We know where the debates lie in Iran. Both subject to individual action at present.
What we need, however, to begin preparing for is the next review conference for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
People are often critical of the NPT, but I think they need to reflect on its history.
When the NPT came into being in the 1960s, the emerging fashion was for one state after another to join the nuclear weapons club. And effectively, what the NPT has done, despite its flaws, is reign that in. And many states, many states, have chosen as a consequence of the existence of the treaty not to go down the nuclear weapons road.
The challenge we face today is that the treaty once again is under great threat and great challenge. And so the proposal that I have put today is to establish an international commission on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament to be co-chaired by former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans.
We'll be discussing with the Government of Japan, as I've indicated in my speech, their form of participation in this commission. And also more broadly with the international community.
What's the objective?
The objective is to take the work already done by both the Canberra Commission, Tokyo Forum and elsewhere, including by the eminent group of Americans to whom I referred also in my address, and, to seek to shape a global consensus in the lead up to the MTP review process in 2010.
When we got to the last MTP review conference, frankly, a lot of the pre-work wasn't done. It's no one's fault in particular, it just wasn't done. As a consequence, it wasn't a terribly productive conference.
We can't afford for that to allow again and for the NPT, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, simply to die the death of a thousand cuts. We've got to work on it.
So, what we're proposing is in effect, a three stage process. One, Australia establishing this international commission, and we'll be working with like minded countries like Japan on their form of participation in it.
Two, the recommendations of this commission will then be taken to an international conference of experts to be convened, we plan, by the end of next year.
Three, to use that conference as a spring board by way of policy and political momentum into the actual NPT conference itself.
Why Australia? We've always been strong historically on the question of nuclear disarmament. We established the Australia group, we were key actors in the development of the comprehensive test ban treaty. And more broadly, at the time in question, were very active in the development of the chemical weapons convention.
It's time for us also as Australians to reconstitute our global disarmament and arms control credentials. The challenge is real.
I just conclude with this.
If you look at the writings of Kissinger, Shultz, Perry and Nunn, none of these are a bunch of peaceniks. None of them. Kissinger isn't. None of the others are either. These are hard realists in the tradition of US strategic policy. But they reached a conclusion after extensive and eminent careers that we need to reconstitute a global objective of the world about nuclear weapons and that the proper execution of an effective nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a part of that process.
So, I think the challenge is there. We're going to have a go. And as I said in the speech as well, no guarantees of success. But you've got to give it a huge shove. And we intend to do that.
Over to you, folks.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd are you saying that the NPT is pretty much in danger of collapse? (inaudible)
PM: I think it's becoming fragmented over time. And, what I'm concerned about with the NPT is incremental drift. And that is, when it begins to lose its cogency in the eyes of states. And, what's the machinery of that an effectively operating International Atomic Energy Agency which is its machinery of force in the field.
These two things have to be done and done well. And it means action also on the part of those states which already have nuclear weapons. Not just threshold states.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible)
PM: We'll be discussing that with our friends in Tokyo on Thursday. And we'll be discussing it in other capitals as well. And we'll take our time to refine the proposal. I know our friends in Japan have a strong, strong track record themselves on the question of nuclear disarmament given their own experience of nuclear weapons in this country. And we would welcome Japan's participation. And they've already agreed with us that we will have between us a high level dialogue on the NPT and non-proliferation more generally as part of this framework.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd, given your strong restatement of the importance of the NPT today, are their any circumstances under which a Rudd Labor Government would see uranium exported to India while it remains a non-signatory of the NPT.
PM: Well, our policy platform on that is clear. And we've made it clear in the past. And secondly, we've also indicated that we believe it's important to maintain the integrity of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
I understand full well the arguments put by the Government of India. I've also, and I've had presentations on this matter from the Government of the United States about the importance of India's particular circumstances.
We've very mindful of that. However I would remind you of where our policy stands and it comes off the back of the platform of the Australian Labor Party.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible) become a member of (inaudible)
PM: Well, the commission that I'm proposing is a non-Government body. It'll be created by Governments, but it's out there, and the model that I would have in mind is what the Government of Canada did some years ago with its international commission on the responsibility to protect. The Government of Canada provided the machinery for doing it. It convened a panel of global experts with a couple of co-Chairs, and it did the work.
And if you reflect back on the work which has been achieved since then, you can see how it has worked its way into the fabric of international law, and worked its way into the fabric of the UN system. And that work is not complete, it's ongoing. That's the model I've got in mind, But, it's going to be very, very tough.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible)
PM: Well, it's the technical aspects of that debate I'd prefer to refer to others. I've heard many presentations on this subject. And, I think it's a matter upon which politicians at this stage should be careful to comment. And I would defer comment until we have further internal discussion on this within Government.
Our own significant uranium reserve, as I said in my speech, is one of the largest known reserves in the world, I also believe underpins our credentials in addressing properly and in a principled way the global debate about nuclear non-proliferation.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible)
PM: I think the facts speak for themselves. This relationship with Japan, I think, we've had seven Australian Government ministers visit here in six months. I can't think of any other country where we've had that concentration of ministerial visits. And, we take this relationship enormously seriously. And the other thing that I'd say is that as I reflect back on when Mr Howard became Prime Minister, I think he got here, to Tokyo, about the six month point. I'm here at about the six month point.
But, you know, the substance of this relationship is a fantastic relationship. And there is so much that we can work on. I described it before as a comprehensive strategic security and economic partnership. And if you go to each of those categories of work, there is much that we are doing with Japan and we'll do more. Including our common interest to expand further our security cooperation.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible) domestic issue (inaudible)
PM: Oh, I'm surprised by that.
JOURNALIST: Belinda Neal (inaudible) -
PM: Which nation-state is she representing?
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible). Have you spoken to her, what would you say about what is going on and (inaudible) disciplinary action?
PM: First of all, no I haven't. Secondly, I understand my office has been in contact. And thirdly, I understand that she has issued a statement and I draw your attention to that.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible) petrol prices (inaudible)
PM: Australian motorists, like motorists right around the world, are copping it in the neck at the moment because of global supply and the problems, in part, associated with OPEC.
There's a huge challenge we've got as a global community. OPEC supplies something like 40 per cent of global oil. Secondly, they're not meeting again until September to adjust any future production quota for themselves.
On top of that, what I have said, and I'll be communicating this with my discussions with Prime Minister Fukuda on Thursday, is that when the G8 meet here in July. This must be the top of the agenda. Why? We need a clear statement from the world's major economies to the OPEC producers to lift their production quota now. Because currently we're having a distorted market. We have a distortion of supply and demand and OPEC has done very little by way of any interim adjustment in its output.
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible) supply side - what about demand?
PM: On the demand side, the other part of my remarks today was this - there must be a parallel emphasis at the G8 on energy efficiency and fuel efficiency technologies in the developing world.
China and India are projected to represent about one half of the prospective global increase in oil demand. Therefore, energy efficiency within those countries is of direct consequence to us. Not simply in terms of climate change reasons, but in terms of overall demand for oil.
We have a supply problem, that's OPEC, and they've been refusing to act. That's where our action must happen.
On energy efficiency in the developing world, in particular those consuming so much of the world's oil at present, this is now acutely important in order to deal with an unsustainable global set of increases to the price, unsustainable in terms of its long term impact on the global economy.
Long term solutions are necessary here. Long term solutions are necessary here. As well as assisting, where we can, to help with family individual budgets on the way through.
JOURNALIST: The other day in your ministerial statement on World Environment Day, (inaudible) funding for a hybrid car (inaudible) green car in Australia (inaudible) 2010-11, I think - when would you like to see an environmentally friendly green car of some description to be produced in Australia?
PM: Well, on the green car fund, the half billion dollar fund, my understanding also is that that fund can also in part be brought forward, is also designed to be accessible to motor vehicle manufacturers across the board and not to support any particular technology or any particular brand.
I want to see an Australian hybrid car, manufactured hybrid car, as soon as possible. For two reasons. One is, for those Australian motorists that like buying Australian manufactured cars, to give them that option.
Second, in terms of the impact on fuel prices, I think it's really important for people to have that as an option at home as well in terms of dealing with this horrible impact of rising oil prices that effects family motorists.
I'd just add one other point.
Whether it's our call to act on OPEC, or our call to use a green car fund to promote an Australian hybrid, or our call to act to give consumers basic information on the price of petrol, I notice the Liberal Party is opposed to each of these measures. Long term, short term. And it raises the question in my books as to what they actually stand for on this question.
We at least have these courses of action which we're pursuing . They seem to be saying no, no, and no.
I think people are getting tired of negative politics. They'd like to see positive solutions for the future.
JOURNALIST: Two questions, if I may. (inaudible) world is actually producing more oil (inaudible)
PM: On the question of speculators which is where you go to and that is in fact what we're seeing is stockpiling and speculators and some time speculative stockpiles. We're currently examining all the data that's available to the Government on that. And we'll have something further to say about it in the period ahead. I don't wish to pre-empt what we'll say there. We're acutely conscious of what a number of states have said about that around the world. We are now, ourselves, establishing the data and we'll have something further to say on it.
That, however, doesn't remove the impetus from OPEC to do something significant about its overall production quota which it has not adjusted despite an exponential increase in demand off the back of what's occurred in the developing world.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, I ask, about your speech (inaudible) nuclear waste (inaudible) Martin Ferguson (inaudible). Do you agree with him on that?
PM: Well, I haven't seen the text of what Martin has had to say. But, quite plainly, we're going to have to work this through our Government decision making processes over time. We'll do it methodically, we'll sift through the options available to us. These are difficult decisions, but we'll do it over time. We'll do it methodically. And we'll do it consultatively. That, I think, is the key response to that.
And I think the broader point being made by Sam Nunn and the rest on the global front is how do we cope with this challenge globally, given the abuse which can occur within the nuclear fuel cycle in terms of the diversion of material, nuclear material, for possible weapons application. That is, I think, their core concern.
JOURNALIST: Have you made a decision yet (inaudible) Beijing Olympic Games (inaudible)
PM: Fairly soon, I think. I think we're sorting a few things out at the moment on that. So, fairly soon I'd imagine.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) haven't made a decision? (inaudible)
PM: We've got a few things still to sort through. But it won't be too much longer.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: You know, Phil, what I'd love to do right now is get an independent international commission on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. I'd like to get a few co-chairs. I'd like to get an agenda rolling. Then I'd like to have a conference in Australia. I'd then like to go to the NPT conference, and then sit down with the community of nations and say, ‘what are we then going to do?'But, you know, that's at least three stages away. And I think that the proposal you just put forward does not have a good foundation at all.