Mr BRERETON(3.47 p.m.) —Let me say that Labor welcomes this opportunity to restate its grave concern at the current political situation in Burma. I know that concern is shared by all members of this House representing all political parties and, indeed, the Independents who sit in the chamber.

The member for New England (Mr Sinclair) has spoken this afternoon about the continuing efforts of the Burmese military junta, SLORC, to suppress the democracy movement, the National League for Democracy, led by Aung San Suu Kyi. The continued revelations of appalling abuses of human rights in Burma, which include arbitrary arrest, detention without trial, torture, the use of forced labour including the forced labour of children, and the suppression of free speech and legitimate political activity leave absolutely no doubt that SLORC is a regime far beyond the pale.

SLORC's record of gross abuse of the most basic human rights has been comprehensively documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch/Asia. SLORC's shameful record is undeniable and inexcusable. Its leaders are masters of murderousness, brutality and viciousness. Their actions deserve the emphatic condemnation of this parliament.

The motion before the House expresses support for the efforts of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to negotiate democratic change in line with the expressed will of the last free and fair election in Burma, back in 1990. The motion goes on to remind SLORC of the repeated international calls for dialogue between them and the NLD—the party which, as the member for New England pointed out, won the majority of seats in the 1990 election—as a prerequisite to the full reinstatement of Burma within the international community.

Given the present lack of dialogue between SLORC and the NLD, and SLORC's continuing actions against members of the democracy movement, including the arbitrary arrests of NLD members, no member of this House would dispute the imperative that there be absolutely no slackening of international efforts to pressure that regime in Burma to respect human rights and accept democratic processes of change.

The former Labor government worked hard to advance the cause of democracy and human rights in Burma and we are determined, from these opposition benches, to continue to do all that we can to support a peaceful movement towards an open and democratic political environment in Burma. In this sense we welcome the actions of the Australian government in conferring an honorary award as a Companion of the Order of Australia on Aung San Suu Kyi in recognition of her outstanding leadership and great personal courage in the struggle to bring democracy to Burma. Her leadership has been of the highest order and, in every sense, is comparable with the outstanding leadership that saw the regime of apartheid broken in South Africa. The nomination of that honorary award was made by the former Labor government.

All Australians recognise and applaud Aung San Suu Kyi's resolute commitment to promoting democracy and human rights in Burma and to improving the lives of the people of Burma. She is in every sense an extraordinary woman, an inspiration to millions of people and an international symbol not only of the Burmese people's desire for democracy but of the whole struggle to secure respect for human rights—a struggle that continues around the world today. The final paragraph of today's motion urges:

. . . regional governments, in particular the Governments of Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia, to use their influence with the Government of Burma to effect the immediate release of those arrested, bring about dialogue between the SLORC and the NLD and encourage improvements in Burma's human rights record.

Certainly, as the member for New England has said, the countries of ASEAN unquestionably occupy a critical position in the international efforts to bring about a restoration of democracy in Burma. Together with the countries of South Asia and China, they are Burma's neighbours and Burma's partners, and any international campaign to bring pressure to bear on SLORC is to a large, though by no means total, measure dependent on their support.

It would be unfortunate, may I say, if the impression were given that the burden of the international effort to restore civil and political rights in Burma should fall on these nations alone. In this regard, while the opposition supports the broad thrust of the motion before the House today, we would point out that it falls far short of the resolution adopted by the Senate on the occasion of Aung San Suu Kyi's birthday on 19 June this year. The final paragraph of that resolution reads:

. . . calls on the Government to put the SLORC on notice that potential trade sanctions must be on the agenda if civil and political rights are not restored.

The question which this parliament and the Australian government must face sooner or later is: what is the next step in relation to Burma? Where do we go from here? The member for New England spoke about where you draw the line. I think we should be asking: what next?

International efforts to date to persuade SLORC to engage in constructive dialogue with the NLD and to take some real steps towards the restoration of civil and political rights and freedoms have borne no fruit whatsoever. Sooner or later, the international community will face the question of whether, effectively, to walk away from Burma—to leave things as they are and do nothing more—or whether to apply greater pressure to induce SLORC to accept a peaceful movement towards the establishment of democratic institutions and processes.

Unquestionably, SLORC's hope is that the world community, including countries such as our own, will take the former course of action—or, rather, inaction—that we will lose interest and eventually walk away. Doubtless, similar hopes are held by those commercial interests which hope to profit from expanded trade with Burma—more often than not involving direct dealings with SLORC—including access to the country's mineral and timber resources.

This is a complex situation which calls for careful judgment. It is often argued that without broad international support, and support from regional countries in particular, any attempt to apply pressure to SLORC will have no effect. The question which Australia will have to face is whether, in the absence of any real movement towards democracy in Burma, SLORC are the sort of people decent Australians would want as trading partners. Talk, after all, is cheap but it is not enough when it comes to questions of basic human rights.

The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Tim Fischer) recently commented, in relation to the issue of human rights in Tibet, that `business is business'. The opposition categorically rejects that approach. As I said in the motion on Cyprus earlier today, it is one of the hard lessons of international politics that nations are often guided by considerations of strategic and economic interests. That said, we must never lose sight of fundamentally important questions of justice, of right and wrong.

In relation to Burma too, this parliament and the government must weigh the cause of justice and human rights in the balance. International affairs must never be reduced to simple calculations of strategic advantage or the trade balance. Fundamental questions of respect for human rights, of the promotion of democratic institutions and liberties, must never be left off the ledger.

With regard to future developments in Burma, the opposition calls on the Australian government to maintain the embargo on the export of defence and defence-related goods to Burma; and, in concert with like-minded governments worldwide, to apply pressure on SLORC to release immediately all political prisoners, to desist from all practices of forced labour, and to respect basic human rights and freedom of expression. We further call on the government, to use the key words of the Senate resolution I referred to earlier, `to put SLORC on notice that potential trade sanctions must be on the agenda if civil and political rights in Burma are not restored'.

In conclusion, while the opposition supports the motion moved by the member for New England, we feel that its limitations should be clearly recognised. We have recognised them and pointed them out to the House. Let me state categorically that the opposition will be watching very closely the government's performance in supporting the observance of and respect for universal human rights, not just in Burma but elsewhere in our region and the wider world.