Mr PYNE (9:30 PM) —I am pleased to be able to speak on this motion, moved by my friend the member for Chifley, with respect to the crisis in Fiji. The government can support aspects of the motion. In particular, we acknowledge the fact that a legitimate democratically elected government in Fiji has been detained at gunpoint and thereafter removed from office by illegal means by a small band of armed terrorists. We note that the ethnic Indian communities in Fiji are being deprived of exercising their fundamental political and human rights. We can urge the government to review the measures taken against Fiji upon full democratic rights being restored to each and every citizen of Fiji and constitutional government being restored. But we cannot support the proposals by the Labor opposition which they believe would resolve the crisis in Fiji.

Specifically, the member for Chifley calls on the Australian government to recall Australia's high commissioner from Suva, to suspend all ministerial and high-level official contacts, to seek Fiji's immediate suspension from the Commonwealth, to suspend all non-humanitarian elements of Australia's $22.3 million aid program, to cancel all defence cooperation with Fiji's armed forces, to suspend the extension of the import credit scheme and its application to Fiji, to urge Australian tourists to favour other destinations instead of Fiji and to encourage other countries to adopt similar sanctions. Those are the proposals put forward by the opposition. In their entirety, we are unable to support them, and that is because you cannot take a simplistic attitude to foreign policy—as the ALP have on this issue—particularly foreign policy in the South Pacific. It is always of interest to me to see the Labor Party, hand on heart, demanding that the Australian government spend more time on, and that the Minister for Foreign Affairs travel more often to, the South Pacific, when in fact, when Gareth Evans was Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Labor government, he travelled less frequently to the South Pacific than our foreign minister, Alexander Downer, has travelled to the South Pacific in half the time of being foreign minister. As usual, the Labor Party's rhetoric is not matched by their actions when they were in government.

I am sure the motion by the member for Chifley is put with the best of intentions. However, foreign policy is not about domestic audience; it is not about the effect that a motion will have in the parliament in terms of electoral support out in the electorate. Foreign policy is about the national interest. Foreign policy is about putting Australia in the best position possible to be able to run a foreign policy for Australia that serves the interests of its people and of Australian values around the world. Therefore, we need to ask: what best serves Australia's national interest in all of our dealings in foreign policy? What is best for Australia in the South Pacific? It is not big brother. It is not taking final actions, which the Labor Party is proposing, that would hurt Australia's national interests and not solve the problem that both the Labor Party and the government genuinely seek to solve. The best position for Australia's national interest in the South Pacific is through constructive engagement in the South Pacific. It is through health programs, education programs, military support, and building civil society and democratic traditions in the long term.

In his address, the member for Chifley said that Australia was caught with its hands in its pockets when the crisis occurred in Fiji and he said that we cannot give in to terrorists. Who has given in to terrorists? Certainly not the Australian government. The Australian government's position is very clear. We support the constitutionally and democratically elected Chaudhry government in Fiji and we believe that the release of the hostages is the most imperative action that needs to be taken. It remains our first priority. We should remember that we are not dealing with this issue in the abstract. There are 31 people still being held hostage by George Speight in the Fijian parliament, one of whom is the democratically elected Prime Minister. Australia is not in a position to be able to say simply that we are going to impose sanctions and make all these changes that the Labor Party suggest and that that is going to solve the problem. The first priority is to get the hostages out of the danger they are in currently and what seems to be becoming greater danger.

We have taken a very firm line against George Speight. We have taken some encouragement from the reports that the military has assumed control solely for the purpose of restoring law and order in Fiji and that it plans to return the country to civilian rule as soon as possible. We are glad that the military is now taking a firmer line with the hostage-takers than it has taken in the past. We have made it very clear that Australia will not accept a government in Fiji which includes George Speight or any of the hostage-takers. Otherwise, we believe that Australia will be in no position other than to impose the sanctions that Minister Downer announced on 29 May. What were they? He announced that, if constitutional government is not restored, we will take measures that include the suspension of the Australia-Fiji trade and economic relations agreement, the downgrading of the aid relationship, in particular the suspension of projects involving the Fijian public sector and the award of new scholarships, the suspension of forthcoming naval visits and joint military exercises and a thorough review of sporting contacts including in particular a possible ban on the Fiji national rugby union team visiting Australia.

On the latter point, Minister Downer announced on 13 June that any applications made by Fijian sporting teams to enter Australia would be considered in accordance with the power available to the minister under the Migration Act to review applications. These measures are intended to send a very strong signal to the authorities in Fiji, without doing long-term damage to our Pacific neighbour, that Australia will not tolerate hostages continuing to be held in the Fiji national parliament and that we will not tolerate a racially divided constitution or parliament in the future.

At the same time, we do not want to hurt the people in Fiji who are the most vulnerable and the Indian community in particular, who have done nothing to deserve being hurt in an economic sense. Economic sanctions, as proposed by the member for Chifley, would hurt most dramatically the Indian population, who are the business part of the Fijian population and who would therefore be the most affected. They would also affect the most vulnerable Fijians, those who are working in businesses in the economy, who would lose their jobs and lose their livelihoods, quite possibly for very little gain, if George Speight continued to hold the hostages regardless of the action that Australia took.

We are also very mindful of the fact that Fiji is a hub for that part of the South Pacific. There are many nations surrounding Fiji that use it as a transport hub for their goods going to Australia and to the rest of the world. Most of their trade is with Australia. Almost all the exports of most of the South Pacific countries come to Australia. If we were to destroy the Fijian economy—and, make no mistake, that is exactly what would happen; the Fijian economy would be destroyed if Australia imposed sanctions against it—that would also quite possibly destroy the economies of the small island nations in the region. Our status in the South Pacific would plummet dramatically. So, far from being able to influence change in the future in the South Pacific and far from being able to play the role that I know the member for Chifley, the Labor Party and the government would like to play—that is, one of an honest broker and a good friend—we would be the pariah of the South Pacific. They would blame us for the destruction of their economies.

The government has also decided not to reverse the decision to extend the import credits scheme, which the Labor Party proposed that we should do. Such a decision, and trade sanctions more generally, would have a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable members of the community, as I have already discussed. The Labor Party also suggests that we should discourage Australians from travelling to Fiji. The government has taken action to warn Australian nationals in Fiji of the dangers there and has suggested that they should either move within Fiji or move out of Fiji. Australia has played a crucial role in the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group in London, where Minister Downer travelled to on 6 June. The group was convened to discuss the situation in Fiji and Fiji's ongoing membership of the Commonwealth of Nations. We did suspend Fiji from the councils of the Commonwealth. A ministerial mission was sent to Fiji, including our Minister for Foreign Affairs, on 15 and 16 June. The mission delivered the very strong message to the Fijian people and government that the Commonwealth would not tolerate the ongoing situation in Fiji.

In conclusion, the government will not support the motion proposed by the member for Chifley because the government believes that we have to consider the national interest of Australia and the interests of Fiji and the entire South Pacific. We should not have a knee-jerk final reaction that would do us and the nations of the South Pacific damage, potentially for little gain. The government believes that the action that Minister Downer has taken has been the right action and that it will bear fruit in the long term. (Time expired)