Mr CREAN (2:24 PM) —My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, given that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair are meeting at Camp David this weekend to discuss the postwar administration of Iraq, does the Prime Minister support the establishment of a US military protectorate, or equivalent, under a US military governor, or does the Prime Minister support a UN administration for the postwar effort? Has the Prime Minister communicated his government's view to President Bush and Prime Minister Blair?

Mr HOWARD (Prime Minister) —I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. I have communicated the government's view on a number of occasions to both President Bush and Mr Blair. Self-evidently, there will have to be an interim period, which will obviously involve a leadership role for the United States and the involvement of the United Kingdom—and obviously the Australian viewpoint, and that of others, would also be expressed in those arrangements. After that, I see a very clear role for the United Nations. That has always been our view in relation to the post-conflict arrangements.

But let me make it clear that, in order for the United Nations to play an effective role in the post-conflict situation, it will need to display a greater degree of unity than it was able to muster in the pre-conflict stage. I want to say very emphatically on behalf of the Australian government that it remains our view that the United Nations failed to match the world's need in relation to Iraq and it was left to others to match the need of the world. I hope that the role of the United Nations will be constructive.

Obviously, if you look at the history of events leading up to the military action, you will see all along a desire on the part of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States—and indeed many others—to see the Security Council accept its responsibilities. The United States President and the British Prime Minister will be talking about the post-conflict arrangements, and I think they will also be talking about other arrangements. Our views have already been very fully communicated to them. I have every confidence that the foreign minister's visit to the United States next week is the right visit at the right time and at the right level to further put our view—and, of course, I will be in further touch with both the President and the Prime Minister; and if any further personal contact between us is necessary then that will take place. The Leader of the Opposition should understand that the idea that the United States, the United Kingdom and others, having done the heavy lifting in relation to this matter, should just walk away without seeking to legitimately put their point of view about the post-conflict arrangements is plainly unacceptable.