Ms BURKE (3:18 PM) —My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister update the House on the situation in Burma and the detention of the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi?

Mr STEPHEN SMITH (Minister for Foreign Affairs) —I thank the member for her question. I regret to advise the House that overnight the Burmese military regime extended the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the last democratically elected Burmese leader. Given the terrible human tragedy that has unfolded in Burma, the Australian government has recently tempered its remarks so far as the Burmese military regime has been concerned. That has obviously been in order to seek to maximise our efforts to get humanitarian assistance into Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis. But this particular matter cannot go without comment.

Aung San Suu Kyi has been under house arrest continuously for the past five years and has been in detention for more than 12 of the last 18 years. Since her most recent detention in May 2003, Australia has repeatedly called for her release and for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Burma. Australia’s embassy in Rangoon renewed these representations yesterday. Our estimates are that there are around 1,500 political prisoners in Burma.

Aung San Suu Kyi was first arrested after her party, the National League for Democracy, won a majority of votes in the 1990 Burma election, an election that the Burmese military were happy to agree to until it saw the result. In 1991, she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. She is a testament to the desire of the Burmese people to freely determine their own future and to bring democracy and respect for human rights to Burma. Sadly, she is also a symbol of the lengths to which the military regime in Burma will go to stay in power.

The extension of her detention comes after the military regime’s recent announcement that over 92 per cent of the votes cast in the recent referendum were to approve a new constitution. That referendum and its process was a complete sham. The fact that it was held consecutively on 10 and 24 May was, in the circumstances, a complete disgrace. That new constitution is fundamentally flawed. It is designed to entrench military power, not to move the Burmese state and people back to democracy. It allows the military to deregister political parties and it prevents Aung San Suu Kyi from standing for political office. Progress towards democracy and respect for human rights in Burma will only occur in a manner which the international community supports and when all political players in Burma have a genuine and transparent opportunity to take part in a genuine political process.

I welcome very much the statements overnight supportive of Aung San Suu Kyi from the UN Secretary-General and from a range of governments, including the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and Indonesia. I say that this regrettable decision on the part of the Burmese military regime will not affect in any way the Australian government’s continued efforts to seek to bring humanitarian assistance to the people of Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis. In this context, I am very pleased to inform the House that earlier today—very early this morning—the Royal Australian Air Force delivered two helicopters for the World Food Program to Bangkok. These helicopters are sourced from South Africa and will be used by the World Food Program to deliver much-needed food to Burma.

I will conclude on this point: the reluctance of the Burmese military regime to accept international assistance in this matter stands in stark contrast to the approach of the government of China. Can I say to the House how very much we regret the aftershocks that have occurred in China and the additional pressure that this has placed on the Chinese government. I say that, as a consequence of these aftershocks, I have today written to the Chinese ambassador renewing, again, our offer of any appropriate assistance from Australia on behalf of the Australian government but also on behalf of the Australian community. That approach of the Chinese government stands in very stark contrast to the approach and attitude of the Burmese military regime.