Senator MINCHIN (Minister for Finance and Administration) (4:16 PM) —It would appear that the Labor Party, by virtue of the question that Senator Carr asked today, are intent on refighting the last election campaign, to which they took a policy of abandoning our replacement research reactor, thus rendering 800 people out of a job. They seem to want to destroy the whole institution in this country of a research facility and all the 800 jobs that go with that and the scientific capacity that that outstanding facility could give us. That is what this is about. It is not correct for Senator Forshaw to say that this is not about whether or not we have a reactor. That is exactly what it is about. It remains Labor policy to throw 800 Australian scientists out of work by abandoning this research facility.

In the case of INVAP itself and the $10 million, I am advised that this is a draw-down facility to be drawn upon if necessary. The activities under the contract for the building of this reactor are fully funded by the contract payments. I remind the opposition that INVAP is in a consortium with two great Australian companies—John Holland Constructions and Evans Deakin—in the construction of this reactor. The selection process for the contract was probably the most rigorous ever undertaken in the world for a reactor of this kind, and the competition was intense.

It did fall to me, as the then minister, to decide whether or not to approve ANSTO's entering into a contract with INVAP to build this new reactor. I had to satisfy myself that the process was indeed rigorous. I had every confidence because it was certainly true, as Senator Forshaw said, that many in the scientific world were surprised that INVAP was able to beat competition from Germany, France and Canada to win this contract. But I had no doubt and nor did ANSTO. ANSTO has a lot riding on this, so it would have gone beyond the norms to ensure that this was a rigorous process and that INVAP was capable of completing. It was, and I had no doubts that ANSTO should enter into this contract with INVAP as a result of that incredibly rigorous process.

Like Senator Tierney, I am disappointed that, by this line of questioning, by hanging off what is a pathetic line of argument that a $10 million drawn-down facility supplied by the Argentine government to a company that is in fact a state owned company—INVAP is owned by a state government of Argentina— it should draw this sort of attack. I think it is a sad reflection by the Labor Party on the high-quality people we have at ANSTO who are working with INVAP to give this country one of the world's best research reactors and to ensure that Australia remains at the forefront of nuclear science and nuclear research and the production of medical radioisotopes which are so critical to this country. It is sad that the Labor Party's cheap attack today reflects upon all the work that we have been doing to develop our relationship with South America in general and with Argentina in particular, a relationship that I think promises over the course of this century to produce enormous benefits to both our nations and regions. This must be causing enormous distress not only to the Argentine ambassador and his people but to the nation of Argentina, which is going through great difficulty. If anything, we should be seeking to do all we can to support Argentina as it goes through this difficulty.

I have also visited INVAP. It is an outstanding facility. It does do work with institutions like NASA, which has great confidence in its capacity to produce. I have every confidence in the capacity of INVAP to produce what will be the world's best research reactor. It has met every milestone that has been set for it in relation to this contract and will continue to do so. The contracts are in Australian and US dollars; they are not affected by the circumstances that Argentina finds itself in. This is an international company, as I said, backed by a state government of Argentina. I am pleased that the Argentine government, despite the difficulties it is having, is showing its strong support for this contract by this draw-down facility which may well not be used at all.

I would ask the opposition, in its review of its policies, to seriously look at the position it has adopted in relation to this research reactor. The Labor Party got thumped again in the electorate of Hughes. Danna Vale wiped Labor off the face of the earth again. The people of Hughes have, I think for a third time, shown their strong support for this reactor contract. It is about time the Labor Party accepted the reality, accepted the need for this reactor and started to support it.