

- Title
GREATER SUNRISE UNITISATION AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION BILL 2004
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (GREATER SUNRISE) BILL 2004
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
25-03-2004
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
40
- Electorate
South Australia
- Interjector
CHAIRMAN, The
- Page
21911
- Party
AD
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Stage
In Committee
- Type
- Context
Bills
- System Id
chamber/hansards/2004-03-25/0063
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- NOTICES
- BUSINESS
- LEAVE OF ABSENCE
- NOTICES
- OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT
- HUMAN RIGHTS: BURMA
- PARLIAMENTARY ZONE
- COMMITTEES
- BILLS RETURNED FROM THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
- COMMITTEES
- PARLIAMENTARY ZONE
- KYOTO PROTOCOL RATIFICATION BILL 2003 [NO. 2]
- BUDGET
-
GREATER SUNRISE UNITISATION AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION BILL 2004
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (GREATER SUNRISE) BILL 2004-
In Committee
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- O'Brien, Sen Kerry
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Harris, Sen Len
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Harris, Sen Len
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Harris, Sen Len
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Harris, Sen Len
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Harris, Sen Len
- McGauran, Sen Julian
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Abetz, Sen Eric
- O'Brien, Sen Kerry
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Harris, Sen Len
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Division
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Nettle, Sen Kerry
- Brown, Sen Bob
- Nettle, Sen Kerry
- Brown, Sen Bob
-
In Committee
- PRIVACY AMENDMENT BILL 2004
- DAIRY PRODUCE AMENDMENT BILL 2003
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Taxation: Compliance
(Conroy, Sen Stephen, Coonan, Sen Helen) -
Australian Defence Force: Deployment
(Scullion, Sen Nigel, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Australian Defence Force: Deployment
(Evans, Sen Chris, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Resources: Investment
(Mason, Sen Brett, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Australian Defence Force: Deployment
(Evans, Sen Chris, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Environment: Ranger Uranium Mine
(Allison, Sen Lyn, Macdonald, Sen Ian) -
Taxation: Capital Gains
(Webber, Sen Ruth, Coonan, Sen Helen)
-
Taxation: Compliance
- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- DOCUMENTS
- DELEGATION REPORTS
- COMMITTEES
- AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC SERVICE: POLITICISATION
- DOCUMENTS
- ASSENT
- COMMITTEES
- ADJOURNMENT
- DOCUMENTS
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
Foreign Affairs: Zimbabwe
(Brown, Sen Bob, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Social Welfare: Newstart and Youth Allowance
(Campbell, Sen George, Patterson, Sen Kay) -
Environment: National Reserve System Program
(Bartlett, Sen Andrew, Macdonald, Sen Ian) -
Environment: Threatened Species
(Bartlett, Sen Andrew, Macdonald, Sen Ian) -
Attorney-General's Department: Criminal Justice and Security Group
(Ludwig, Sen Joe, Ellison, Sen Chris)
-
Foreign Affairs: Zimbabwe
Page: 21911
Senator STOTT DESPOJA (10:51 PM)
—I have another question to put to the minister. At the committee on Monday night, I asked about the issuing of new exploration licences. I thank officials for the response, but I just want some clarification. My understanding is that, since the IUA in March 2003, Australia has unilaterally granted at least two—not one, but two—exploration licences in areas of the Timor Sea neighbouring Greater Sunrise. The permit numbers that I have here are permit NT/P65 on 22 April 2003 and permit NT/P68 on 23 February 2004.
First of all, I ask the minister to confirm whether or not that is indeed the case. I can certainly see one of his advisers nodding. Clearly, the government considers this to be appropriate, but I wonder if the government acknowledges whether there is room for that kind of unilateral activity to be considered as showing poor faith, certainly not good faith. Is it the government's understanding that under international law we are obliged to refrain from unilateral exploitation in areas where there may be overlapping claims? Is that indeed our obligation under international law? What is the government's response to that?