Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 8 August 2007

3433  Senator Allison: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs—In regard to the potential deal that would see the export of uranium from Australia to India:

(1) Considering obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, how does the Australian Government reconcile selling uranium to India.

(2) (a) In any agreement regarding the export of uranium, what safeguards will be included to guarantee exported uranium does not end up supplying India’s nuclear weapons program; and (b) how will these safeguards be policed.

(3) Can the Government rule out the creation of a nuclear waste dump in Australia.

(4) Is the Government preparing to take control of uranium reserves in non-mining states.

(5) Does the sale of uranium to India compromise Australia’s obligations under the Treaty of Raratonga.

(6) Is the United States of America (US)-India nuclear technology deal consistent with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the provisions of the principles and objectives decided on in 1995.

(7) Under either the Australian or the US deal with India, will India be able to keep its nuclear weapons program without adequate safeguards.

(8) Are these arrangements consistent with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 which refers to transfers that ‘could in any way assist’.

(9) Will any agreement between India and Australia include Indian support for a verifiable global treaty to ban the production of fissile material for weapons and a ban on testing nuclear bombs.


 3434  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence—With reference to the judgment of Federal Magistrate Connoly in Lee v Smith & Ors (No. 2) [2007] FMCA 1092, delivered on 6 July 2007:

(1) (a) What criminal action has been taken against the defendant, Mr Smith, for the alleged rape; and (b) in light of the judgment, what disciplinary action has been taken against the three defendants by their employer, the department.

(2) Is an appeal being considered by the department or any of the defendants; if so, on what grounds is the appeal to be made.

(3) (a) What was the cost of defending the application against the department; (b) which counsel were engaged and at what cost; and (c) what legal assistance was provided by the department to each of the defendants.

(4) (a) How many cases of sexual harassment involving Defence personnel are currently before the courts; and (b) can a list be provided that details each case by its name and, to date, its duration and cost.