19 December 2007
Transcript of joint doorstop with Peter Garrett MP
Main Committee room, Parliament House
Canberra, Wednesday 19 December 2007
E&OE
T57/07
Subject: Government Actions to Stop Whaling
SMITH: Okay, well thanks very much for turning up. I'm very pleased to be here with Peter Garrett, the Minister for the Environment to detail the measures which the Australian Government proposes to pursue, to persuade the Japanese Government to stop its slaughter of whales.
Before I detail those measures, let me make some general remarks and also remind you of actions that the Government has already taken since coming to office.
Firstly, our objective here is to persuade the Japanese Government to stop the slaughter of whales in the Antarctic. And the array of measures that we outlined, we hope will be ultimately effective in that ambition.
Our starting point, of course, is that we're dealing here with the slaughter of whales, not scientific research. That's our starting point and our end point. And before I detail the new measures, let me remind you of actions that the Government has already taken.
Firstly, the Attorney-General has formally withdrawn the previous advice to the Federal Court in the Humane Society International vs. KSK Case, and we await the outcome of the Federal Court's decision in that respect.
Secondly, I've already taken the opportunity of making representations to the Japanese Government, when Deputy Foreign Minister Yabunaka was here earlier this month, and I made the point to him that the Australian Government was very strongly committed to the cessation of whaling by the Japanese in the Southern Ocean.
And I made the point to him very strongly, that this was very firmly felt by the Australian people. And that the Australian Government would make these representations in the strongest possible terms over whatever period of time was required to persuade the Japanese Government to desist from the whale slaughter.
The Deputy Japanese Foreign Minister was, of course, here as part of the Japan, Australia, US trilateral discussions and in the course of those trilateral discussions, the point was also made to the Japanese delegation, the Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister, of the extreme concern about the proposal for the first occasion to cull humpback whales. And Peter will make some more remarks in that respect.
So we've already formally called upon the Japanese Government to desist and made the point about the proposed cull for the first occasion of humpbacks.
Let me detail for you the proposed new measures.
Firstly, the Australian Government will take all diplomatic measures to seek to persuade the Japanese Government to stop the whale slaughter.
It will do that by making representations to my counterpart, and to Peter's counterpart. We've also commenced a demarche, or a formal diplomatic protest, which is Australia leading a formal diplomatic protest with other nations, to the Japanese Government in Tokyo and that will be affected over the next few days.
Secondly, we will appoint a diplomatic envoy to seek to persuade the Japanese Government of the correctness and the rightness of our cause and Peter will make some more remarks in that respect.
Thirdly, we will up our activity in the International Whaling Commission, to seek to use our voice in the International Whaling Commission to bring an end to the so-called "scientific" whaling.
Fourthly, the Government is considering pursuing international legal action and the Attorney-General has commissioned advice from both the Australian Government Solicitor and also independent legal advice, to advise the Government on the capacity for the Government to take international legal action against the Japanese whaling.
All options are on the table, including utilising the Whaling Convention, utilising the Endangered Species Convention, taking action before the International Court of Justice, and taking action before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
All options are on the table and early in the New Year, the Government expects to receive that advice and in the course of next year decisions will be made in that respect.
Next, for the purposes of accumulating evidence for the purposes of assessing the merits of such a case, the Australian Government will affect a surveillance of the current Japanese whale cull.
That will be affected in two ways.
Firstly, aerial surveillance. That aerial surveillance will be conducted by the Australian Antarctic Division - an A319 plane - which will take both photographic and video evidence by way of aerial surveillance.
Secondly, surface surveillance, using the Customs boat the Oceanic Viking. That will be surveillance of up to 20 days in the Southern Ocean.
For the purposes of the whaling surveillance - and I make the point it will be surveillance, not enforcement or interdiction or intervention - for the purposes of that surveillance, the customs boarding party will not be armed and the Oceanic Viking will not be armed. This is not an enforcement action, this is a surveillance action for the purpose of a surveillance activity, for the purposes of gaining photographic and video evidence for the purpose of assessing the merits of taking an international legal case against the whaling.
Having made the point that the Oceanic Viking's role will be to survey at a safe distance, let me again make a point that I made to the Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister. I urge all parties to exercise restraint. That includes the Japanese whalers. It also includes the NGOs who are proposing to be in the area.
We are dealing here with an area of water which is thousands of miles away from mainland Australia. If there is an adverse incident on those seas, the capacity for rescue is very low and the capacity for adverse injury or fatalities is very high.
Of course, if there is an incident and the Oceanic Viking is in the vicinity, it will of course exercise all its obligations under the Law of the Sea and all its rescue obligations to render assistance. But I again stress the point, the capacity to render assistance will be low, and the risk of grave outcomes is very, very high, so I again urge all parties to exercise restraint.
So that's a comprehensive array of new measures which the Government is announcing today. Can I just make this final point before handing over to Peter.
Australia and Japan are friends and have a very productive relationship. And I made the point to the Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister that whilst we strongly disagree about this issue, the strength of the relationship between Australia and Japan is a long-term, enduring one, and is such that whilst we agree to strongly disagree over this point, it will not disturb the nature and the basis of the strong relationship between Australia and Japan.
Reflecting the warmth and the strength of that relationship, my department has taken the opportunity, at my request earlier today, to formally advise the Japanese Government of the array of measures which I'm announcing so that they would be aware of it in advance of public release by the Australian Government.
I'll hand over to Peter and then we'll happily respond to your questions. Thank you.
GARRETT: Thanks very much Stephen.
Now today's announcement is all about the comprehensive, robust and serious measures that Labor wants to bring to bear to oppose commercial and lethal scientific whaling, particularly in the Southern Oceans.
It has a Japanese focus, simply because Japan is conducting the largest single whaling operation of its kind in the world, with some 1,035 whales targeted. Fifty humpbacks, the mainstay of Australia's whale watching industry, who are vulnerable. Fifty fins, who are endangered.
It's focused on Japan, because scientific whaling is a sham. The IWC review of Japan's scientific whaling has clearly found that the pretext of scientific whaling is a sham. There are non-lethal ways of continuing and developing your research into whales. You don't have to harpoon them to find out important scientific research information about them.
Particularly in that we are seeing an increase in the targeted quotas of the Japanese over the past years, what we can say is that the past policies of the Liberal Government, the diplomatic endeavours that they've had in place, simply haven't worked.
So if you read Australian lips, you'll say that slaughtering whales is not scientific. It's cruel, it's barbaric, and it's unnecessary. And as a consequence, we think there needs to be a greatly enhanced level of activity at the IWC, and Australia will initiate that in the coming year.
And additionally, we want to look at measures for modernising the IWC, and for clearly seeking to close the loopholes that have allowed the Japanese whalers to come into the southern oceans and to harpoon whales on the pretext of scientific whaling.
Australians care a lot about these whales. Australians care a great deal about these whales. Fifteen minutes of agonising death at the hands of a harpoon, is no way to treat these beautiful and regal creatures. And our commitment to stopping the slaughter of whales is a firm and very strong one, and these measures are an indication of that.
I should also just additionally note that I will be instituting a report on whales and dolphins generally; their state of health, and what we need to do, within the international fora - including the IWC - to ensure that they're adequately and properly protected into the longer term.
Happy to take any questions.
JOURNALIST: Are you likely to board these Japanese ships?
SMITH: No, the Customs vessel will be there for surveillance purposes only. And for the purposes of surveillance of the Japanese whaling fleet, and the Japanese whaling hunt. The Customs boarding party will not be armed, and, the operation will be a surveillance activity. It will not be enforcement or boarding.
And as I have indicated, if of course worse comes to worse and there is an adverse incident, it will of course discharge whatever rescue operation it can. But I again make the point - I urge everyone to exercise restraint, because the capacity for rescue is low, and the danger of a fatality is high.
JOURNALIST: Will the guns be removed from the Oceanic Viking? Will it be completely unarmed?
SMITH: The guns, either the boarding party guns, or the armourments on the vessel will be stored and locked below, prior to the whaling surveillance.
JOURNALIST: …those two heavy machine guns can be rebolted at any time?
SMITH: They won't be. For the purposes of the whaling surveillance it'll be a surveillance only activity. There will be no effort or attempt or desire to effect an enforcement or a boarding action.
And for the purposes of the whaling surveillance, the armourments will be stored below.
Now the reason that armourments won't be removed prior to departure is of course that the Customs vessel is also involved with illegal fishing surveillance, and in the course of the surveillance exercise it may well encounter other illegal fishing which it will deal with in the usual way.
JOURNALIST: Have you discussed this with the Japanese Embassy yet…?
SMITH: Well, as I said in my opening remarks, because of the strength of the relationship between Australia and Japan, I asked my Department earlier this morning to advise the Japanese Government of the array of measures so that they would be aware of it before Peter and I publicly announced it.
JOURNALIST: Your diplomatic protest, have you started gathering a response to that? Who has responded positively?
SMITH: Well, firstly, yes we have started the procedures for the demarche - the official term -
which is a formal diplomatic protest. It would be inappropriate of me to indicate any other nation States under the demarche until it is actually presented. But Australia will lead the formal diplomatic protest.
This has occurred in previous years. But I'll leave it to other nation States to either indicate their involvement, or wait until it is formally presented, which will be in Tokyo in the next few days.
JOURNALIST: When will the Oceanic Viking leave, and where from?
SMITH: My understanding is it'll leave from Fremantle, and it'll leave in the next few days.
JOURNALIST: Are you expecting a diplomatic backlash, and could this severely affect relations with Tokyo?
SMITH: No, I'm not expecting a diplomatic backlash for two reasons.
Firstly, the strength of the Australian Government's view, the strength of the Australian publics feeling, and our very strong view about the rightness of our cause has previously been relayed by me to the Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister. The Japanese Government is only too well aware of our view in this matter. That's the first reason.
Secondly, the strength of the long-term enduring relationship that Australia and Japan has, is good enough and strong enough and big enough for us to agree to disagree about this matter.
Now, this is no minor disagreement. There are strong views firmly held on both sides, and it is a strong view from which the Australian Government will not resile. But, I believe that the long-term strength of the relationship is more than robust enough to well and truly absorb that.
JOURNALIST: How effective do you expect these measures to be given that Greenpeace, and I assume other green groups are already down there surveilling and taking footage of whaling activities?
SMITH: Okay, well, firstly I hope that's all the NGOs and Greenpeace do, which is to surveil, not to intervene, because if there's intervention that will potentially be at grave risk to all concerned.
Secondly, there's a qualitative difference between an NGO surveilling and the Commonwealth of Australia surveilling. And we are surveilling for the purpose of gathering evidence to use if we're so advised, in international legal action to seek to get an international legal determination to end so-called "scientific" whaling and to stop the Japanese slaughter of whales.
JOURNALIST: Any indication that Japan might now send one of their military vessels down to monitor us monitoring them?
SMITH: Well, there will be no need for Japan to do that. I make the point, no defence assets are being utilised here.
The aerial surveillance is by the Australian Antarctic Division, using an A319, and the seaborne surveillance is using a Customs vessel which does have Customs armourments, but which will be stored below for the purposes of this surveillance.
This is a stand-off and surveil at a safe distance. It is not enforcement, interdiction, or intervention. So there would be no need for that response.
JOURNALIST: Mr Smith, I understand that the Sydney panel recommendations - the confidential version of their report by Don Rothwell - has been examined by the Government and two of the key recommendations there in relation to the ICJ, is one that Australia could take Japan to the ICJ if it submitted to jurisdiction, voluntarily agreed to jurisdiction. And the second option being that Australia could seek a, a ruling even if Japan didn't agree to the exercising of jurisdiction in this case.
And the other option being the tribunal on the law of the sea.
Now those experts argue that if action was initiated before those two tribunals, either of them could immediately order a halt to the current hunt.
Now, does the Government accept that legal argument, after having already examined, as I understand it, the, that panel's recommendations?
SMITH: Well the advice to the Australian Government will of course be given by the Attorney General.
And as I indicated in my opening remarks, he is doing two things. Firstly, taking advice from the Australian Government Solicitor, and secondly, commissioning independent outside legal advice, so as to ensure that we have the entire array of legal advice and legal options before us.
Now I haven't, I haven't read those materials. It may well be that the Attorney General's Department, or the Attorney General himself has.
But, in the end, the Commonwealth will act upon the legal advice that it receives.
And I expect that the Attorney General will receive that advice, and advise the Cabinet in the course of the early weeks and months of 2008.
JOURNALIST: The capacity for rescue is low and therefore the danger of fatalities in a confrontation is high. Haven't you just underlined the confrontational nature of the action that the Rudd Government is taking and if there is a fatality down there, won't you therefore, having had this prior knowledge, at least shoulder some of the blame?
SMITH: No, I reject that entirely, for a number of reasons. Firstly, what we are doing is surveillance only. I have urged from day one all parties to exercise restraint and, in response to an earlier question, I made the point, I hope that all that the NGOs do is to surveil and not to seek to intervene. All parties - all parties should exercise restraint and all parties will be responsible for their own actions. The Australian Government is responsible for its actions and those actions are to surveil, to gather evidence for the purposes of a potential international legal case and to urge all parties to exercise restraint because, as I put it on a number of occasions, the capacity for rescue is low and the capacity for a fatality is very high.
JOURNALIST: What sort of advice are you actually seeking? Like are you going to be sitting off those boats taking photos? I mean, what, can you add any more detail about what…
SMITH: It will be a surveillance activity for the purposes of taking photographic and video evidence to use in an international legal case if the Government determines on the legal advice available to it that that is an appropriate course of action.
JOURNALIST: And evidence also be used against NGOs? For instance, last summer there were a lot of allegations that Sea Shepherd were ramming the Japanese boats.
SMITH: The purpose of the surveillance by the Commonwealth is to gather information both photographic and video for the purposes of potential use in an international legal case against the Japanese whale slaughter.
JOURNALIST: Are they looking for - don't you have an idea, a kernel of a strategy, a legal strategy that you'll want to back up with the evidence?
SMITH: The kernel of the legal strategy is to seek to make the point internationally before an international legal tribunal, if the legal avenue is open to us, is to make the point that what we are seeing is not scientific research but the slaughter of whales.
JOURNALIST: You say that you're focusing on Japan, but you also looked at those other countries that were convinced to vote recently to allow Japan to hunt those humpbacks.
SMITH: Japan is not the only country that engages in the slaughter of whales. Iceland and Norway are two other countries. Our focus is, of course, upon the Japanese whale hunt because it occurs in the Southern Oceans not in the Arctic.
JOURNALIST: How much is it going to cost?
SMITH: We will need to do a detailed assessment of that after this.
JOURNALIST: A ballpark figure?
SMITH: No, I can detail that for you subsequently. I don't carry it in my head but because we regard this as effectively an election commitment we will be implementing it and we'll publish the detailed - we'll publish the detailed financial aspects once the surveillance has been completed.
JOURNALIST: The Oceanic Viking currently protects toothfish, Patagonian toothfish.
SMITH: It's a Customs vessel which is engaged in enforcement action against illegal fishing.
JOURNALIST: …our toothfish stocks, and I understand this is quite a large fishing industry. Is there any possibility that our toothfish stocks will be left vulnerable?
SMITH: No, the advice we have is that the Customs surveillance for illegal fishing and the whale surveillance can both be accommodated but the reason we have determined that the Customs armaments, both hand-held and machine gun, should be stored below for the purposes of the whale surveillance is that in the course of the Oceanic Viking's voyage, if it is required to intervene or interdict in illegal fishing, then it will have the usual and necessary facilities. I think there was a question over here for Peter.
JOURNALIST: Are you considering taking a formal protest to the CITES convention in relation to the humpbacks?
GARRETT: Again, as Stephen said, that will be considered in the context of looking at the legal options on the basis of the advice that's received by the Government.
I would say in relation to the Oceanic Viking, that the sweep that it does in respect of its work over the summer season enables it to have a closer access to some of those proximity areas where we may see the Japanese whaling take place.
And the final thing to say is that the Antarctic Division aircraft that's contemplated for use, the A-319, has got low level surveillance capacity so it can loiter, I think, for something like an hour in a region of activity so there's every possibility that the quality of information that's gathered there would be of use.
JOURNALIST: Mr Garrett, given that the Sydney panel has already - the five or six experts have already given a detailed examination, they've presented a confidential report and that finds that these avenues, including CITES and the ICJ, are available already, why is further advice necessary? Do you accept that it's a real possibility under those tribunals that the current hunt could be stopped, as already recommended by Rothwell and others in that confidential report which the Government has?
GARRETT: In relation to the Sydney panel I think it's absolutely prudent and necessary for us to take advice which presents all the options and the consideration not only from the Attorney-General and the Government's lawyers but also from an independent expert.
In relation to CITES, the proposal, as I understand it, applies to the issue of humpbacks. Now, we are saying very strongly that we totally oppose the slaughter of these beautiful animals. It's not at all scientific to kill humpback whales which are the mainstay of Australia whaling industry. It's a cruel and unnecessary act but at this point in time no humpbacks have been taken and the measures that the Foreign Minister has outlined are designed to put pressure on Japan to consider those activities as they unfold in the Southern Oceans.
JOURNALIST: This year's hunt could be stopped?
GARRETT: I think we have to do everything we can to put the very strongest message possible to the Japanese Government and to the fleet and we oppose what's going on in the Southern Oceans. We have opposed it in the past. I think those measures haven't been as strong as they needed to be. These measures are stronger.
JOURNALIST: Can I just ask, is there not already existing advice from the Government in relation to whaling under the previous Government?
SMITH: Well, I'm not actually aware of it. That's a matter for the Attorney-General but when the Government came to office, because we had made such a strong commitment, we wanted effectively to start afresh. I don't want to trail over the past but we could if we wanted to be, be rightly critical of previous inactivity. I think it's much more important to focus on what we might be able to do. We wanted to start afresh both in terms of independent legal advice commissioned externally from the Australian Government Solicitor and also whatever existing advice there was.
JOURNALIST: The Japanese have said they were going to ignore any adverse findings in the Federal Court.
SMITH: Well, I think the starting point for the Federal Court decision in the Humane Society International vs. KSK Case is to wait for the decision. We're not a party to that. The Commonwealth is not a party to that. I think we'll just have to take that one as it comes and see what the Federal Court determines.
JOURNALIST: The Federal Court based a lot of its ruling, its initial ruling, on the advice from the Australian Government at that point.
SMITH: And we've made the point of advisedly withdrawing that from the Federal Court to enable the Federal Court to make a decision on what we would regard as the merits and not coloured by the previous Commonwealth's advice.
Sorry, there was only one question I couldn't answer which was the costing question. We'll get you a ballpark figure. Other than that, everyone happy?
JOURNALIST: If Greenpeace or other protest boats were to try to interpose themselves between the harpooners and the whales and there were claims by the Japanese that the law of the sea or other laws had been breached, would the Oceanic Viking have a role as a potential witness to those events, recording of those events, or could it intervene in the case of a confrontation between anti-whalers and the whaling fleet?
SMITH: I'd urge the NGOs and the Japanese whalers to not put themselves in that position.
JOURNALIST: That's not the question. Could the Oceanic Viking play a role…
SMITH: The Oceanic Viking will be there for the purposes of photographic and video surveillance of Japanese slaughter of whales in the Southern Oceans.
Thank you.
Ends
Media Inquiries: Adam Siddique on (02) 6277 7500