Page 5524 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR CONNOLLY: I do not have with me a copy of that direction, which was of course tabled in this place, so it is in the public domain. The intention of the direction was certainly clear - to prevent future arms exhibitions at Natex. There is obviously a difficulty here. We would be most enthusiastic about an information technology exhibition at Natex which might feature a range of new computer programs - that is, computer technologies. Some of those would obviously have a defence application. That would be fine. But we do not want weapon systems exhibitions or defence arms bazaar type activities in Canberra. We have said that repeatedly. It is a view that seems to be shared by everyone in this Assembly - - -
Mr Stefaniak: Except the Liberal Party.
MR CONNOLLY: Apart from the Liberal Party, as Mr Stefaniak says. I notice that David McNicoll in this week's Bulletin has suggested that the Duntroon cadets should have been let loose to carry out some demonstrations of unarmed combat on the protesters at Natex; that it would have been very useful practice. That no doubt is a view that would be shared at least by some members of the Liberal Party.
But the Government's position is clear. We do not want arms bazaars in Canberra. Our vision for Canberra does not include our being a centre for the international arms trade. We do not want to have a bar of arms, defence, weaponry focused exhibitions. Obviously, there is a potential, in any technology shows, for there to be defence applications. That is fair and proper.
MR COLLAERY: I ask a supplementary question. The Attorney may have clarified it in his last few words, but I seek clarification in terms of the direction issued under section 6 of the Natex Act. Is the Attorney clarifying the situation by saying that technology exhibitions which may have a defence application will be permissible and are outside the scope of the direction issued to the Natex Trust?
MR CONNOLLY: As long as it is not focusing on weaponry it is permissible. There was rhetoric from some of the organisers at Natex that there was not a gun in sight. I did not actually go out there, but I did see the interesting show bag that Mr Stefaniak brought back into the chamber. It featured a particularly attractive brochure for a particularly interesting looking aeroplane and pictures of cluster bombs, anti-personnel bombs and other interesting trinkets and optional extras which were being promoted. There was a clear weaponry focus in Aidex as it was planned this year. We do not want weapons exhibitions and arms exhibitions in Canberra, and those are the terms of our direction.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .