Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 2 Hansard (19 May) . . Page.. 309 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I support the motion and urge members of the Assembly to help in the process of educating the community about what this means and ensuring that the process does go forward to strengthen international nuclear disarmament.

MR SMYTH (Minister for Urban Services) (11.38): Mr Speaker, in consultation with Mr Stanhope, we would now like to see paragraph (5) inserted as is; but the proposed paragraph (6) actually become a new paragraph (c) of Ms Tucker's amendment. That paragraph would read:

calls on the Commonwealth Government to consider supporting appropriate international sanctions.

MR SPEAKER: You can foreshadow it at this point, Mr Smyth, because they have not been moved yet.

MR SMYTH: I would like to foreshadow that amendment. Mr Stanhope is in agreement. It has actually been circulated in the house now.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (11.39): I am sorry about that, Mr Speaker; I think I led to that confusion. I seek leave to move together the second set of two amendments which have now been circulated in my name.

Leave granted.

MR STANHOPE: I move:

(1) After proposed paragraph (4) insert the following paragraph:

"(5) calls on India and Pakistan to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.".

(2) After proposed paragraph (b) add the following paragraph:

"(c) calls on the Commonwealth Government to consider supporting appropriate international sanctions.".

MS TUCKER (11.40): Mr Speaker, I would like to make just a couple of comments about these amendments. I will support them, but I think it is important to point out that the reason that India and Pakistan did not want to support the comprehensive test ban treaty was that, if the treaty required that there be a commitment by all nuclear weapons states to a timetable for the elimination of all nuclear weapons, then they would have to forgo the nuclear option themselves. There is, obviously, a huge problem here, because the reality is that what the comprehensive test ban treaty does is say, "We will not develop any new weapons; but, for those who already have them, it is okay as long as they do not develop any more". Those nations which have shown restraint, in fact, and have not developed weapons are not allowed to develop them, but those which already have them are able to keep them.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .