MINISTER FOR

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

NEWS RELEASE

IMo. m 85 Date 21 July 1978 THE HON. ANDREW PEACOCK M.P.

AUSTRALIA'S NUCLEAR SAFEGUARDS

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Andrew Peacock,  today answered comments by the Deputy Leader of the Federal  Opposition, Mr Bowen, on the Australia/Finland Safeguards  Agreement, signed in Helsinki yesterday.

Mr Peacock said:

"Mr Bowen alleges that the Nuclear Safeguards  Agreement between Australia and Finland "waters down" the  safeguards policy announced by the Prime Minister on 24 May  1977. It does not. Mr Bowen has not identified any point  of the Government's policy which the agreement does not cover.

Mr Bowen says that there is no prohibition in the  agreement on stock-piling weapons usable material by the  recipient. The 24 May statement did not say that there would  be such a prohibition. What the 24 May statement .said, and  what the agreement provides, is that Australian material can

only be enriched over 20 per cent or reprocessed if Australia  is satisfied as to the conditions and arrangements. We would  not be satisfied with arrangements which posed a proliferation  risk. We would not agree to high enrichment or reprocessing

for other than peaceful purposes.

Mr Bowen says, "There is an explicit endorsement of  reprocessing to produce material for long-term storage, which  material would be usable for weapons". There is.no such  endorsement:

- If he is suggesting that Australia should have decided  that in no circumstances would we allow our material  to be reprocessed, this would be to prejudge the  outcome of international studies,  such as the  International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (INFCE).  These studies are specifically addressing the  complex issue of the relative merits of reprocessing,  as against long-term storage, from the points of  view of both non-proliferation and safe disposal of  waste. The former Leader of the Opposition, of

course endorsed Australia's participation in INFCE. No country has sought an absolute prohibition on  high enrichment or reprocessing.

2

- If he is suggesting that Australia would have no  control over the arrangements for the storage of  plutonium produced from Australian uranium following  its reprocessing under conditions acceptable to us,  he is again wrong. As the Prime Minister said on

24 May last year,  one of the points on which we  would need to be satisfied, before agreeing to  /reprocessing,  would be: "that there is not excessive stock-piling of plutonium in a way that

could pose future proliferation dangers".

Mr Bowen complains about the arbitration clause on  the grounds that it "effectively takes control out of our  hands1 1  = The arbitration clause is a normal one in international  treaties, including safeguards agreements. It provides an

impartial mechanism for dealing with any dispute that might  arise in the implementation of the agreement. It protects  Australia as well as Finland.,  It does not strengthen the  hand of one party against the other. For instance,  if the

agreement were breached, we would not have to wait for an  arbitrated decision before taking action, such as cutting off  supplies.

One wonders whether Mr Bowen is arguing against the  A L P 1 1  s policy of support for the peaceful settlement of interÂ­ national disputes through arbitration and judicial settlement. In the absence of an arbitration clause,  any dispute under the

agreement would have been subject to the compulsory jurisdiction  of the International Court of Justice - as a result of action  taken by-Australia during the term of office of the Government  in which Mr Bowen was a Minister. Under arbitration arrangements  the parties, including Australia, would have to agree on the  terms of the dispute submitted to impartial adjudication.

The most disturbing of Mr Bowen's comments however,  is his assertion that a Labor Government would not accept the  agreement. In international affairs,  treaties are binding  undertakings between nations,  not trivial matters to be upset

at the whim of the government of the day in one of the parties  to the treaty. A government which repudiated its international  treaties would be regarded internationally as irresponsible and  untrustworthy. Mr Bowen seems to be saying that his party,

if it came to power, would behave in this way."

Ã¢ÂÂ

