(%ÃÂ¶^)

Comments on nuclear safeguards policy 2 November 1977 - T h e  Minister for Foreign |  Affairs, the Hon. Andrew Peacock, made the follow- ;  jug comments today on what he termed the irrespon- Â·  sible action by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition,

u, releasing a confidential document stolen from the .  Department of Foreign Affairs. Mr Uren has ;  attempted to convey the impression that the record of i  conversation casts doubt on the basis o f the GovernÂ­

ment’s policy on nuclear safeguards and uranium  export. It does no such thing, Mr Peacock said. Mr  Uren has selectively quoted from a document which is  iseifonly a summary of an account by Mr Justice Fox  cf a wide range of views that had been expressed to !

g^n by officials and private individuals with whom he . =yd discussions overseas. . :

Unlike Mr UrenÂ· the Government has never sought :  ydenigrate, and thereby undermine, existing nuclear  yfcguards arrangements and the very important '  gy^aints that have already been set up i’ntema-  donally against nuclear weapons proliferation,

gather, what the Government’s policy has success-  jblly done is to recognise that such arrangements, 1   isduding the NPT and the safeguards applied by the :  international Atomic Energy Agency, represent a  gjosiderable achievement in their own right on which

policy can build. This is why the Government is setÂ­ ting out to negotiate bilateral govemment-to-govern-  ment nuclear safeguards agreements, which contain  additional and stringent export conditions. As for  President Carter’s non-proliferation policies, these  had already had the major achievement of bringing

about the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle EvaluÂ­ ation, which opened in Washington recently. That  some countries questioned aspects of United States  policy was hardly a new revelation. The issues had

been under public discussion for months. This debate |  in no way reflects unfavourably on the Government’s '  endorsement o f the non-proliferation objectives of '

President Carter’s policies. >

Mr Uren has cast doubt on Japan’s.intention to live :  up to its obligations as a party to the Non- .;

Proliferation Treaty without giving any reason for  doing so. Furthermore, Mr Uren is apparently unÂ­ aware that already Australian uranium exported to  Japan is covered by International Atomic Energy  Agency safeguards under arrangements pre-dating

Japan's adherence to the NPT. His remark about  India is factually incorrect also. India has never .  violated the NPT; it has never been a party to the .  NPT. ' Â· :

Mr Peacock said he was glad to say there is one '  aspect of Mr U ren’s statement with which he ;

concurred. That is, Mr Uren’s belief that the views of ‘  Mr Justice Fox deserve close study. It was because of  the Government’s recognition of Mr Justice Fox’s Â· ;  knowledge and experience in nuclear non-prolifera- ;

tion matters that he was recently appointed as ;  Ambassador-at-large on non-proliferation and safeÂ­ guards matters. In his first assignment in that role he !

led the Australian delegation to the recent INFCE !  conference in Washington at which he said that ÃÂ¯  Australia was ‘emphatically determined to do all that Ã¢ÂÂ    it can. to maximise protection against proliferation .

risks’. ,

