INTERVIEW - SKY NEWS AGENDA WITH DAVID SPEERS
4 November 2009
Subject: Update on Indian Ocean vessel rescue mission
SPEERS: Minister, thank you for your time. Let's go through exactly what happened here.
When were Australian authorities first made aware that this boat was in trouble?
O’CONNOR: Just after 7am, Sunday morning our time, there was a distress signal received by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority. We couldn't, at that point, locate precisely the location of the vessel. At approximately, just after 10am on Sunday, that day, there was a location determined. There was then a request sent out for any vessel, commercial or otherwise, in the twelve hour sailing radius to go to the rescue of that vessel.
That vessel was approximately 2700 kilometres from mainland Australia and, as you know now, we had LNG Pioneer and the Taiwanese fishing vessel go to the attendance and - of that vessel that subsequently sank.
SPEERS: And they got there that night?
O’CONNOR: The Taiwanese fishing vessel arrived about 4.30pm and that was followed by - some hours later by the LNG Pioneer.
SPEERS: And when the fishing vessel got there, was the boat carrying these asylum seekers still in the water? Was it sinking? What was - were the people in the water? What was the situation?
O’CONNOR: As I am advised, the Taiwanese fishing vessel got there. There was clearly some concern about the seaworthiness of the vessel in question. However, it was still afloat and they were not in a position, given the size of their vessel, to take on the passengers. They therefore stayed until the LNG Pioneer, the Bahamas LNG tanker, arrived very late Sunday night, after which, I'm advised, and we don't know the detail at this point, the vessel sank and, of course, now we're talking about it being dark and very difficult for those two vessels.
SPEERS: But this is a critical period here, where they were - all 39 were presumably on the boat when it was still afloat.
O’CONNOR: That's what I'm advised.
SPEERS: And the Taiwanese fishing vessel couldn't take them onboard because of size. But there way of ensuring the safety of those 39? Some of them obviously went missing during those dark hours.
O’CONNOR: That's all I'm advised at this point. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority, as lead agency, worked with those two commercial vessels. The closest Australia vessel was more than 40 hours sailing time away. There was no chance for us to get there.
But, immediately, we - of course the vessel were going towards the boat, we also sent aircraft in order to provide surveillance and assistance to those vessels.
SPEERS: When were they despatched? When were the search parties…
O’CONNOR: They were despatched sometime - as soon as they were ready, sometime on the Sunday. They were still, of course, hours away, but clearly - it might have been actually - once we knew the boat was in danger the actual aircrafts were sent.
As you know now, ultimately, there were eight aircraft involved in the search rescue.
SPEERS: But initially it was two?
O’CONNOR: It was two. It was a - it was initially the RAAF P3, out of Darwin and subsequently a Dash 8 was involved. We also had a AMSA Dornier and another Government - another - sorry - four other commercial aircraft subsequently.
SPEERS: Would more planes have - if they had been sent out on the Sunday or the Monday, have possibly helped here? Would possibly have helped spot those in the water?
O’CONNOR: We've dedicated our resources as quickly as possible to that search zone and we also worked very closely with the vessels in question. Clearly, the fact that it - the vessel sank at that late hour made things very difficult.
We're talking about a remote area. Australia has 53 million square kilometres of search and rescue zone. It's a four hour plane trip just to get there. And, can I just say, the efforts of our personnel, both onshore and offshore have been magnificent as too, of course, have been those personnel on the two commercial vessels and subsequently the Japanese vessels.
SPEERS: Now, one body was recovered from the water. Is it correct that two others were spotted but couldn't be recovered?
O’CONNOR: As I'm advised the - there are 27 recovered survivors on LNG Pioneer, heading to Christmas Island. There's also one deceased on that vessel.
There were, as I'm advised, two people spotted in the water but were not able to be recovered, and there were others, it would appear seven, that were not spotted at all. And, if indeed the claim of 39 is actually accurate, then there's been, you know, clearly, some loss of lives - life here beyond those two spotted.
SPEERS: Now, you mentioned the 27 survivors are going to Christmas Island. When will they arrive there and is it because Christmas Island is the nearest port? Is it closer than Indonesia to where they were picked up?
O’CONNOR: Firstly, the LNG Pioneer will take some 40 hours to arrive at Christmas Island. All of the passengers that are on board apart from one minor injury are fine.
For that reason, the LNG Pioneer could stay in the search zone for as long as it did, until this morning their time, to ensure it did everything it could to pick up other survivors. The dilemma as to whether you travel to a safe place - safe port, with injured passengers, wasn't as much a dilemma because of the relative wellbeing of those passengers.
But the reason why Christmas Island was determined: it's, firstly, in the Australian search and rescue zone. It is a port - a relatively close port which will provide the requisite medical attention and any other attention, the trauma attention that might be required for these passengers, given that - the just awful experience they've endured as a result of the sinking of this vessel.
SPEERS: So there wasn't any thought of taking them to Indonesia instead?
O’CONNOR: No, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority was the lead agency. Whilst it's 2700 kilometres from our mainland, we have a responsibility to coordinate it. We also had two commercial vessels, neither of which were Indonesian vessels, just to make the point. I guess that it was really important that we went to a port where we knew could assist, and Christmas Island - Cocos Island was closer but would not have the requisite facilities, so we - they will go directly to Christmas Island.
SPEERS: Yeah. Of course there's the 78 asylum seekers onboard the Oceanic Viking who want to go to Christmas Island. They were picked up not in the Australian search and rescue zone.
Is it a twist of fate that if you do come unstuck on the boat closer to Indonesia than Australia, that's going to change the whole scenario of what happens with how your claim is processed? Can you tell us one way or the other, will the 78 on the Oceanic Viking be brought to Christmas Island under any circumstances?
O’CONNOR: You've asked me the question as to why one vessel might go to one port and another vessel go to the other, or another port.
The fact is that the Oceanic Viking went to the aid of these people on an unseaworthy vessel. Our personnel and that - and the Oceanic Viking, coordinated by the Indonesian authorities because it was in the Indonesian search and rescue zone, saved those people. And there was an agreement then struck because of the location of the vessel and because of the agreement between the two countries, that they would go to a safe place, and that place be an Indonesian port that they be taken there.
The decisions as where a vessel goes under the Safety of Life at Sea convention are indeed determined by the master of vessel and those countries that are coordinating the effort.
They're not to be determined by passengers. They're to be determined by the master of the vessel and indeed the countries in question.
SPEERS: But there has now been a standoff that's into its third week. Can you rule out taking them to Christmas Island?
O’CONNOR: We will continue to do everything we can to realise the agreement struck between the two countries.
We - clearly there are real sticking points on the vessel at - that's docked at an Indonesian port. But we are having productive discussions. Our focus is making sure that we reconcile the differences that exist on the vessel and have them safely transferred to the Indonesian port, as agreed between our two countries.
SPEERS: But when the Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, was asked last week whether they'd be brought to Christmas Island, he said flat out, no. Is that still the position?
O’CONNOR: Well, our position is to fulfil and realise the agreement struck. And so you can ask me what other ports should be a place of destination. There is a destination. It's one determined by two countries involved what has been a humanitarian effort. I mean…
SPEERS: But given there's a problem there, this isn't working, they're not getting off, those negotiations aren't working. You're not ruling out bringing to Christmas Island?
O’CONNOR: Well, I'm saying to you that that is not something we're considering because we have reached an agreement and we have to ensure that agreements are realised, they're done so properly.
We understand the anxiety that may be experienced by some on the vessel. But these matters must be determined by the appropriate authorities and indeed the master of the vessel or vessels, and not by passengers.
We are following our obligations under international law, and quite rightly so. And I don't think these matters should be determined by passengers on a vessel that have - passengers, I might add, who were saved as a result of the great efforts by both the Indonesian authorities and two of our vessels; the HMAS Armidale and also the Oceanic Viking.
SPEERS: There were talks yesterday between top officials from Indonesia and Australia in Jakarta about this stand-off on the Oceanic Viking. What did that achieve?
O’CONNOR: Look, I won't go to the discussions that are occurring internally, both in Jakarta or locally or indeed on the Oceanic Viking. They're matters that are sensitive and need to be handled properly.
We have an agreement. We want the agreement of course fulfilled. And therefore of course we're trying to work through these issues.
The passengers have a different point of view. That's why we've had discussions and dialogue with them. Those discussions have been productive.
Can I also say, because there's been some outlandish claims in relation to that - the Oceanic Viking, that the personnel have been dedicated to… since they've saved these people, they have been under their care and have cared for them in a manner that we would expect Australian personnel to do so. And any claims about maltreatment are entirely and utterly untrue. These passengers are receiving medical assessments by the doctor, they're receiving food and supplies; that they are being treated the same way as crew on that vessel. And it is very unfortunate that such claims would be made of our professional and quite courageous personnel.
SPEERS: There have also been reports that those asylum seekers on the Oceanic Viking were in Indonesia for as long as five years before attempting to make this journey. Have you been able to confirm that?
O’CONNOR: Look, I've heard the reports and speculation. At this point we won't…
SPEERS: But surely you've had talks, the government agencies…
O’CONNOR: I mean, there's all sorts of speculation…
SPEERS: …[indistinct] people on board.
O’CONNOR: But can I say to you that we will not start entering into a discussion about the - firstly, the location of individuals historically until we have the proper transfer of these passengers to the port, and that the UNHCR and other international agencies, in conjunction with the Australian and Indonesian authorities work through those matters. That's how…
SPEERS: But this would be a pretty important fact to know whether they have been in Indonesia for five years or whether they were just transiting through Indonesia, because the Government has been saying that this recent surge in arrivals is due to the end of the civil war in Sri Lanka. Well, clearly that would shoot that argument down, if they've been in Indonesia for five years. Is this question even being asked of the…
O’CONNOR: Well, I refute - I refute whether in fact these passengers have been in one place or another, that would actually somehow undermine the contention that this surge has been a result of conflicts.
There's no doubt that the civil war that ended in Sri Lanka has led to a massive displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, which has led to an increased incidence of people seeking asylum in First World countries, mostly to Europe but some to Australia.
SPEERS: But if they've been Indonesia for five years, it would seem they've been waiting for the right opportunity to make the trip to Australia; waiting for perhaps a softer border protection policy.
O’CONNOR: And, look, that's why all along we've said this is a regional problem needing a regional solution. Whether people are in one place or another, we know this: that we are having to deal with this with our friends in the region. That's why the Indonesians have - certainly work very closely. The Indonesian's national police work very closely with the Australian Federal Police. We've had more prosecutions in the last 12 months of people smugglers than for many a year. The Indonesian national police have set up a 145 strong people smuggling task force. Why do we do that? Why are they doing that? It's a regional response. It's to dismantle these organised syndicates that entice people onto dangerous boats, on perilous journeys, on an empty promise. And we need to continue to do that to prevent these things happening.
SPEERS: It certainly is a dangerous journey, as we've seen this week.
Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor, thank you.
O’CONNOR: Thanks David.
