Returning to our top story, the 11-nation meeting in Brisbane to discuss the US plan for intercepting the transfer for weapons of mass destruction and their component parts around the world. It's clear the direct role the US has in mind for Australia is in a naval force to target the transport of weapons and drugs by North Korean ships, an action Pyongyang is warning it would regard as an act of war.

The US Undersecretary for Arms Control John R Bolton, who's in Australia for these talks, told this program last Friday he hopes to bring it up and running as soon as possible. But, as you'll see, our own Defence Minister is far from enthusiastic. Just a short time ago, I spoke with Senator Robert Hill in Cairns.

Robert Hill, how soon are you going to start preparing the navy for possible operations to interdict North Korean ships?

Senator Robert Hill

We don't have a plan to do that. If you're referring to the meetings that are taking place at the moment, (a), they weren't North Korean specific but, (b), they are really the start of a process to look at ways in which a range of countries ... they're mainly European but also the US, Japan and Australia ... can best guard against the transfer of weapons of mass destruction and the materials that make up such weapons.

Tony Jones

It's clear that some planning is already under way and that our ships are likely to be operating with the US Navy. Will there be some sort of joint exercises with the US Navy to practice this sort of operation?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, I wouldn't say planning is under way at all. Meetings today have been of the intelligence community looking at how we can best ensure the intelligence in relation to transfer of these weapons and, secondly, of Defence looking at whether the various parties to these discussions have got the operational capabilities to contribute. But planning as such is not under way. Out of these meetings obviously there will be reports back to the Australian Government and to the other governments. And, in the case of Australia, we will consider the reports and decide on a whole of government business how we wish to proceed.

Tony Jones

As we know, John Bolton is here from the State Department. The PM has had talks with President Bush about this. It seems pretty clear that if there is to be an Australian role, that will be in the interdiction of North Korean ships.

Senator Robert Hill

As I said, I think that we certainly have a view that if you can stop the passage of weapons of mass destruction, items that are illegally being transferred, then we all have an interest in that. How this can be done effectively and within existing laws is part of the debate that's taking place at the moment.

Tony Jones

You're clearly not ruling out at this stage a serious involvement by our navy in conjunction with the US Navy in this sort of operation?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, I think you're leaping many steps, as I said. The starting point is a group of nations have come together, mainly European but also the US, Japan and Australia, that have said that it's in our interests, all of our interests, that we find ways to effectively curtail this trade in illegal weapons. And basically, how you do that, what intelligence is needed to be confident of what you're doing, examination of the law to ensure that what you do is within existing international and domestic laws and what operational capabilities that you would need to do this effectively are the subjects of the discussion taking place this week.

Tony Jones

Well, I mean the reason we're jumping ahead is not because we're fanciful but because the American representative who is here is already talking about operations on the high seas. He is saying quite clearly that he wants Australian participation in some form.

Senator Robert Hill

But you're not asking the American representative. You're asking me. And what I'm saying is that Australia has a vested interest, as do all civilised nations, in curtailing this trade in weapons of mass destruction. What we're prepared to do is to talk with our friends and allies how we might effectively achieve that goal.

Tony Jones

And might we effectively achieve that goal, though, by using Australian naval ships in conjunction with US naval ships on the high seas to interdict North Korean ships?

Senator Robert Hill

You're jumping many more steps than I'm prepared to at this stage. I think it's important that it's taken step by step. It's a new initiative, it's highly complex, but it can be very important in the challenge of defeating weapons of mass destruction, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, in this instance, horizontal proliferation. It's important that it be done effectively within the law and based on good intelligence and that's what we are working on at the moment.

Tony Jones

It could be a very dangerous operation as well, couldn't it, operations on the high seas against North Korean ships when the North Koreans themselves are already saying they would regard that as a hostile action and would conceivably defend their ships.

Senator Robert Hill

Oh, I think any interdiction of a ship that is believed to be carrying weapons of mass destruction or of an aircraft would be a major event in itself and certainly have with it considerable danger.

Tony Jones

Is that why you're being a little --

Senator Robert Hill

It's another reason to proceed cautiously, yes.

Tony Jones

Are your naval officers, the people that you deal with in talking about these issues, warning you that this could be a very dangerous operation, that we should be extremely cautious?

Senator Robert Hill

They wouldn't have to. I can see that for myself. But we are interested in playing a part in defeating threats that are associated with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We have a responsibility to Australians of this and future generations to do everything possible to defeat that threat. And we are contributing with other nations of a like mind to work out ways in which we might be able to do that in this area in the future.

Tony Jones

Alright. One of the reasons we want to have this debate now is because of what the Americans have already said. Are you saying they have effectively jumped the gun in talking about operations on the high seas?

Senator Robert Hill

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that ... and I'm not shying away from the fact that Australia feels that it has a vested interest in this subject matter and wants to make a positive contribution. And I think we've already illustrated with the successful interdiction of the North Korean ship off the coast of Australia that was carrying illegal drugs that we can do it effectively in certain circumstances.
So, so ... but we need to take it step by step because, as I said, it's a highly complex, difficult area. There are obviously risks associated with it. We would want to do it effectively and legally.

Tony Jones

Alright, Robert Hill, just moving on ... the question of David Hicks's impending military trial. If he's found guilty of being a member of Al Qaeda, what's the penalty?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, as I understand it, he hasn't yet been charged, so the first issue is what he is to be charged with. From that, you will determine the range of penalties.

Tony Jones

Is there a penalty simply for being a member of Al Qaeda that you know of?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, I don't know. He hasn't been charged. When he is charged, and presumably he will be charged with a terrorist-related offence, there will be attached to that offence a range of penalties. If he's found guilty, he would be penalised according to that range.

Tony Jones

The point is this ... I mean, you trained as a barrister. The PM has today said he is guilty of being a member of Al Qaeda. If there were a penalty attached to that, won't the PM have corrupted his trial?

Senator Robert Hill

No. But if I might say with respect, you seem to be jumping many steps. I think the first thing is to see what he's charged with. I'm assuming it will be a terrorist-related offence. The PM, as I understand it, said there are admissions in relation to an association with Al Qaeda. But we need the ingredients of the offence before we can really address the issues that you are raising.

Tony Jones

Can we now guarantee, though, that the military officers who are going to make up Hicks's judge and jury won't have heard that the Australian PM actually thinks he's guilty of having been a member of Al Qaeda?

Senator Robert Hill

I don't think the offence ... I don't know of an offence as such. What the PM was talking about were admissions in relation to a terrorist association. But we need to see what he's charged with, and he will then be charged on the basis of the evidence that's put to the tribunal, including any admissions that he has made.

Tony Jones

Now the British Foreign Office says it has strong reservations about this whole military tribunal process. Why is it that the Australian Government appears to have no similar reservations at all, that it appears not to have much care for the fate of David Hicks and his co-accused in Guantanamo Bay, Mamdouh Habib?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, I think that that is unfair. In actual fact, the Australian Government has put a lot of effort into assessing how the tribunal would operate and to ensure that the rules of natural justice would apply, that he or they, depending on what happens, would receive a fair trial, that they would be legally represented and that it would be an objective judgment upon the facts.

Tony Jones

Even the Bali bombers in Indonesia are having their day in an open court. I mean, is there something that the Indonesians could teach us about justice?

Senator Robert Hill

No. If it's a military offence with which he's charged, that's the case. In the case of the Bali bombers, that's not the case. They have been charged under civil law, or what we would refer to as civil law. But what the Attorney-General in particular on behalf of the Australian Government was keen to ensure was that the rules that would apply to this military tribunal would ensure that it is a fair trial. And he's satisfied of that. And, as you know, he's a very conservative individual in this area. And if he's satisfied of that, I'm sure that it's the case.

Tony Jones

Robert Hill, you don't believe in the death penalty, do you?

Senator Robert Hill

No, I'm opposed to the death penalty.

Tony Jones

So what if David Hicks is finally found guilty --

Senator Robert Hill

And so is the Australian Government.

Tony Jones

So what if David Hicks is finally found guilty and sentenced to death by a group of military officers?

Senator Robert Hill

Well, we would obviously be greatly disturbed by that we because we don't support the death penalty. We also don't believe that he would receive the death penalty.

Tony Jones

As a matter of conscience, would you try and stop that from happening if he did receive the death penalty?

Senator Robert Hill

I would protest the application of the death penalty, yes. And I would assume the Australian Government would do so because we oppose the death penalty.

Tony Jones

What about life imprisonment in a small cage on an island like Cuba?

Senator Robert Hill

Again, you're jumping many steps. I think the next step is the charge and to assess the range of penalties that are attached to that charge. I don't know all of the facts. All of the facts have to be put before the tribunal. We have an interest in ensuring that they are objectively assessed. We believe that they will be, and then the penalty would flow from that.

Tony Jones

Alright, Robert Hill, we thank you very much for taking the time to join us tonight.

ENDS