|
Issue No. 134 | 03 May 2002 |
The Hijacking of May Day
Interview: Youth Group History: Back To The Future Industrial: On the Street Unions: The New Deal Legal: The Police State Road Women: What Women Want Politics: Street Party International: The Costs of War Review: Songs of Solidarity Satire: Bono Satisfies World Hunger for Preachy Rockstars Poetry: Woomera
Yarra Seamen Take Border Stand Kinkos Copies Anti-Union Script Nike Told to Shoosh on Sweatshops Rapper Wins Wobbly Anthem Prize Unions Target Labour Hire Bidding War Rally Targets Tight-Arse Costello Councils To Be Audited On Language Allowance Scope For Payback In Privacy Limitations Heavyweight Push For Medibank Private To Stay Public East Timor MPs Question Timor Gap Plan Artists' Union Bans Voice For Peace
The Soapbox The Locker Room Bosswatch Week in Review Tool Shed
M1 Open Letter Julian Online May Day Debacle Mothers Day Musings Greetings From Canada
Labor Council of NSW |
News East Timor MPs Question Timor Gap Plan
Australia wants the MoU signed, sealed and delivered by or immediately after 20 May. And if that happens, East Timor stands to loose billions of dollars in loyalties from the oil and gas tax revenues in the Timor Sea and thousands of much needed jobs. However, several members of the elected East Timor's Constitutional Assembly (which will become East Timor's new parliament) now want to delay the signing of the MoU for at least six months--they want a parliamentary committee set up to fully investigate all aspects of the draft agreement. They are mainly from two of the main opposition parties--Partido Democr�tico (PD) with seven members in the assembly and Partido Social Democrata (PSD) with six members in the assembly. This latest development arose after they heard legal experts advised them at a weekend seminar held in Dili in March that East Timor should own most of the natural gas and oil field in the Timor Sea. According to Eusebio Guterres, a PD member of the assembly who attended the seminar, the new East Timorese Parliament has to ratify any agreement signed. He believes all members of the assembly must be fully briefed before making that decision. Eusebio, is a lawyer and former director of the Labour Advocacy Institute of East Timor (LAIFET). 'The MPs cannot make a sound and correct decision that would benefit the people of East Timor, unless they fully understand the issues involved. That is why we need a parliamentary committee to review submissions from the oil companies, lawyers, economists, geologists, engineers, scientists and other consultants,' Eusebio said. 'Parliament must not be used just as a rubber stamp,' he added. It appears most assembly members have been kept in the dark and have very little understanding or knowledge about the MoU--only a handful of people were involved in the negotiations--most of them foreign UN advisers to Chief Minister Alkatiri and Foreign Minister Horta The seminar was also told by a leading oil and gas engineer, Geoff McKee, and the former head of US oil company Uncoal, John Imle that it is possible and possibly less expensive to build pipelines from the gas fields of Bayu-Undan and Greater Sunrise to East Timor then to Darwin. These information had been made available to senior members of the United Nations Transitional Authority (UNTAET) and the East Timor Transitional Authority (ETTA) for the past two years. At stake is $US50.4 billion of potential tax revenue from the three oil and gas fields in the Timor Sea--Bayu-Undan (US$12.4 billion), Greater Sunrise (US$36 billion) and Laminaria/Corralina ($US2 billion). In addition, if the gas were to be piped onshore, it would create an estimated 4,000 jobs and billions of dollars in industrial spin-offs. The MoU is largely based on the 1989 Timor Gap Treaty with Indonesia. It established a Zone of Co-operation (ZoC) to divide up the oil and gas resources between Australia and Indonesia on a 50:50 split in Zone A of the ZoC. It favours Australia because it uses the continental shelf seabed boundary rather than the medium-line (half way) boundary between the two coastlines. Bayu-Undan falls inside Zone A. However only 20% of the eastern gas field of Greater Sunrise is inside Zone A--the remaining 80% is in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)--so is the western oil field of Laminaria/Corralina. In drafting the MoU, the medium line boundary was not applied. And to add to the disadvantage of East Timor, Zone A is retained as the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA). But instead of a 50:50 split, Australia agreed to increase East Timor's share to 90%. This means East Timor is entitled to 90% of Bayu-Undan but only 18% of Greater Sunrise under the 90:10 revenue split, but no revenue from Laminaria/Corralina. However, if the medium line boundary is applied--the whole of Bayu-Undan would fall inside East Timor's EEZ. And if East Timor than applies the eastern and western lateral boundaries, at least 80% of Greater Sunrise and 100% of Laminaria/Corralina would fall inside East Timor's EEZ. 'We want the maritime boundaries between East Timor and Australia settled by an independent arbitrator. After that is done, we cam discuss the formula for revenue sharing,' Eusebio said. Eusebio also refutes Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's claim that Australia has been generous to East Timor and he is correct in saying so. The oil field of Laminaria/Corralina which should belong to East Timor has began production--providing US$300 million in tax revenue for Australia in 2000 and US$350 million in 2001. As can be seen, for the past two years a total of US$650 million has been siphoned off from East Timor. In other words Australia's generous contribution to East Timor has been paid for by money which rightfully belongs to them. And as the years go by it would be East Timor contributing to Australia's coffer rather then the other way round--where is the generosity! Eusebio and his colleagues are worried if the MoU is ratified, East Timor might not be able to revisit points of contention at a later date. Their concerns are shared by three eminent international law specialists--Professor Vaughan Lowe from Oxford University, Christopher Carleton from the UK Marine Hydrographic Office and Australian barrister, Christopher Ward. In a legal opinion released on 22 April 2002 they stated: 'It is important that East Timor be fully advised prior to entering into any agreement that defines the limits of its rights over the seabed, even a "temporary" or provisional agreement, because any such agreement may materially affect East Timor's long-term entitlement to the resources of the seas and seabed off its coasts.' The full legal opinion with a detailed map can be found on the website: www.gat.com/Timor_Site. In helping to draft the MoU, UNTAET has failed in its duty of care. And in turn, Australia has take advantage of East Timor's lack of experience and knowledge. It must not be forgotten that it was largely due to the UN's and Australia's initial inaction that led to over 75% of East Timor's infrastructure being destroyed in September 1999 by the TNI sponsored militia violence. Had Ian Martin, the then UNAMET head of mission and the UN taken a tougher stand with Indonesia, and had Foreign Minister Downer and his Department not withheld vital information, the destruction of East Timor might have been avoided. Let's not forget Downer was still talking about 'rouge elements' when Dili began to burn in early September 1999. Australia and the UN must therefore make amends with East Timor by providing them with the best possible deal. HT Lee
|
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|