Pre- CHOGM Media Conference

Media Centre Conference Room
Don McKinnon, Secretary-General
Friday, 1 March 2002

MR KIBAZO: Good afternoon. Secretary-General Don McKinnon has just hotfooted it from the other side of Twin Waters. He is here to talk to you about the agenda for CHOGM and some of the issues that will be before the Heads and what they will be discussing. After that he will take some questions. So do not fear; I doubt whether any of you will feel inhibited about asking those questions. But, without further ado, the Right Honourable Don McKinnon, Commonwealth Secretary-General.

MR McKINNON: Thank you very much, Joel, and my welcome to all of you here. I understand there has been a total of 943 media registrations, and that is something we obviously appreciate: that you believe that it is worthwhile coming here.

This is the first CHOGM of the 21st Century, and it probably is not necessary for me to explain to you the reasons for the change or the reasons for the postponement. But I certainly want to put on the record my thanks to the Australian Commonwealth Government and the Queensland State Government for hanging in there, because, when you begin one conference and have to postpone it and go somewhere else for the next one, it is certainly not a cheap exercise. It may be the most expensive CHOGM we have had, if you add the costs of preparation for Brisbane on top of these costs. So again I thank very much the Commonwealth Government of Australia and the Queensland Government who, from September 11, remained totally committed to ensuring that this meeting was held in Australia.

The theme of this conference you have probably seen plastered around in many places: Continuity and Renewal-and I will come back to that. Part of the postponement of CHOGM has meant that we have not got the level of muster we expected of heads of government. As of now, we are expecting 35 leaders to be here. We are expecting 16 countries to be represented at ministerial level-and two of those, in fact, will be at official level. Three countries-Pakistan, because it is still suspended from the Commonwealth, Grenada and Antigua Barbuda-will not been here. We are welcoming Tuvalu for the first time being a fully active member of the Commonwealth.

One of the reasons you lose some support from some leaders in terms of coming to CHOGM is through the change in time, because it is often not easy to change schedules that easily. A number of Commonwealth governments have also got 31 March balance dates, which means that they are right in the middle of the budget cycle right now-and many leaders, of course, do not like to leave their home country when they are in the middle of very tense, usually, budgetary discussions. Of course, in relation to India and Sri Lanka, domestic issues obviously prevent each of those two leaders from coming-and, of course, we have only heard about that very recently.

Because the meeting was postponed from October last year, there have been a few obvious changes in the agenda itself. The first that thing the leaders do when they meet is approve the agenda. I am only able to convey to you at this stage the range of items that are likely to be on that agenda. At this stage the full agenda has not be approved, but certainly at the top of the list will be the issue of terrorism. Obviously of interest is the statement by leaders that was made after the September 11 events, and of course the establishment of a Commonwealth Ministerial Group on Terrorism, which has put forward a plan of action to leaders. The work that that group is really doing is designed to complement that of the United Nations, not compete against it. But that issue will be up to leaders as to how that plan of action progresses.

Another major agenda item of course is the promotion of Commonwealth fundamental political values. This is obviously a very wide-ranging item, covering the good offices of the Secretary-General and the Secretariat. Then election observation, which area is keeping us very busy; the running of democracy workshops; and the report from the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group-and you will be aware that that group, the Ministerial Action Group, just concluded its meeting an hour or so ago and that report will be going directly to leaders.

A number of country issues will be discussed as they normally are in this particular agenda item-issues in relation to Guyana, its territorial dispute with Venezuela and Surinam; the issue of Belize having a similar territorial dispute with Guatemala; and a number of other countries. Cyprus has always been on the agenda in terms of receiving Commonwealth support for what they are doing there-and on the list goes.

The next major agenda item relates to global economic developments, and this gives every leader the opportunity to voice their concerns or otherwise about any one of global economic issues: the state of the world economy, the World Trade Organisation, the development of the DOHA Round, trade access issues, highly indebted issues of a number of countries, the whole issue of debt relief-which is, of course, a very sensitive issue with a number of our members-foreign direct investment, and corruption. The leaders will be receiving a report from the Commonwealth Business Council. This was the council that was formed as recently as the Edinburgh CHOGM. It was very much involved in the promotion of business within the Commonwealth and governing issues for the private sector in order to enhance their status of attracting foreign investment and those many other things.

The next agenda item comes under the broad heading of 'Commonwealth functional cooperation'. This is where the Commonwealth engages with the very many other organisations-at least some 70 of these other organisations have names which begin with Commonwealth-but it also relates to our functional cooperation with the World Bank, with the International Monetary Fund, with the UN, with a variety of other organisations.

But we feel that the engagement with these organisations does enhance Commonwealth countries opportunities, enhance the role of the secretariat. All these many relationships will include presentations to the leaders from the Commonwealth of Learning and the Commonwealth Foundation, both intergovernmental organisations. Also reports have been received from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Commonwealth local government, Commonwealth on technological management and Commonwealth sport-and, of course, this is a fairly major issue this year with the Commonwealth Games coming up in Manchester in July and then two years later, of course, it is to be in Melbourne, in this country.

Small States is an area that the Commonwealth has done a tremendous amount of work on for the last six or seven years. It is felt, certainly amongst ministers and amongst leaders, that the Commonwealth should remain very much to the forefront on issues relating to Small States. Thirty-two of our members are in the category of Small States-and, whatever anyone says, small states are always small states. They do have their own vulnerabilities, they do have issues which are not the issues of larger countries. The work that we have been doing, particularly in conjunction with the World Bank in getting a lot of support from President Jim Wolfhensen of the World Bank, we have made a lot of progress in these areas to the satisfaction of many of our member states.

Of course, amongst these agenda items the leaders themselves go into a retreat mode. The big difference here is that, instead of the leaders going off to their rooms at the end of two executive sessions and packing their bags and getting in their cars and going off to a retreat, they are staying right here at Coolum for the retreat. And most of the officials here at Coolum will then go back to Twin Waters. So the leaders will have a lot of what can only be described as quality time amongst themselves. It is something they all want. It is something they all insist upon. It is something that Prime Minister John Howard has felt that we could do a lot better with, rather than spending a lot of time travelling to another place and travelling back from another place.

It is time for leaders to not just get together but certainly to get to know each other. I do not think there is a head of government or a former head of government that has not extolled the virtues of the retreat, going back to former Prime Minister, the late Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau in Canada, who said it was always the most valuable meeting he had every year, and also echoed by again a former Prime Minister Lee Kwan U in Singapore, who always felt he got more out of a retreat than any other meeting he attended internationally. So the fact that Prime Minister Howard has ensured that at this particular CHOGM, even though some of the corners have been cut on it in a number of ways, the retreat session will certainly be enhanced and, obviously, we are interested in knowing leaders' reactions to that.

Another agenda item which will emerge in the course of the meeting is the report of the High Level Review Group. This was the group set up in Durban, South Africa, at the last CHOGM, chaired by President Umbecki. At the leader level and at the official level, this group has been doing a lot of work over this last two years endeavouring to find the right place for the Commonwealth in the 21st century. It is all about looking forward, it is all about charting a future course. It is meeting the challenges of the 21st Century. It is ensuring that the Commonwealth remains relevant and remains credible as an international institution.

The only other change of significance will occur tomorrow evening, when the leaders host Her Majesty to a banquet here, at Coolum. The tradition is, of course, that the Queen normally hosts the leaders to a banquet. But the leaders, in recognition of Her Majesty's 50 years as head of the Commonwealth, wish to be the hosts, and that will be taking place here at Coolum tomorrow night.

That is about as much as I feel it warrants me to convey to you now, but obviously I am happy to fill in any gaps or answer any questions, if I can. Joel will be in control of that.

MR KIBAZO: There will, I presume, be one or two questions no doubt.

QUESTION: Secretary-General, you did not mention the word 'Zimbabwe' in that long discussion. Could you tell us what the CMAG meeting did this morning and what will be carried forward to the leaders?

MR McKINNON: I can tell you what they did: they had a meeting-but it is not for me to tell you what they decided. They have spent some time on the subject obviously. CMAG has been engaged with Zimbabwe since, I think, April 2000. They have discussed and prepared a report, and that report will go to the leaders. Obviously it will be up to the leaders to take that issue forward, when they meet from tomorrow onwards.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on that, how are you going to avoid the accusation that you are pulling your punch on Zimbabwe; that in the end you will have talked and talked, but not done anything against a regime that is apparently violating the very principles that the Commonwealth stands for?

MR McKINNON: I cannot agree with what you say, and you have not seen the recommendations that will be going to the Heads of Government tomorrow. It is the decision they make and where they take the issue from that you can ultimately make a judgment on the Commonwealth's response to the issues in Zimbabwe.

QUESTION: If, as is expected, CMAG fails to follow the example of the European Union and the United States, do you believe that the Commonwealth as an institution can remain credible and relevant?

MR McKINNON: I have read hundreds of obituaries of the Commonwealth that go back about 30 or 40 years, and I do not believe that this will be an obituary, even if people want to write the obituary. The Commonwealth's engagement with Zimbabwe, as conveyed after the last CMAG meeting, was where the ministers took the judgment that, putting everything else aside, the most important thing they could do was ensure that election observers were on the ground. They are on the ground now. They are increasing in numbers on the ground now. That was the issue they looked at then. But you will have to wait until after the leaders meeting to see where they have gone from that point.

QUESTION: I note that there is no discussion-at least there appears to be no discussion-of environmental issues on the agenda. Isn't this curious, since some of the small states in the Caribbean and the Pacific are not going to exist much longer if the level of the sea continues to rise because of global warming?

MR McKINNON: Well, I can certainly say that within the general agenda item of global economic developments any leader can bring up the issue of environment. Also, the fact that the small states ministerial meeting is gathering together in about half an hour, I have no doubt that environmental issues in relation to those points you made will be on their agenda. Their report comes back to the leaders as well. So it is not a question of not being on the agenda. It is not a question of anyone being prevented from talking about environmental issues.

QUESTION: Over the last two years, the host nation Australia has been accused of human rights abuses in terms of its treatment of asylum seekers. It has been accused of this by UN committees, its own parliamentary committees and the Human Rights Commissioner here in Australia. Given the Commonwealth's mission of promoting democracy in human rights, is this an issue that should be raised at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting? Have any member states approached you about this issue? Have you held any discussions with the Australian government on this issue?

MR McKINNON: The answer to the last one is no, I have not had any discussions with the Australian government. The one before that, is, no, no government has indicated they wish to raise that issue here at CHOGM. It is not beyond the possibility of someone raising it. On the other hand, no-one has given any indication of raising it. If they do, it will happen. If they do not, it will not happen.

QUESTION: You mentioned three countries that were not going to be here represented. Pakistan has been suspended. Granada and Antigua were the other two you mentioned from the Caribbean. Any reasons why they are not here? How unfortunate is it for them that they are not?

MR McKINNON: It is not uncommon for some nations to be absent from a CHOGM. It is not uncommon at all. The last three or four CHOGMs I can attest to that. I am not prepared to give you the reasons that were conveyed to me. If those countries wish to make those reasons public, that is fine. But I do not think this is particularly abnormal. As I recollect when New Zealand hosted CHOGM six years ago when I was involved in a different role, there were two or three absences then. Usually they were from smaller countries. There were often budgetary considerations. Purely domestic political issues can often prevail.

QUESTION: I refer to Zimbabwe. It is clear that you are not going to give anything away from the CMAG meeting. In answer to another question, you said that we have observers on the ground there. The election is going on. Isn't the point that some of the values listed within the Harare declaration have already been breached in Zimbabwe? If the Commonwealth does not make an action here, will it make a joke of that?

MR McKINNON: Again, you have got to go back and look at the statements that have been made by the Chair of CMAG and by the ministers themselves of CMAG by their engagement over a period of time, albeit they are not very successful, with Zimbabwe. Then look at what emerges from the meeting here tomorrow. But the issue of observers on the ground is very important to CMAG. The fact that some 40 to 50 people are there doing their best to be able to give a very appropriate report on the issue clearly will have some bearing on a future course of action. But recognising that these elections will not be occurring until 9 and 10 March, yes, the fact that we are meeting just some eight days before those elections occur will have some bearing on the processes by which these discussions are going on.

QUESTION: Mr McKinnon, continuing on the subject of Zimbabwe, I understand you cannot say what the Commonwealth's leaders are going to decide and what is in the recommendation. But how do you assess the situation at the moment on the ground in Zimbabwe? How serious is it? What are the chances of the election being free and fair?

MR McKINNON: We get a lot of information about Zimbabwe all the time. It comes from private citizens. It comes through your own media sources. It comes from a variety. My own political people obviously keep in contact and get reports. I think the general tenor of reporting that is coming through to me is the fact that the situation is certainly not good. The situation is deteriorating. Certainly there is evidence from a number of international organisations that it is much more uncomfortable there than what it was during the elections of June 2000.

QUESTION: Secretary-General, are you absolutely confident that the outcome of this meeting will strengthen the hand of those who want greater scrutiny of the Commonwealth's fundamental democratic principles over those countries who undoubtedly do not want greater scrutiny?

MR McKINNON: This is, quite candidly, very much an evolutionary process. It will continue to be an evolutionary process within the Commonwealth. I certainly, having seen the draft report of the high level review, see it as a document that does take us forward. But like any document, where you are trying to bring the wishes of some 54 countries together and getting consensus among 54 countries, no one country is ever going to be 100 per cent satisfied with an outcome. But, to me, there were certainly be advances on where we have been over the last five or six years.

QUESTION: Can you tell us specifically how many observers you have now in Zimbabwe? Do they have free access to all parts of the country? Do you believe they will be in a position to pronounce on the validity of the election when it is held?

MR McKINNON: I am confident that they will have an ability to comment on the election. But let us remember this: the number of observers will be heading towards about 45 or 46. The number of staff from my office, I think, will be about 10 or 11. These numbers are a little bit fluid. There has been no indication of any restrictions placed on them. General Abubuka, who is the head of the mission and the former head of the state of Nigeria and the person who handed Nigeria back to democracy, has had discussions with all the key people in the country. I understand that he has raised some concerns about some issues. But that is entirely his brief. My role is to put that observer group together, get them to Zimbabwe. Then I have nothing to do with them, really, until they report to me after the elections.

I have had no information from them that plays any part and recommendations that have gone to the ministerial action group. They are quite an independent entity. It should be known that they are an independent entity. We will not want it any other way.

Given the last time in June 2000 when a similar group was there, not as big as this one, they made a fairly critical report of the elections at that time. They made a number of recommendations that they hoped the Zimbabwe government would have followed at that time. To some extent, some of those recommendations were followed. But there is no evidence that the present time that there are any restrictions on their movements. But, still, 45 plus 10 - 55 people - 4,500 polling booths. There may be another 400 election observers from other parts of the world, particularly from Africa. No-one will be able to give anything other than a snapshot of what they believe is the general picture.

QUESTION: Can you tell us whether the Zimbabwe question will be sorted out by the leaders tomorrow? Secondly, while you declined to go into the content of what CMAG discussed today about Zimbabwe, can you indicate to us whether it will be putting simply options to the meeting tomorrow or whether there will be a recommendation? Have they reached a consensus on something?

MR McKINNON: I cannot answer either of those questions. It will be up to the leaders when they wish to discuss that issue, be it in an executive session or a retreat. It is entirely up to them. I am not prepared to say anything of even the nature of what the ministers have conveyed to the leaders.

QUESTION: Just in relation to the controversy in Australia surrounding the Australian Governor-General and his handling of sex abuse allegations when he was Archbishop of Brisbane, has that caused embarrassment to the Queen's visit while she is here, and indirectly to this Commonwealth meeting, given that that is one of the purposes of her visit?

MR McKINNON: It is not causing me any embarrassment. You would have to ask the Queen if it is causing her any embarrassment. This is an issue. Yes, I have read it about it. Ultimately it will be resolved in this country.

MR KIBAZO: Thank you very much. The Secretary-General has to attend the small states meeting, so forgive us for cutting this short. Thank you.

ENDS