 Good morning, everybody. Welcome. We're delighted to finally be in Australia's neighborhood. As everyone knows, the embassy is right across the street. It was really the first modern building that was built on Massachusetts Avenue after World War II. But it still holds its age beautifully. And of course, it hardly can contain its ambassador, who everyone knows is a little bit bigger than life. And Kim, thank you for all of your help through the years. We're delighted here. And I would like to say special thanks to the foreign minister for coming today. This is the foreign minister's first public speech in Washington. Of course, she's been here for a couple of days with the Osmond, and really burning things up. It's really been impressive. And to give us a chance to welcome her and host her here is a real honor. I would say thank you, everyone, of course. Of course, knows that, well, Margaret Thatcher is the Julie Bishop of the United Kingdom. That's just the only way to really say that. And I had the privilege of talking with her a little bit last night. And as we say back home, she's tougher than a woodpecker's lips, and she's a one strong and capable person. And I could understand why when the government was forming up, and Tony Abbott was here, you came a year ago, and we had a chance to meet briefly. And I thought, this is a government that's on the rise. And it came in, and we're delighted that you've been asked to lead the nation's foreign policy establishment at a crucial time. This is a tough time. But it's a time when leadership matters. It's a time when character matters. And I've seen both of that in Foreign Minister Bishop. And so we're delighted, really honored to have you here. This is an event that's hosted by the Cemetery Bonnian Tree Leadership Forum. Ernie, I want to say thank you. Ernie is going to be moderating our discussion. I'd like to think that it was my letter of invitation that got Foreign Minister Bishop here, but it was really Ernie's charm. I know what that's like. And so I've been kind of seeing his tail lights for an awful lot of my time together. We're working together. We are broadcasting live. We are tweeting. I'm not a tweeting kind of guy. But I guess if you do hashtag CSIS live, you will hear something on the other end of that. Little tweets, I guess. But this is going to be a rare and wonderful opportunity to get insights at the start of a new administration that's looking at Asia with friendly eyes, but very important eyes for us to see through. America needs friends not to tell us what we want to hear, but to tell us what we need to hear. I think we have seen that time and again from our friends from Australia. Certainly right now with Foreign Minister Bishop. Would you please with your applause welcome her to the stage and welcome her to Washington. Thank you, John, for that introduction and Ernie. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, Twitter followers. All. I'm absolutely delighted to be here at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in your brand new premises, a stunning building in the heart of Washington, DC, conveniently located across the road from the Australian Embassy. Your proud history of providing 50 years of non-partisan assessments and policy advice, including on Australia's immediate neighborhood, what I'll call the Indian Ocean, Asia-Pacific, makes yours a natural venue for an address by a visiting Australian Foreign Minister. Coming to Washington within a few weeks of being appointed Foreign Minister, I am reminded of my distinguished predecessors who paved the way in developing Australia's relations with the United States. And one eminent figure who comes to mind is Sir Percy Spender. Appointed as Minister for External Affairs in Sir Robert Menzies' 1949 government, Sir Percy was Minister for only 16 months. Now, that's not actually why he springs to my mind. But he subsequently became Australia's Ambassador to the United States, then Vice President of the UN General Assembly with his career culminating as the President of the International Court of Justice. However, in his short time as Minister, Sir Percy left a lasting legacy, finalizing with the US envoy, John Foster Dulles, the terms of the Australia-New Zealand United States Treaty, ANZUS, and representing Australia at the treaty signing ceremony in San Francisco on the 1st of September of 1951. His views on Asia and the United States were influenced by a visit to Southeast Asia in 1950 when he became convinced of the need for a Pacific pact. Spender believed that engagement with the United States was crucial and that a Pacific pact without the United States would be a meaningless gesture. I believe his perspective remains current to this day. Governments in Australia from both sides of politics have come and gone since Sir Percy Spender's days, yet in successive parliaments and governments as busy and bruising as Australian political affairs can be, there is an unequivocal bipartisan consensus about the importance of the United States regional and global role. And the central, vitally important truth which underpins Australia's foreign policy remains the ANZUS Treaty. The principles of the alliance hold firm despite changes of government and the strength of our relationship should never depend upon the particular party in government. So the Australian government changed hands at the general election last September and I assure you that the new government is fully committed to the alliance and to working as closely as possible with the United States. It remains fundamental to how we in Australia perceive our own security and foreign policy outlook. But it's not just a treaty that brings our two nations together, it's our history that binds us. We have fought together, we have died together. From the trenches of the First World War to Afghanistan's valleys from Korea and Vietnam to the Gulf, Australians and Americans have stood together and given their lives in every single major conflict of the past 100 years. We started to find out about each other in the First World War, the centenary of which we begin commemorating next year. The first fight in which American troops were engaged alongside Australians was at Hamel in northern France under our general monash on the 4th of July, Independence Day, 1918. But it was during the depths of the Second World War that our enduring bonds were forged. Australia and the Pacific Theater were a very long way from what was centrally occupying the thoughts of the Allied commanders, North Africa and Europe. But critical elements of the US military determined Australia should be a focal point of the Pacific fight back. In March, 1943, 70 years ago, the United States' seventh fleet was formed in Brisbane to meet the threats in the Pacific. Many Royal Australian Navy vessels came under the US fleet and the overall leadership of General Douglas MacArthur. One million American servicemen and women passed through Australia. However, it wasn't until 1944 that General MacArthur commanded more Americans than Australians. As Australia and the United States stood together to defend the Pacific, we formed a partnership in a time of crisis and challenge that endures. On the 14th of September, 2001, just three days after that fateful day, Australia invoked the terms of the ANZS Treaty for the first and the only time. We were with you in your darkest hour. The Australia-United States Alliance, tested by time and events, remains the indispensable feature of Australia's strategic and security arrangements. Our ties haven't been determined solely by conflict and challenge. Our paths have been shaped by similar legacies and narratives. In each other's story, we see a reflection of our own pasts, ancient cultures from an ancient time, migrants who crossed continents and oceans for a new life. From all parts of the globe, people have come to our countries to search for a brighter future for their children. Each new arrival, adding diversity and vibrancy that makes our nation's dynamic and innovative. And as new world countries, we believe that regardless of who you are or what your background is, everyone deserves a fair go and an opportunity to succeed. It has bestowed on both our countries a global outlook and shared values. We believe in democracy in the rule of law and the fundamental freedoms. A liberal international order backed by strong institutions to underpin stability. And a commitment to an open rules-based system of trade to drive economic growth and enterprise and to provide job opportunities. Our belief in these values has been pivotal to our ability to confront shared global challenges over the last century from two world wars, the threat of communism, financial crises, to terrorist attacks. Our alliance shouldn't be considered just in the context of the past or what we have achieved. It should be viewed through the lens of future opportunities and challenges. The alliance will hold us in good stead as we face the changing nature of the regional and international landscape. The gradual emergence of what I'll call the Indo-Pacific region as an economic, political and strategic center in its own right will be one of the most significant developments of this century. This region stretches our traditional focus on East Asia to embrace India. It links two magnificent oceans, the Indian and the Pacific. And it reflects the fact that the big strategic challenges of this century are likely to be maritime. History will have no bigger arena this century than the Indo-Pacific. Already the region, including the ASEAN countries, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, accounts for a third of global GDP. By 2020, it could account for around one third of global trade. The emergence of the Indo-Pacific's middle class is stunning and is expected to mushroom to 2.5 billion people by 2025. 60% of the globe's middle class, up from 20% in 2013. The Asian story today is about exports. Tomorrow it will be about consumption and investment. But population growth in the short term will be checked as the Asian population ages and hits a demographic ceiling. China expects its population to peak at about one and a half billion in the 2030s before a predicted demographic decline. Japan is facing a similar problem. Meanwhile, by the middle of the century, India will become the most populous nation in the world. Continued economic growth and higher standards of living will put increased pressure on resources. Infrastructure is already inadequate and is in turn creating barriers to growth. Demand for energy will grow. In the Indo-Pacific region, demand is anticipated to grow by around 40% by 2020. Wealthier populations are also demanding more and better food. They'll need more water too. As populations become wealthier, they will demand higher environmental standards. And the rapid economic transformation has created a new dynamic, rising ambitions and rising tensions. New dynamics create uncertainty. And with it comes risk. The region already contains long-running potential flashpoints, Kashmir, the Taiwan Strait, the Korean Peninsula. Territorial disputes have emerged which could stoke nationalist tendencies and drive political and foreign policy outcomes. And as new powers emerge, new balances of power and influence are being forged. China is an emerging global power and modernises India, the world's mega-democracy, and Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim democracy. New dimensions of technology and national wealth are being created. By 2020, Asia's share of global military spending will have grown to nearly one-quarter. Militaries throughout Asia have sought to modernise and continued economic growth will encourage the acquisition of higher technology military systems. For Australia, engagement with the Indo-Pacific is not just determined by a geographical proximity. Our engagement with the Indo-Pacific for the future is about a region of global significance in its own right. We are living through a period of history when a country's capacity to adapt and respond sensibly to rapid change will determine its prospects for many years to come. These are exciting but demanding times. The stakes are high and will test the strategic maturity, restraint and adaptability of all nations. It calls for innovation and vision. Australia approaches our changing region, clear-eyed and with a sense of optimism. We reject the notion that the future is predetermined in that we do not see conflict as an inevitable result of changing strategic relativities. We do not view regional politics through the prism of a zero-sum game. What we do see is a region of remarkable promise and we have an opportunity to help shape its future, an opportunity to calibrate our collective diplomatic and strategic assets to ensure that in this century our region will be peaceful and prosperous. To promote a web of stability to allow the engines of economic growth and trade to continue to lift millions of people out of poverty. To provide continued opportunities for the new middle classes. To promote an international order where the rights and responsibilities of all nations are protected and upheld. Responding creatively to these realities and fulfilling our potential in the world's most dynamic economic region constitutes the foremost challenges of Australian foreign policy. Maximising economic opportunity, minimising strategic risks. So it's against this background that we see no more important strategic decision in recent years than that outlined in President Obama's speech in Canberra in November of 2011. President Obama made clear that the United States would play a larger long-term role in shaping this region and its future by upholding core principles through close partnerships with allies and friends. Not only on the bilateral front, but also with trilateral and quadrilateral arrangements and more, the United States and Australia will be active in connecting our partners. I was pleased to meet National Security Advisor Susan Rice yesterday and to compliment her on her speech this week about the US rebalance as a cornerstone of the Obama administration's foreign policy. Dr. Rice expressed clearly and unequivocally that no matter how many hot spots emerge elsewhere, the United States will continue to deepen its commitment to our region. There is no doubt President Obama will be very welcome when he returns to Asia in April, as the rebalance is vitally important. It is the logical continuation of an American perspective that's been trending gradually towards Asia for nearly two centuries. It is a continuation of the US commitment that assisted Japan and Korea emerge from the ashes of the Second World War, a commitment that has seen the United States Navy guarantee safe passage of maritime trade which has underpinned regional trade and economic growth, a regional presence that has provided a vital check on North Korean provocations and nuclear proliferation, a security commitment that has allowed countries in Asia to prosper and to grow. That commitment is as important now as it has ever been. It might be impolite for a foreign minister to opine about the national interest of another nation, particularly while traveling in that country, but I think I'm on pretty firm grounds in saying this. United States engagement in our region is more in the American national interest than it has ever been in the past. And in my meetings with regional leaders, they want to see more United States leadership and not less. And let me be clear about this. Australia wants the United States to remain engaged with and committed to our region. It'll be the partnerships and cooperation we forge or enhance now that will help shape the region's future. And that's why I'm here in Washington with my colleague, the Minister for Defence, Senator David Johnston, of the annual bilateral talks known as OSMIN. With our counterpart, Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel, we spoke of how to further our enduring strategic partnership, bilaterally and regionally, and in multilateral arenas. We shared insights and perspectives. You know, one of the most impressive things about the Alliance has been our two nations' ability to adapt how we use it to meet the changing security challenges we both face. Bilaterally, we've continued to strengthen our military cooperation and interoperability over several decades. The strength of the United States also lies in its network of alliances and partners around the world. And the Australian government is mindful of the need to play its part within the United States security umbrella. And we will restore defence expenditure to 2% of GDP, which we believe represents Australia doing its part. The Minister for Defence and I expressed our strong commitment to the implementation of the U.S. Force posture initiatives in Northern Australia, announced by President Obama in November of 2011. That was a change that we welcomed in opposition and we will continue to support in government. The Force posture involves rotational U.S. Marine Corps deployments and increased rotation of U.S. Air Force aircraft in Northern Australia. Over coming years, we expect substantial progress towards rotations of around 2,500 U.S. Marine Corps personnel and equipment. Last Wednesday, we signed a statement of principles with the United States, which provides a common vision for implementing the Force posture initiatives. We will commence the negotiations on a binding agreement to support the future cooperation. We're also committed to ensuring our bilateral cooperation through this Force posture achieves the goal of increased linkages with other countries in the region through combined training, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercises and multilateral engagement in the broader Indo-Pacific region. We've pledged to strengthen and regularise our biennial talisman sabre exercises involving around 28,000 personnel. It is Australia's and the United States' largest bilateral exercise. The scenario tests high-end military coordination, but it also incorporates a significant civilian component to test disaster and humanitarian response readiness. And we've seen recently in the response to the Philippines typhoon how our cooperation prepares us to move quickly to help our neighbours in times of crisis. Australia is one of only two countries to share a defence trade cooperation treaty with the United States, making sure our military forces can work together effectively. The United States and Australia's history of close cooperation in space was deepened this week with our signing of a memorandum of understanding, governing the arrangements for the relocation and the joint operation of a highly advanced US space surveillance telescope to Western Australia. Our shared intelligence cooperation has enhanced our security and counter-terrorism capability and has saved lives. Our alliance will continue to adapt and change and move into new spheres and new frontiers as we work together to enhance security in the Indo-Pacific region. Our commitment to achieving regional security will shape the form and content of our strategic partnership. Our government is committed to what we term economic diplomacy using our foreign policy assets to promote productivity, prosperity and growth, at home and in the region. And it's our shared belief in free trade and open markets that guides our cooperation with the United States in regional trade negotiations as exemplified in our efforts on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP. I welcome the United States leadership in setting an ambitious timeframe and agenda for TPP negotiations. With membership currently covering some 40% of global GDP, it is right that we hold ambitious outcomes for the TPP. Like the United States, Australia can see the huge potential benefits of liberalizing trade among such significant players in the global economy. The TPP has the potential to deliver a major boost to trade and investment in the region that is already driving global growth and trade. The region can use more openness, transparency and lower tariff barriers to propel economic growth. When signed, the TPP stands to be a vital building block in establishing and confirming the rules-based regional and international trade order. We understand what the TPP means to the United States. A high quality agreement with an open accession clause has the potential to take the initiative on trade rules and become the primary overarching trade agreement for the region. It will give expression to an economic grouping that will drive regional trade. And the United States competitors are not standing still. The United States has been losing ground on trade market share in Asia. And the TPP is certainly not the only game in town. A range of other trade initiatives are gaining momentum in the region. So this is a big and ambitious undertaking. Finalizing an agreement will require some tough decisions by all parties. But the bottom line is simple. The United States, just as it plays a fundamental role in regional stability, also needs to be in the game on regional trade. And only the TPP includes the United States. To any skeptics, I simply state that the region cannot afford to the United States not to be part of regional trade arrangements. And this opportunity cannot be missed by the United States because it will determine the capacity of this nation to profit from the consumption and investment boom that we will see in Asia. Without this, I suggest it will be a struggle. But the TPP is only one aspect of how the future of the Indo-Pacific region will be defined as the region becomes more confident, as cooperation becomes more pressing, as transnational issues emerge, structures will develop to stop conflict and to agree on rules and cooperative patterns of behavior. The Indo-Pacific region is far from a European Union. A federal type arrangement will not emerge, given the divergent interests and values, histories and cultures. But what is emerging is a loose web of overlapping institutions that's encouraging habits of cooperation and dialogue across the region on issues ranging from trade and economic cooperation, environment and climate change and other transnational challenges. We will need to develop bodies that facilitate cooperation when times are good, but also solve problems when times are tough. We must encourage the development of a genuine and comprehensive sense of community whose habitual operating principle is cooperation. The danger in not acting is that we run the risk of succumbing to the perception that future conflict within our region is somehow inevitable. And in this endeavor, we value our close cooperation with the United States. In the 18-member East Asia Summit, we both see a grouping that has the potential to emerge as the region's premier leaders forum, one that can help foster a stable strategic environment, support the rules-based order and economic growth. With the United States included, the East Asia Summit has the right membership and the right mandate to address region-wide political, strategic and economic issues. And the Howard government rightly considered gaining membership to the EAS back in 2005 as a big foreign policy win. Our cooperation in the EAS builds on our long cooperation through APEC, of which we're both founding members. Where our priorities align, we work closely with the United States, an active and influential member in reinvigorating APEC's agenda. And like the United States, Australia places high priority on APEC's free and open trade and investment agenda, including moves to cut red tape and regulation. We're both very active in the ASEAN regional forum, a grouping that Secretary Kerry says is going to have a key role in preventative diplomacy. And in the recently renamed Indian Ocean Rim Association, or IAORA, the United States has joined as a dialogue partner. Australia will chair IAORA for the next two years and we're committed to making IAORA an essential piece of Indian Ocean regional architecture with its focus on maritime security, trade, investment, fisheries management, disaster relief, scientific and research collaboration. Beyond the region, the United States and Australia, based on our shared interests and values, work together in the full range of international institutions. We continue to work closely on United Nations Security Council issues, including North Korea, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran and Africa. We welcomed United States' strong support for Australia's September Security Council presidency, including our resolution on the illicit trade and misuse of small arms and light weapons. We look forward to working with the United States during our G20 host year in 2014 to produce practical outcomes which will generate investment and create jobs and develop vital global infrastructure. Jeffrey Bleich was an outstanding ambassador for the United States in our country and his farewell speech last September summed up rather neatly the nature of our ties. He said, in hard times, we bet on each other. We met our challenges head on, we came out stronger. We continue to bet on each other and the bets are significant. The United States is, by far and away, the greatest foreign investor in Australia, amounting to about $630 billion in our country. That's six times the US investment in China. Your investment is developing the critical infrastructure for our gas fields, building our agricultural sector and enhancing our financial integration into global markets. And the United States is the most important destination for Australian investment, amounting to $430 billion, 20 times our investment in China. Almost 10,000 Australian companies are doing business in the United States and we do it because the market is secure and the legal protection worlds best practice. So in terms of both trade and investment, the United States is our most significant economic partner. The United States, the nation that has produced over 300 Nobel laureates, is the go-to place if you have a new idea or a new product and we have lots of both. Earlier this year, I attended the Australian-American Leadership Dialogue at Stanford and we had a presentation from five of the best and brightest young people working in Silicon Valley as software engineers and invention capitals in startups and the like. And after hearing of this success, we were asked to guess what they had in common, apart from being precociously young and successful. They all had a degree from an Australian university. Our best and brightest continue to collaborate with US counterparts. The United States remains Australia's number one international partner in terms of joint publications in areas as diverse as astronomy, molecular biology and particle physics. Australia was the United States' eighth ranked international partner. Our educational links are strong, flowing naturally I would suggest from Australia having the largest number of top 100 universities in the world after the United States and the United Kingdom. One of my most memorable experiences was in 1996 when I attended Harvard Business School completing an advanced management program. And that whole experience of studying overseas and in the United States inspired my thinking in introducing a policy for a scholarship program to start next year for Australian students to study at universities in our region and undertake internships with businesses operating in the host country. It's been dubbed Australia's new Colombo Plan and we hope it will be a signature policy of the new government demonstrating our commitment and engagement in the region. But with more than 800 formal agreements in place between our universities, our education and research ties are on a solid platform. The visa arrangements provided by the Australia US Free Trade Agreement which we signed in 2005 means that you'll only see more Australians visiting and working in the United States, more Aussies. From music and the arts to science and business through to sport and popular culture, our extensive people to people links across the range of human endeavors will draw us even closer together in the years ahead. The transformation of the Indo-Pacific region over the recent decades has been a watershed in the evolution of Australian foreign policy. Our economic interests are inextricably tied with the region. Our businesses, our institutions, our people will need to place great effort into understanding and responding to the significant shift that is occurring. We must comprehend how the rise of the middle class in the Indo-Pacific region will transform the relationships between the region and the rest of the world. Expanded forms of economic regionalism and sub-regionalism among Indo-Pacific countries is building and is set to continue. Australia will need to meet the regional challenges of the future with the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances, but with pride in our history and in our values. So in that context, so Percy Spender's insights from 1950 still ring true 63 years on. As he told the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament in March of 1950, I have emphasised how essential it is for Australia to maintain the closest links with the United States of America for vital security reasons. I am confident that on the great issues affecting the maintenance of peace and security in this area, Australia and the United States can act in concert to our mutual advantage and the advantage of other countries concerned. So as we grasp the changes in our neighbourhood and rise to meet the regional challenges, we need a United States that is active and engaged, a United States that works with partners and does what it says it will do. There is no substitute for the United States. Australia looks forward to working with you as you continue to provide the pivotal support for regional peace and security that has underpinned our region's growing prosperity over 70 years. Ladies and gentlemen, I firmly believe that the best days of the Australia-United States relationship lie ahead of us. Thank you. Well, Madam Minister, Julie, thank you so much for those warm remarks. I'm just struck by the feeling in this room of warmth between our countries and towards you and Australia. And I have to note that it's remarkable that when you think about it, Julie and her counterpart, Minister Johnston, are both new ministers. They've met with two new secretaries on our behalf, Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hagel. And yet it feels like we haven't missed a step. And so it's just wonderful to have you here at CSIS in Washington. And thank you for those great remarks. I'd like to open the floor with a question and then open the floor to others' questions. I appreciate you taking a couple of them. Dr. Hamry mentioned when he introduced you that we rely on our best friends to remind us of what we need to focus on. And you play that role as Australia's foreign minister. You mentioned that you spent some time with Susan Rice, who made her first Asia speech today. I mean, sorry, this week. But could you share with us sort of some of the short strokes of what your advice is to the United States? What do we need to do to keep on track in the framework that you so articulately laid out for us in your speech? Far be it for me to instruct the United States on how it should handle its foreign policy. What we can do and what we do is share our experience and our observations. And the conversations I had with secretaries Kerry and Hagel and with National Security Advisor Rice was based on our observations of how the United States is perceived in the region, what the Australian people think is the United States role in the region. And there was a recognition on both sides. In fact, a very, a lot of common ground, might I say. In terms of what we think is required. There's no question that your presence in the region is much desired, physical presence, trade and investment presence. And we emphasise time and time again how important the rebalance is, not just for Australia, but for countries in the region. And we encourage the United States to remain committed to the rebalance. I understand that Vice President Biden will be visiting North Asia shortly. I understand that Secretary Kerry in his very busy schedule will be back there again before the end of the year. And that is deeply appreciated and much welcome. And I know that when President Obama is able to visit the region, he will be warmly welcomed and embraced by the people of the region. So relationships need nurturing, they need attention, and the Indo-Pacific region is no different. So that's our observations, they're our insights, but we know that the United States is perfectly capable of handling its own foreign policy. We just there to help along the way. Help is appreciated. Let me open the floor to questions, Dan, right here in the back row. Dan. Thank you, I'm Dan Bob, Susica Peace Foundation USA. Wondering if you might give your thoughts on China's increasing economic and diplomatic role in the Pacific Island countries, what that means for Australia and the United States. And also, just since Susan Rice actually mentioned Fiji in her address a couple days ago, if you could give your comments on Commodore Bainu Marama's most recent actions, the constitution pending elections, thanks. Thanks, Dan, thanks for the question. There is no doubt that as China grows in economic strength and influence, we are seeing its presence in the region, not only in Africa, in the Indian Ocean region, but also in the Pacific. It has moved on from a time when it was the dollar diplomacy contest between Taiwan and China. China now invests significantly in the region in terms of development assistance. And we welcome that. I mean, there's plenty of room for more development assistance and foreign aid in the Pacific. What we seek to do is work cooperatively with China to ensure that their development assistance often in the form of soft loans is consistent with the kind of development outcomes that we believe the Pacific needs. And I hope that we'll be successful in that regard. There have been examples of China working in joint ventures, particularly with New Zealand for a water sanitation project in Cook Islands. We would like to see more of that, more joint ventures, more cooperation in the aid area. In relation to Fiji, as you know, back in 2006, there was a military coup led by Commodore Baini Marama. Australia and other nations imposed sanctions at the time in the hope that the sanctions would bring about an election and that Fiji would return to democratic rule. Well, a number of years on, we haven't seen that occur, although Commodore Baini Marama assures us that there will be an election held in September of 2014. Of course, we were disturbed by the treatment of the independently drafted constitution, but they now have a constitution. It might not be pretty, but it's a constitution. They are on track, we hope, to holding an election in September of 2014. Our concern is to ensure that we are there as a natural partner for Fiji, should the election be held, and on the assumption that it will be free and fair, or as close to free and fair as we can expect. And on that basis, we are looking to engage with Fiji. In specific terms, I informed Banky Moon when we were in New York for Unger Leaders Week that we would not object to Fiji taking more substantial role in UN peacekeeping efforts. They are very good at it, and the UN needs them. And so we're working over time to increase our engagement, but bearing in mind that the sanctions will have to remain under review for we are not dealing with a democratically elected leader. Australia and Fiji are close friends. The Australian people still travel to Fiji for their holidays in large numbers, and we want to normalise relations as soon as possible. And given our commitment to economic growth in the region, it's hard to envisage a free trade agreement or a regional agreement on economic and investment issues without an economy the size of Fiji's. So we believe it's in their interests, in our interests, in the interests of the Pacific, for an election to be held as soon as possible, for there to be an outcome we can all accept and for Fiji to be welcomed back into the arms of its friends and allies. Mr. Barfield. Claude Barfield, the American Enterprise Institute. No, I'm happy to stand. You sit. Claude Barfield, the American Enterprise Institute. I'd like to follow up on another question on Australian-Chinese relations. I think the Prime Minister has given us a top priority, a free trade agreement with the Chinese. And what has been the impact on that decision, of the decision also to exclude Huawei, the telecom's giant Chinese company from the broadband after there were some glowing remarks about the company as the new administration was coming in? Has the Chinese signal they would back away or are they raising questions about that? The incoming government has a commitment to building a network of free trade agreements, bilateral and regional free trade agreements, in conjunction with the TPP because we believe that the more trade liberalisation we have, the more likely we are to get global momentum for the WTO and the multilateral side of things. So we've got an ambitious agenda to complete a free trade agreement with South Korea, with Japan and with China, hopefully within 12 months, probably in that order. And in relation to China, we have been negotiating free trade agreements since 2005. Our friends and family in New Zealand commenced negotiating free trade agreement with China in 2005. They concluded one in 2008. And the trade between the two countries has grown enormously. Now, China's already our largest merchandise trading partner, but we want to see a much more diversified trading relationship beyond commodities, resources and energy. So it is a priority for us. In relation to Huawei, the previous government on intelligence and security grounds refused a tender for Huawei, a Chinese company, to take part in the building of the Australian National Broadband Network. The opposition was critical at the time of the way it was handled. We were not critical of the intelligence advice. And since we've been in government, we have confirmed that the previous government's position stands. Yes, of course, the Chinese are not happy about an ongoing discussion in Australia about one of its global telecommunications companies. However, we hope that we'll be able to negotiate an ambitious but pragmatic free trade agreement with them, notwithstanding that decision. Madam Minister, Sanjin Choi and Langham partners, thank you so much for your lucid and succinct remarks. Can I follow G20 agenda? And Australia will take over G20 next year. And would you able to share what are the vibrant ideas for your government? Especially, I was interested in your views on regard to the A, infrastructure, and B, and regulatory issues. You mentioned the India. Five out of 20, member of G20 is a common words, including India. And the government in India required one trillion investment infrastructure next five years out of interesting reviews. And second with regard to regulatory issues, I mentioned quotient to search in real estate market in Australia, especially as Sydney and Melbourne and Brisbane, where your G20 summit will take place. I have interesting new reviews. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, what was the last one? What's the question on Australian reviews? Nothing, the question on the review. The G20 agenda for Brisbane is about that, yeah. Especially, you're making progress here in B, regulatory issues, especially related to real estate. Oh, you mean foreign investment in real estate. Okay, thank you. The G20 agenda, we hope will be focused and will be sufficiently exciting and interesting that it will maintain the focus of the leaders. We want the G20 to remain the premier global organization that brings the major economies and the advanced and emerging economies together. We want to ensure that leaders are there, that they will be able to deliver on outcomes and that it will remain relevant. So we think an agenda that focuses on three or four themes. The overarching theme is economic growth and creating jobs on a global level. But specifically, we want to focus on infrastructure, particularly productive infrastructure and how we harness or unleash the private sector to support infrastructure globally. We want to look at issues such as trade and trade liberalization, not to repeat the WTO or the APEC agenda, but look at behind the borders issues that can help liberalize trade. We want to look at tax reform. The developing countries of the world, I think, would be very keen to see some outcomes on tax issues and tax systems generally. Developing countries tell us that they lose more in tax evasion than they receive in foreign aid. And we also want to look at regulatory issues to make it easier to do business, not harder. In relation to real estate in Australia, foreign investment is determined by the treasurer of the country with advice from a foreign investment review board. And we have certain thresholds in place which trigger monetary thresholds, which trigger foreign investment review. So in real estate, if it's residential, then it's triggered at zero. If it's commercial, it's 50 million. There are different thresholds for triggering foreign investment review. We want to ensure that Australia welcomes foreign investment, but that our process is transparent and easily understood by potential investors. Australia's economy has been built on foreign investment and that will continue to be the case, a country of 22 million people to have the standard of living that we do requires foreign investment in the major projects that we have. So we certainly welcome foreign investment subject to the national interest test. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I hope you'll join me in thanking Foreign Minister Bishop for speaking to us today. Thank you. Thank you.