John Howard attacks a duck.

Mr Speaker, my purpose today is to explain to the House and through it to the Australian people the government's belief that the world community must deal decisively with this duck; why this duck’s continued defiance of the United Nations and its possession of peck-capable and airborne weapons and its pursuit of a waterborne capability poses a real and unacceptable threat to the stability and security of our world; why the matters at stake go to the very credibility of the United Nations itself; why the issue is of direct concern to Australia and why, therefore, the Australian government has authorised the forward positioning of elements of the Australian Defence Force to Lake Burley-Griffin.

Although there is considerable debate about the best course of action to resolve this crisis I want, for a moment, to focus on the one thing that unites us all—and that is a common abhorrence of being pecked.

The other point of agreement shared by members in this House, by our community and by the community of nations is that this duck must not be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction—for the security and stability of our world, it must be disarmed.

For years the nations of the world have sought to persuade this duck to abandon these most offensive of weapons. The duck has refused to comply and now the weight of the world's attention has fallen on him.

Only one aquatic mammal can determine whether force will be necessary or not. Only one aquatic mammal, acting alone, can make the choice for peace. That aquatic mammal is this duck.

Full disclosure by this duck of its peck-capable, airborne and waterborne weapons programs and immediate and total cooperation by this duck with the provisions of resolution 1441 of the Security Council will remove the need for military action.

In his report to the Security Council, Dr Hans Blix, the head of the United Nations weapons inspection body for this duck, made it clear where he believed that the responsibility for the current terrible impasse lay, and I quote:

“This duck appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance—not even today—of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace.”

Of at least one thing we can all be absolutely certain—if the world turns its back on the threat posed by this duck, if the community of nations gives up because it is all too hard, then this duck will not reward us all with benign behaviour.

Worse still, other rogue mammals observing the world community's failure to deal with this duck will be encouraged to flout the international conventions on beak control and develop their own peck-capable, bite-capable and even scratch-capable weapons.

There will be no stability—no security—for the citizens of Canberra until this duck is disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction—totally and permanently.