E& O E.....
Well, good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I'd just like to say one or two words about the historic decision of the Victorian Government to transfer that State's industrial relations powers to the Federal Government, This will end 90 years of a situation where we have had a totally dual system of Industrial Relations in Australia. It represents a very sensible decision by the Victorian Government to end participation in a field which can be more effectively occupied at a national level. It is of course a ringing endorsement of the Federal Government's approach to workplace relations. It will be of significant benefit to small and medium size businesses. I say to the business community of Australia, every day virtually, you call for a reduction in red tape, you call for an elimination of duplication, you call for an end to the overlap between the Commonwealth and the States. Here we have an example in a key area of the second largest state in Australia acting because of the friendly, cooperative relationships that exist between that State and the new Coalition Government acting to give effect to it.
I applaud the decision of the Victorian Government. I congratulate Peter Reith and the Victorian Ministers for the intelligent way in which they have negotiated this decision and I regard it as a victory for pragmatic federalism. Pragmatic federalism is when you take opportunities as they come along to remove duplication and waste and overlap rather than the pie-in-the-sky, airy-fairy federalism which first seeks to put in place an overall grand plan and a framework and doesn't do anything to fix up things when they can be fixed up until you've got the grand plan in place. This in the industrial relations area represents more progress than has been achieved in many other areas without fanfare, without rhetoric, because people have sat down and negotiated ina an intelligent, pragmatic fashion.
I have another announcement to make but I'll come to that after your questions.
JOURNALIST: None of the Premiers seem to be too confident that you'll be able to get rid of duplication in other areas on Friday, Mr Howard.
PRIME MINISTER: Well just as this announcement has come as a surprise you can always expect in politics there'll be other surprises.
JOURNALIST: Will you be holding talks with other States to see, particularly New South Wales, to see if they'll follow suit?
PRIME MINISTER: If I were John I wouldn't be telegraphing it.
JOURNALIST: Mr Howard, who instigated this deal and how long have you been negotiating it for?
PRIME MINISTER: It was a natural coming together of like minds.
JOURNALIST: When Mr Kennett first raised
PRIME MINISTER: It's been going on for some time and I give all credit to Mr Reith, my Minister, and to the Ministers in the Victorian Government.
JOURNALIST: When do you expect it to take effect?
PRIME MINISTER:
When do I expect what?
JOURNALIST: The changes, the legislative changes, to take effect? 2
Fax from PRIME MINISTER.:
Well, just as soon as the legislation has been passed through the Victorian Parliament.
You've got it's got to go through Victoria and then it can go through here.
JOURNALIST: Mr Howard you would like the other States to follow to though wouldn't you
PRIME MINISTER:
Michael, I've learnt long since in these things that you are gratefuhl for what you have.
You then beaver away and if you have a bit more you say something about it. But you
don't start making big announcements. I'm not giving any hints or giving any advice
gratuitous or otherwise to the other States, I'm just pleased to announce what we
have achieved today. And I'm very pleased that it's a demonstration to those people
who cynically suggested that the reform process had died in the sand, that there's a lot
of pragmatic reform in this Government. We're not about trumpeting it from the roof
tops but we are about intelligently working behind the scenes and when we have a
deal, we'll announce it and then we'll go on to the next deal and see if we can get that
worked out as well.
JOURNALIST: Mr Kennett wouldn't give away something for nothing. What's the pay back, tax
reform? PRIME MINISTER:
Nothing. I mean, do I look like the sort of person who would engage in that kind of
trade-oMf
JOURNALIST: When Mr Kennett actually first raised it in April he was seeking a tradeoff
( inaudible)...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, John I can assure there are no trade-oftfs. Look, this is a win-win situation for
Victoria and the Commonwealth, that's why Mr Kennett has done it. I mean, Mr
Kennett has once again demonstrated his reform credentials and we are demonstrating
a capacity to achieve pragmatic reforms in very important areas.
JOURNALIST: .( inaudible).,. once you accept the Democrat amendments you had ( inaudible)...
Faoxm 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 3
Fax from PRIM MINISTER:
No, no can I tell you that's not right Tom. Discussions about this have been going on
for some time.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, how does it .( inaudible)... your system when workers will still be able
to remain in State awards?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the whole sort of formal operation of the thing will be done at a Federal level.
. JOURNALIST:
Mt Howard, what is your view on how would you contrast your view on pragmatic
federalism with that left to you by Mr Keating and Mr Hawke in terms of
( inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Mr Keating's greatest Federal-State reform legacy was of course to torpedo the
Greiner-Hawke thrust in the name of bringing Hawke down as Leader of the Labor
Party. I mean, you will remember the 1991 initiatives. You will remember that in
1991, for the first time you had real cooperation between a Labor Prime Minister and
the Liberal Premier of the largest state and Paul Keating set about destroying that. So
I don't reflect in any great sort of detail on the leg acy that I picked up from earlier
people. Look, I don't spend a lot of time comparnng myself with Mr Keating and Mr
Hawke. That's not meant disrespecti~ ly, it's just that I can't see the point of it.
JOURNALIST: What will this agreement mean actually for small and medium sized businesses in grass
roots terms?
PRIME MINISTER:
They won't have to worry about flipping from one system to the other and they'll have
the advantages of our you-beaut new system.
JOURNALIST: In terms of transferring to the new you beaut system ( inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it will need what is contemplated in our legislation. Faoxm 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 4
Fax from 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg S
JOURNALIST: Mr Howard are you satisfied you got your reaction right to the Malaysian Government
following the riot the other day in ( inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER;
Well David, I am satisfied. Let me take a moment to repeat, in full, what I said
yesterday at Benalla, What I said was that I regretted what had occurred. I then went
on to say that the reality is that when you visit another country you have to abide by
the rules of that country, even though you may not like them. Obviously conferences
on a whole range of things are the sorts of things that would be allowed in this
country. I mean, I don't ever contemplate that this country would ban a conference
being held on something of this nature. But the point I sought to make yesterday was
that when Australians visit another country and they know or can reasonably be
expected to know in advance that a certain activity they propose to engage in has been
banned by the government of that country then they can't in relation to the activities of
that government be heard to complain too loudly if what they said they were told was
going to happen does in fact happen. That doesn't mean to say that I like it and it
doesn't mean to say that it is the kind of thing I expect them to like. I mean, I can
understand anybody feeling upset and angry that an activity which you wvould normally
be permitted to engage in in this country you cannot engage in another country. But
this is a point I have made frequently about relations between Australia and the nations
of the region. We have to learn that there are differences between our societies. We
do things our way and we don't take advice from other people as to how we should do
them and other countries do things their way and all I sought to say yesterday, and I
repeat it today, is that they went there with their eyes open. A decision was taken by
the Malaysian Cabinet. It was announced so I am told on the 4th of November, it was
announced, the organisers according to my understanding were locally-based people. J
don't think they could seriously, the organisers of the conference, seriously plead
ignorance of the decision that had been taken by the Malaysian Government. Now,
that doesn't mean to say that I think things should be banned, I have my own views on
that. I am simply making the point that if people are told that something can't take
place and that it is being banned then when the Government that has made that
decision has laid down that policy then gives effect to that decision then the people
affected by it can hardly say they weren't warned.
JOURNA. LIST:
Mr& Howard, why then does the Catholic Bishop who was arrested say that it wasn't
banned, that it was authorised on the proviso that they conducted their proceedings in
private and on invitation only?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that is completely contrary to the advice that 1 have received from the
Department of Foreign Affairs. I mean my comments yesterday and today are based
entirely on the advice that I have received from the Department of Foreign Affairs that
the matter was the subject of an explicit decision by the Malaysian Government to
Fax from impose a ban. Now that's the basis of what I've said and if the information that I have
is correct, and I have had it checked again today, then I have no reason to believe that
the analysis that I have made it is not an analysis that lacks sympathy for the desire of
people to lawfully participate in meetings and express views on issues it is just a
pragmatic statement of the reality when you are dealing with relations between states
that if the law of another country, or the rules of another country, or the decrees of
another country say you can't do something and you go there and you do that thing in
full knowledge of those lawvs and decrees and mores then you can hardly be heard to
complain too loudly if the consequences implicit in the original decision are in fact
delivered. JOURNALIST: Are you saying that in relation to Catherine McGrath given that she was merely a
journalist covering the meeting rather than... ( inaudible).. H-ave you got a distinction
between her position and her being detained and the other... ( inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I always am very respectful of the differences that should be drawn between
journalists and their participants in proceedings but I think it is fair to say that a person
of her background and standing would be as cognisant as anybody else of the fact that
the meeting was taking place and unless there is some international covenant or law of
which I am unaware that gives a special treatment in relation to journalists then it's
inevitable that the comments that I have made have some application to her as well.
JOURNALIST: So the Bishop Deakin and the Australian reporters, did they get it wrong that they
were unaware of the fact that it was banned?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well what I am saying, and I don't know precisely what Bishop Deakin has said. What
I am saying is that my information is that the meeting was banned, banned by the
Malaysian Government. That was made known at a Press Conference. The decision
was taken on the 4th of November. In those circumstances I find it very hard to
believe that the organisers of the conference didn't know that the decision had been
taken. JOURNALIST: Given that the delegates knew it was banned, do you think they were harshly treated by
being detained for 24 hours and then deported?
PRIM4E MINISTER:
Well I have had mixed reports about their treatment and I will continue to monitor
those reports and the initial reports were that although they were very unhappy and
Fa om11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 6
Fax from they were scared and they were disconcerted by what had occurred, the initial reports
were that they had not been mistreated. Now, if reports I subsequently receive suggest
otherwise well I may have something further to say about that. I never want to see
Australians badly treated overseas, never ever, and when I heard the news reports
about this incident which I think first broke on the ABC News on Saturday night, that
was certainly the first I saw it, I then got straight to my office to be in touch with the
High Commissioner in Kuala Lumpur to find out wvhat happened and I had a report on
it within a few hours and the indications were broadly to the effect that although the
meeting had been broken up people had not been badly treated and the initial news
reports, the interviews with Catherine Mc~ rath indicated that there had not been any
physical abuse involved although obviously it was a very distressing incident.
JOURNALIST: What's your view of the way ( inaudible)... It was a group of
political supporters of the Government rather than a police....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I know you are trying to get me to give a running commentary on the domestic
policies of Malaysia and then perhaps some of you might run away and say well you
know a problem has been created thereby between Australia and Malaysia. Let me
simply say that different countries do things differently. I mean we do things our way
other countries do their way and I thought the whole modality that we understood and
accepted in this country was that if we are to have sensible relations with the nations of
our region we ought to understand what they are and also what they are not. There is
a tradition of free public assembly in Australia which is almost unique in the world.
We are always going to be different on things like that. I think proudly different on
things like that from other countries, but if we are to be able to live in this region we
have to, all of us, sort of understand that and I think that is very very important in the
context of a whole lot of debates that have occurred in recent times.
JOURNALIST: Does that mean you're keen to be a strong advocate of free speech in Australia but you
are not willing to extend that empathy for free speech within our region....?
PRIM MINISTER:
I think what it means is that I don't see my role as the Prime Minister of this country to
give endless moral lectures to the rest of the region.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, on the question of tax reform. Do you accept that there is now almost
universal calls for tax reform or an overhaul of the tax system and do you have any
intention of setting up some sort of process of tax reform in your second term?
Farxft 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 7
Fax from PRIME MINISTER:
I don't accept that there is almost near universal support for it. For example, I
understand that the alternative government of this country is still root and branch
opposed under any circumstances to a goods and services tax, so if you are looking for
unanimity, that is a
JOURNALIST: .( inaudible)...
PRIE MINISTER:
Well, everybody believes in some kind of tax reform. Our position is very simple. We
said during the campaign we wouldn't introduce a GST in our first term, that remains
our position, it is plainly stupid, plainly stupid to be talking about wvhat we are going to
be doing during our second term when I'm only just settling into my first term. And
I'm really just not going to, I mean you can try as long as you like and I know you will,
but I'm just not going to keep repeating, I mean, I'll keep repeating that but I'm not
going to alter it, we are not going to have a GST in this term. What happens in the
next term well, as we get closer to the imminence of the next term, then I'll be happy
to entertain some questions on it, but it is what -eight months, the next election is due
in March of 1999.
JOURNALIST: The Small Business Deregulation Taskforce. . one of the reports has suggested, a
broadly based.... and reduce the number of.. .( inaudible).. does that sit with your
election promise not to increase tax?
PRIME MINISTER;
Well, it depends a little bit on how you interpret the recommendation. We are
con~ idering the report. We haven't taken any decision on it, so I don't think the
question of whether or not our election commitment has been kept arises, because we
haven't taken any decision.
JOURNALIST: You were saying that the Opposition hadn't embraced a tax reform. Are you saying it
would be almost impossible in this country to get any meaningful tax reform unless it is
bipartisan and embraced by the Labor Party?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I was just making the observation. I don't really want to say any more than that.
I was making the observation in reply to Mr Burion's observation that everybody is in
favour of it. Perhaps I'm being over respectful to the Labor Party but I thought if the
everybody doesn't include the alternative Government then it is not quite everybody,
Faoxm 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 8
Fax from JOURNALIST: What's your second announcement?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh I'd almost forgot. I wanted to announce that I've appointed a new Parliamentary
secretary to replace Brian Gibson, Senator Macdonald, Senator Ian Macdonald from
Queensland will become Parliamentary secretary to Senator Hill and Senator Ian
Campbell will become Parliamentary secretary to the Treasurer. It's just Campbell
goes to the Treasury and Macdonald comes into take Campbell's place beside Hill and
everything else is exacty the same, no other changes, nothing else foreshadowed and
I'll have two more questions. Is there anybody who hasn't had a go?
JOURNALIST: Do you expect that that might satisfyr some of your critics in Queensland who say that
the Libs are a bit over-represented?
PRIME MINISTER:
Are you frm Queensland are you? I don't have any critics in Queensland.
JOURNALIST: Are you concerned about the allegations that have been raised about the operations of
the Special Broadcasting Service and would you favour an amalgamation of the ABC?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the allegations about the Special Broadcasting Service are the subject of an
investigation by the service called for by the Minister and in advance of that I'm not
going to say anything about them. They are merely allegations and I'm not going to
try and say whether they are right or wrong. I don't know.
JOURNALIST:
Do you favour and amalgamation?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's not our policy to do so.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister have you checked out the shareholdings of the new Parliamentary
Secretaries? Farxft 11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: 9
Fax from PRIME MINISTER:
Have I? Well, he will be required to make the usual declaration.
JOURNALIST:
But you haven't....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I only spoke to himn a few hours ago, so it is a bit unreasonable to have firstly
expected him to put his declaration, me to have examined it. I mean I spoke to him
this morning and after that I went off to the remembrance day service and I did a
couple of other things there, and then I had a meeting and now I'm talking to you, and
I know I'm very efficient Mr Farr but that's look, he will be required to make the
declaration in the normal way and I will have a look at it.
JOURNALIST: When will you expect that declaration to be in?
PRIME MINISTER:
Within a normal period of time. Well, I'll decide what that is. I probably give him a
couple of weeks.
JOURNALIST: Mr Howard, who should bat Number 3 for Australia in the upcoming test series?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I mean, I think if he were really available Boon would be terrific but I don't think
I should go any further than that! This is the last question. This is getting out of hand,
JOURNALIST; You've got today's latest housing figures. Do you think that's showing good signs for
the economy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, they are on the face of it, they are very good, but I never get excited by one
month's figures. I think it is always very foolish to get carried away positively or
negatively by one month's figures but in themselves they are good but I think it would
be very foolish and counterproductive of me to get carried away by one month's
figures. Thank you very much. Faro M11/ 11/ 96 19: 38 Pg: