17 February 1997
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MIN4STER, THE HON. JOHN HOWARD
AND THE PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND,
THE HON. JIM BOLGER
PARLIAMENT BUILDING, WELLINGTON
E O E
BOLGER: Good morning. I was just advising Prime Minister John Howard that the cricket was
looking reasonably well according to my staff as I came out of Cabinet. Can I just
begin this joint press conference by welcoming Prime Minister John Howard to it,
thank him for the opportunity that his visit has provided for both of us to have a range
of discussions both informally and this morning more formally on a variety of issues.
There are the ones that have been identified in various commentaries and media
comment but we have ranged wider than that in terms of the informal discussions we
have had and the structure of the visit enabling us to spend considerably more time
together, I have found immensely valuable. We have just talked through issues as
Trans Tasman neighbours and Trans Tasman friends and I just want to say at this time,
from our perspective, the relationship with the new Australian Government and with
the policies that have an impact on Trans Tasman relationship, I don't think have ever
been better. I mean, obviously there are issues we have to work through and you will
want to raise some of those, but if you talk about the totality of the relationship and the
common approach and the common principles that are driving various policy initiatives
and policy developments in the two countries, there is a very, very broad base of
commonality. So John, thank you for coming, thank you for the warm friendship you
have displayed in terms of the discussions we have had. The understanding you have
had for the New Zealand position on various issues. Your officials have been
constructive and helpfuil and I might add, as well as working through issues, so thank
you very much and I will just hand it over to you and then I have no doubt that the
journalists from New Zealand and Australia will one of ask one or two easier
questions. HOWARD: Well thank you very much Jim, I would like ladies and gentlemen to echo everything
that the New Zealand Prime Minister has said. I came here for a number of reasons,
not least was to get an idea of the priorities of the newly established Coalition
Government in New Zealand. The visit has been a very strong reminder to me of how
much the two countries mean to each other and the easy informality which comes of a
naturally close friendship and it's a friendship that like all close friendships, should be
kept in good repair and I have seen the last couple of days as an exercise in keeping a
close friendship in good repair and certainly there is no relationship between two
countries which has a stronger history than the relationship between our two countries,
but it is not a relationship that is steeped in the past, it is a very contemporary
relationship. We have been able to compare notes on economic reform. The Liberal
party of Australia and the Nationals in New Zealand have quite a lot in common
philosophically and we have watched many of the changes that have been undertaken
in New Zealand over the past very years, economic changes, with a great deal of
interest and in some areas, quite a lot of areas, a good deal of admiration. I have
especially valued the opportunity of furthering the close personal association that the
New Zealand Prime Minister and I have had for a number of years. I have appreciated
the fact that he was the first overseas leader to speak to me after the election last
March. We met very earlier in Sydney, we have met on a number of occasions at
meetings, the South Pacific Forum, the A. PEC meeting, and we have kept in regular
contact on the telephone. I certainly would agree with the Prime Minister that the
relationship has never been better. I would like to believe as I know he would, that the
good and easy personal relationship that we have established, and I am sure we will
maintain, has played no small part in that very happy state of affairs. Thank you.
BOLGER: Thanks, thanks John. All right who wants to be first.
JOURNALIST: Michael Gordon from the Australian newspaper. Did you discuss New Zealand's
defence spending and did you discuss the question of the outstanding two frigates
where New Zealand will exercise its options ( inaudible)?
HOWARD:
Well, let me say that the issue of defence was certainly discussed yes and I explained
the very high priority that Australia places on defence. The fact that in the first budget
of my Government defence expenditure was quarantined from expenditure cuts, I made
it clear, as I will be at the luncheon today, that the same will obtain in the forthcoming
budget. Defence in Australia will be quarantined from further cuts in the forthcoming
budget. We see defence, the defence investment as being a very important element of
our projection and influence in the region. We also see it as a essential concomitant of
the relationship with the United States. We place, as does New Zealand, a great deal
of emphasis on the CDR and I have made very clear what the position of the Australian
Government is on defence matters.
JOURNALIST: Fleur Bitcon Channel 9. What is that position?
HOWARD: Well I have just explained the great importance that Australia
JOURNALIST: Are you saying then you have encouraged New Zealand to take..
HOWARD: Of look, the question of how much New Zealand spends on defence or social security
or indeed anything else is a matter for New Zealand. As I said yesterday, I haven't
come here to give public lectures. I don't go to any country giving public lectures.
BOLGER: Can I just pick it up. Thank you John. We certainly have discussed the issue of
defence amongst many other issues and we had a chat this morning in the meeting in
the Cabinet room, where the Minister of Defence was in attendance as well. Our
approach is very clear, and it is documented in part in the decision we made as a new
Government to get a defence assessment produced by officials, to determine the
priorities and the options that the Coalition Government has in terms of defence
spending, and will make judgement calls from that. We have also in the Coalition
document identified the need to maintain a professional well-equipped defence force,
to meet both our close security arrangements and also the security arrangements we
have in the region and sometimes on an international basis. Central to this issue, from
a New Zealand perspective, is a closer defence relationship we have with Australia, we
make no bones about that, that is very important to us, and we thank the Australian
Governments, successive Australian Governments for the input they have made for
that closer defence relationship. Now you will all want to ask have we made decisions
on the frigates, so I might as well say that and deal with that in advance. The answer is
no we haven't, because we don't have to make decisions on the frigates until nearly the
end of this year. Clearly, in the assessment that is coming through from officials over
the next few weeks, that will be there on the agenda item with many, many other items
of capital expenditure that the New Zealand Government will have to address. The
first of those, of course, are the replacement helicopters, we advanced that issue
substantially before the election. At that stage the Australian Government had not
advanced its decision making process to quite the same degree. It seems sensible and I
think constitutionally correct not to enter into that final decision until the election was
held and the Government was formed, and we anticipate to be in a position to make
that decision, possibly by the end of next month, thereabouts. So that one will move
ahead of all the other proposals that will come forward for capital equipment and the
like for the defence forces.
JOURNALIST: Louise Dodson, Financial Review. Were you able to win any concession on New
Zealand apples and also getting a commitment from Mr Howard on lowing tariffs on
cars? BOLGER: Tariffs on cars was not an issue that we discussed, formally or informally. On the
question on those sanitary arrangements, there are two issues there, of course, apples
and salmon from New Zealand. Both of which are going through due process in the
Australian system. The one on apples is further advanced than the one on salmon.
Naturally we hope from our side that the analysis made by the officials, the appropriate
officials will come out positively in terms on New Zealand's exports to Australia. But
it wasn't a question of pressuring the Prime Minister on that, he was able to advise that
the process is proceeding as understood by us, and they will produce a
recommendation in due course.
JOURNALIST: Linda Clark What logic would convince you that New Zealand did indeed need two
extra frigates?
BOLGER: I wouldn't answer that in the way you put that at the moment Linda, we have got to
get all the options in front of us and you say what logic would convince us on that.
What we have to do is determine the overall defence investment that we have to make
in capital equipment, replacement equipment, and the like, and then establish priorities
for that. The first two frigates are well on track. We will have the first one Te Kaha
transferred or officially handed over to the New Zealand Navy in the next few weeks,
that is not that far away and we will just progressively work our way forward from
that. When the last Labor Government in 1989 when did they do it, 1989, signed the
agreement with the then Australian Government on the purchase of frigates, under a
joint arrangement, it was on the basis that we would review the circumstances in New
Zealand by the end of this year, and make a decision on the next stage, and that it
exactly would, we would do.
JOURNALIST: David Barber, National Business Review. Would you like to see New Zealand, back
into ALNZUS or do you regard New Zealand's membership as ANZUS as a now a dead
letter that AUSMIN has replaced it as far as you are concerned?
HOWARD: Well certainly, the AUSM[ N association is a very effective and a very close one, but
you will be aware that what Australia has endeavoured to do since the ANZUS
relationship changed somewhat in the 1980s, Australia has endeavoured to on the one
hand maintain a close defence and security relationship with New Zealand and also
with the United States. The question of how New Zealand behaviours vis a vis the
United States, is a matter for New Zealand. You are aware and I think all here aware
and the Australian public are aware, of the great importance my Government places on
the close security relationship with the United States and we are very close to New
Zealand as well. It is not for me to say to New Zealand what New Zealand should do.
That is a matter for the New Zealand people and for the New Zealand Government. I
have made it clear on all these defence issues, my views and that of my Government's
and the importance we place on the defence investment for Australia, but I am simply
not going to get into the business of public lecturing or advising another Government,
that, that is not the role of a friend and close ally.
BOLGER: Can I for the benefit of the Australian media, just say in case there is any view in your
mind that New Zealand and the United States do not have any defence contracts, the
Minister of Defence has just arrived back in New Zealand this weekend from
discussions with the Americans in Hawaii and he tells is that he was extraordinarily
well received up there as well. So while the relationship between New Zealand and the
United States on defence issues changed under David Lange's Government of some
years ago, I think it is proper and fair to observe that we have been successfuil in reestablishing
much better relationships with the United States on defence and security
matters now than we had in the past as evidence, as 1 say, by the very recent visit of
the Minister of Defence to discuss issues with the United States.
JOURNALIST: ( inaudible)
Are you concerned about the Australian criticism of New Zealand stance ( inaudible) of
East Timor as irreversible, were you surprised by Foreign Affairs cable suggesting that
position resulted by New Zealand created a foreign policy... for Australia did you
discuss the issue with Mr Howard at all?
BOLGER: John Howard and I have discussed the issue of Indonesia and East Timor, and again
there is broadly comparable policies between the two countries, but I think there is the
distinct that has been there for a long time. In terms of the word irreversible that
seems to have excited people that was a decision taken the Minister of Foreign Affairs
in New Zealand on the advice of our Foreign Ministry, that given we are talking about
the internal arrangements of another country, including those arrangements were
somewhat controversial in that country, was wrong for us, that was the advice given to
my Foreign Minister, wrong for us to presume what was or was not irreversible in that
country but in terms of the approach that New Zealand has adopted, it has not
changed, and that's really where it is at, and I don't know whether it created a
headache for the Australian Foreign Ministry or not, John, I don't know.
HOWARD: Well, I haven't reached for the Panadol!
BOLGER:
No, so I don't know about that, but that was the logic behind the decision to drop that
which was considered to be presumptuous as to what may or may not occur in
Indonesia. JOURNALIST: Dennis Grant from the Seven Network. Prime Minister Howard's government has the
proposal to extend the waiting time for social security benefits for New Zealanders
living in Australia from the present six months to two years. What's your view on that
and to what extent could you reverse his thinking?
BOLGER: Well the relationship on benefit entitlements Australians and New Zealanders and
New Zealanders and Australians it is conducted under agreed protocols and
agreements that were brought together and we've noted the decision of the Australian
Government. We've discussed it with Prime Minister Howard this morning to extend
the waiting time for some defined benefits predominantly I think the unemployment
benefit some defined, but I think that is the dominant one, for two years. What we
will do now, is the New Zealand side of the agreement, bilateral agreement we have
with Australia is to sit down and talk to the Australians as to the implications that has
for the bilateral understanding. Clearly it is a significant shift by Australia, it also, if
New Zealand follows that shift, we will have to look at the relationship in terms of our
benefit entitlement relationships and regimes from other countries that have people
come over to New Zealand. So we will now calmly work our way forward, that's
been agreed to. The officials and the relevant Ministers will work their way forward
from that.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister Howard, are you sticking to that rigid formula or were you persuaded
by Mr Bolger's arguments in the reverse and..
BOLGER: I'll just pause you there Dennis. We didn't seek to persuade the Australian
government in the reverse. We didn't say Australia you've got this all wrong, please
listen to us. We noted the Australian Government's position, noted that that has
implications for the bilateral arrangements that we have between the two countries and
we will take it forward from there.
HOWARD: Our position is that the law has been changed in Australia and the policy decision was
taken by the Coalition before the last election. In fact this was one of our
commitments in the document ' Meeting our Commitments' and the policy must, as I
explained, be applied in a non-discriminatory fashion however there are extant
recripocal social service agreements with a number of countries including New Zealand
and naturally Australia will honour the terms of existing social service agreements
which require the giving of notice and discussions and negotiations and so forth, but
the policy which has been adopted by us has to be applied for reasons I think people
will understand in a non-discriminatory fashion but we are not going to do other than
honour the processes laid down in agreements. We'll honour those fully and I'm quite
certain the thing can be worked through in an intelligent fashion.
JOURNALIST: Craig McMurtrie from the ABC. How was your meeting with Winston Peters and
what did you talk about?
HOWARD: Well, very good. I was very interested to meet the new deputy Prime Minister of New
Zealand. What did we talk about? We talked about overwhelmingly economic issues.
I was interested to learn that New Zealand is quite active in considering the
introduction of work-for-the-dole schemes and we agreed that our officials and New
Zealand officials should be in touch. I talked about the size of the New Zealand
surplus. We talked a little bit about immigration policy and the different experiences of
the two countries on that, and very briefly about the experience of Coalition. His
experience has been briefer than mine and the history of the two is different, but can I
say I found a very enthusiastic committed Deputy Prime Minister who spoke very
warmly of what had been achieved in the time the Coalition Government had been in
place here in New Zealand and I certainly if I may say so, I sensed an optimistic
positive ' it's a different era but it's a new era' atmosphere in the relationship in the
Cabinet room which of course included Ministers from both National and New Zealand
First and certainly I found my meeting with Mr Peters interesting. I'd not met him
before, I'd read a lot about him and he's a great personality in New Zealand politics. I
think they will be a formidable combination.
JOURNALIST: Were you impressed by the depth of Mr Peters' knowledge of economics?
HOWARD: I thought he was totally.., very very informed and very sensitive to the balance of
economic and social policy which any successful Treasurer must be.
JOURNALIST: Did you discuss at all access for New Zealand programme makers to the Australian
market vis a vis the quota, and the shipping of nuclear waste through common waters,
through the Tasman Sea?
BOLGER: On the issue of New Zealand programmes being able to be shown on Australian TV it
is my firm and committed view that Australians should see those programmes, it has
been my view for some time and I've re-expressed it to John Howard.
HOWARD: He has!
BOLGER: And I see no reason why when we have to watch it dare I say John some of your
programmes that you shouldn't watch some of ours. The matter on a more official
basis is of course going through the court process in Australia. The New Zealand
proponent ' Blue Sky' have had some success in the courts, they've had some lack of
success in the courts and it is back before the courts. But I hope it can be resolved. I
think there is benefit personally on here, and on a facetious basis there is benefit in the
opportunities that that would provide both ways. On the question of the shipment of
nuclear waste, not we haven't discussed that. It would be I think both countries
expectation but given that there is an opportunity for that ship to go up outside the
exclusive zones of both countries that barring some compelling reason for it do
otherwise, that's what it will do.
JOURNALIST: Have you made any progress on the Trans Tasman Aviation Agreements, is there
anything to report from this meeting?
BOLGER: This morning at the Cabinet table and I'll invite John to make comment in a moment
at the Cabinet table we discussed this, because Transport Minister Jenny Shipley has
just been over talking to her Australian counterpart John Sharp on the whole question
of a further extension of ' beyond' rights to Air New Zealand, the basic message Mrs
Shipley took to Australia was that there were benefits to both countries from that
extension of ' beyond' rights in terms of opening up a wider range of route
configurations for visitors to both our countries, not just to New Zealand, but to New
Zealand and Australia and for trade opportunities in both directions as well. And the
argument based on the common sense approach that to make progress here both
countries have to benefit, and Mrs Shipley put material in front of Mr Sharp to suggest
that both countries would benefit from some additional on rights being made available
to Air New Zealand.
HOWARD: Could I just say on that subject that I agree completely with what Jim has said about
the discussion between Mrs Shipley and Mr Sharp. They are to meet again before the
Australasian Transport Ministers' meeting in Cairns in May and the material that Mrs
Shipley presented is to be displayed before the Australian carriers. The ' beyond' rights
issue is very important in New Zealand. I've understood that from the beginning.
Equally it is fair to say that it is always been seen by us as having a degree of difficulty
which is greater than the original negotiations involving the single aviation market. It's
something that has to be worked through and we are trying to do that in an intelligent
way and in a way that benefits.., respects the interests of both countries and the
carriers concerned but we are certainly happy that the discussion is going on and it will
be interesting to see what arises out of the meeting in May.
JOURNALIST: Do you have a time frame for when you may be able to make a decision one way or
another on that issue?
HOWARD: Is that directed to me? No, I don't.
JOURNALIST: Mr Bolger?
BOLGER:
Well, what we agreed as John Howard said a moment ago is that officials will continue
their work over the next many weeks and that the two Ministers are scheduled to meet
again some time in May.
JOURNALIST:
At lunch today you are both proposing a toast to the Queen. I just wonder at this
stage in our respective countries' history whether you feel it might be more meaningful
in toasting each other rather than the Queen?
HOWARD: That would offend all the Labor voters.
BOLGER: I don't think John I actually want to toast to ourselves but I think you were probably
saying should both countries pick up a suggestion I believe Prime Minister Howard has
made in recent days that in fact the toast should be to Australia rather then to the Head
of State, well, that's something we haven't addressed in New Zealand yet I have to
say. Interesting concept.
JOURNALIST: Ben Fordham from 2UE. I just wanted to ask apart from making your warm
relationship warmer with Mr Bolger and the New Zealand Government, what's been
the greatest achievement of this trip? Is there anything out of your meetings which you
can say has been a great achievement?
HOWARD: Well, reinforcing and keeping in good repair a fundamentally close and intimate
relationship is always an important thing to do and you should never take close
relationships for granted. It's dangerous, both at a diplomatic level and at a personal
level. So you should never do that. I've learnt a lot more about the goals and
priorities and aims of the new Coalition Government in New Zealand. It is an
interesting path down which New Zealand has decided to go in relation to MIIMP and
the new Coalition arrangement the change to a mixed system and as a student of
political science as well as a fraternal political colleague in a philosophical sense it is
interesting for me to see it more first hand in operation. And New Zealand's done
some very significant things in the area of economic reform over the last ten years, and
the opportunity at a Prime Ministerial level to talk about these things is very important.
BOLGER: Could I just add thirty seconds to that, because I would endorse the remark that it is
important that friends and close colleagues and countries that are close both in history
and at the present time don't ignore each other. I think most New Zealanders would
understand that Australia is New Zealand's largest export market, perhaps not all
Australians understand that New Zealand is Australia's third largest export market. So
there is straight commercial grounds, leaving sentiment to one side, there is very strong
and compelling arguments why we should make certain that we have our thinking clear
on all issues that might affect Trans Tasman relationship.
JOURNALIST: Is it your view that Australia is running the risk of becoming increasingly
diplomatically isolated over its opposition to legally binding greenhouse gas
emission targets and have you discussed that issue at all with Mr Howard on recent
days? BOLGER: A very short discussion I've got to say because we were running out of time in
Cabinet, with my Minister for the Environment Simon Upton, but nobody suggested to
me that Australia is going to be isolated out there somewhere, that certainly didn't
come up. We didn't have time to develop the respective approaches of the two
countries in any detail. We acknowledge that the issue was mobile in terms of the
positions that were being adopted internationally. I think if you followed us through
from the Rio conference when there was a very high level of participation and
optimism, what I would describe it as now is down to a more realistic assessment of
what the world can achieve in terms of greenhouse gases and how they might be
achieved and we are talking about tradeable rights, putting that into the international
debate, whether that is something that should be given considerable weight to. The
Americans have developed a different concept and so on. So my interpretation of that
is not that anybody is isolated in one corner. I think the world is seeking the best way
forward without imposing very substantial and perhaps unenforceable costs on certain
economies if we just take a very simplistic approach to this. It is a complex issue and I
think that's now better understood by some of the protagonists out in the world
community, than perhaps it was in the enthusiasm of the Rio conference.
HOWARD: Could I just add to that that I don't see Australia as being isolated or in danger of
being isolated. I do however see the position of the Australian government as one that
promotes the Australian national interest. Australia is a net exporter of energy, a very
big net exporter of energy and we are naturally seeking an understanding, we're
seeking I think the diplomatic expression is ' differentiation' we are seeking an
acceptance by countries that are not net-exporters of energy of our position and I think
if you look given our status as a net-exporter of energy, you look at what Australia has
achieved in terms of voluntary greenhouse targets over the past few years, we've done
pretty well, but we did, as Jim said, we discussed it briefly and I think Robert Hill and
Simon are going to have a discussion about it and certainly we want to keep working
closely with New Zealand on the subject.
Thank you.