Today's article by Peter Rees in the Sunday Telegraph badly distorts the truth. The article's assertion that my decision to spend more time at Kirribilli House in Sydney than did my predecessor, has cost the Australian taxpayer one million dollars, is quite false.
I have actually saved money on running costs of the two official establishments compared with my predecessor.
My department has told me that since my occupancy in April 1996 of both official establishments to 31 July 1997 there has been a saving in running costs of $374,990 compared with the same period for Mr Keating.
In terms of comparative guarding costs the latest figures are from April 1996 to March 1997 and show a saving from my predecessor of $586,034.
This has amounted to a saving of $961,024 against which the security upgrade (which is a one-off expense) to which Mr Rees refers, should be offset. Furthermore, Mr Rees' article failed to mention that the security upgrade was for a combined security perimeter with Admiralty House, the Sydney residence of the Governor-General.
The bottom line is that the living arrangements I have chosen for myself and my family have not resulted in any additional costs for the Australian people associated with Kirribilli House and the Lodge. There have been savings.
Any rental costs associated with my Sydney office are applicable irrespective of who is Prime Minister. It is a government rented office.
31 August 1997