E&OE....................................................
JOURNALIST:
This morning it's my pleasure to welcome the Prime Minister
who joins us from the ABC's Melbourne studios and he has agreed
to take your calls as well. Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Carolyn.
JOURNALIST:
Do you believe Queensland would be better served being governed
by an alliance between the Coalition, One Nation and two Independents,
or Labor and a couple of Independents?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I am not going to buy into that. Obviously I wanted a clean,
outright Coalition Government. I wanted a coalition of the National
Party and the Liberal Party because I believe Rob Borbidge has been
a very good Premier but I'll leave that to the Queensland commentators.
That's a matter for the Premier to speak of, I don't want
to buy into that. Let me simply say that the best outcome from last
Saturday would have been an outright result in favour of the Coalition.
Now that clearly is not the case. The question of what ultimately
unfolds is entirely a matter for the voters of Queensland and the
leaders of the Queensland political parties. My attention now, quite
naturally, is very much on the Federal scene and particularly addressing
the concerns of the voters of Queensland in the context of that
Federal election campaign, whenever it may be.
JOURNALIST:
How can you effectively discredit the policies of One Nation though
if the Queensland branch of the Party is teaming up with them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh look, very easily discredit their policies where they are wrong,
and the latest manifestation of where their policies are wrong,
and let me say that I do understand in these times of economic and
social change why some people might be attracted to a party that
is offering apparently easy, simple solutions. I understand that
and I want the people of Queensland who supported the One Nation
Party last weekend to know that I understand the sense of vulnerability
and disappointment that some of them feel. I am taking account of
that, I always have tried to take account of that but in the process
of talking to those people who are decent ordinary Australians who
are concerned about their future, I will point out where I believe
the policies of One Nation will hurt them a lot more than they think
the policies of my Government may have hurt them. And one example
of that, of course, is this idea that you can print money in order
to fund two per cent bank loans. That has to be one of the most
misguided economic statements that I have heard in the 24 years
that I have been in politics. I think the last person who suggested
that was Jim Cairns who was a Labor Treasurer - a Labor Treasurer
- I point out, and he, I think, has a rare distinction of being
the only Treasurer in the history of Australia never to bring down
a Federal Budget. I mean the very idea that you would print money
ought to send a shiver down the spine of every retired Australian
because high inflation would result from printing money and that
will destroy the savings. And it is interesting that a constituency
that One Nation is trying to appeal to is the elderly, and I say
to those people if you value your savings, don't listen to
policies that talk about printing money because printing money will
erode the value of your hard earned savings.
JOURNALIST:
There is considerable infighting among the Queensland Liberals
though about the preference decision with calls to expel some members
who said publicly that it was a grave mistake and the decision went
all One Nation's way, there was no benefit that could be found
for the Liberals. Will you now make an unequivocal decision about
the allocation of preferences and put One Nation last?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's not in my power to make an unequivocal decision, I don't
control that.
JOURNALIST:
You surely have some influence?
PRIME MINISTER:
The best way to exert influence on these organisational matters
in the Liberal Party is to privately talk to people. Let me say
this, that in these areas the organisation of the Liberal Party
makes the decision and calls the shots, I've always accepted
that. They decide who the candidates are and they decide preference
issues and they get out of the way and leave it to us to decide
policy. That's where we are different from the Labor Party.
The Labor Party organisation has a much greater influence on policy.
In our party, the Parliamentary party controls the policy and the
organisation controls the candidates and pre-selections and things
like that. Now, it'll be decided around Australia on a division
by division basis. I know that some divisions have already said
they'll put One Nation last, others will make up their mind
over the weeks and months ahead. It will be a matter for each individual
division. But as far as the Queensland Liberal Party is concerned,
it's a very important part of the Federal structure of the
Liberal Party. There are a lot of Liberal Party seats in Queensland
which we hold, we won a record number. A magnificently high number
in the last Federal election and I want to hold onto every one of
them. And naturally we need a united, combined effort from all members
of the Liberal Party in Queensland to do that and whatever differences
may have existed in the past about tactics and so forth, those differences
ought to be set aside because the goal ahead of the Queensland Liberal
Party now is to make sure we hold onto every one of those seats
we won from Labor in March of 1996 and we do that by focussing on
the positives of what my Government has done and pointing out that
whenever the election is held there will be a very simple choice.
We have an area of great economic turmoil in Asia and against that
background my Government has given the country the strongest economic
foundations for 25 years. And we either hang onto those foundations
that have given us security, stability and safety. And what are
the alternatives to hanging onto those? You either go back to the
failed deficit debt policies of the Labor Party that left us weak
and vulnerable, or do you experiment with these ideas that suggest
that you can solve problems by such erroneous ideas as printing
money, that would be a dangerous experiment with the stability of
our economic future. So there is going to be a pretty clear choice
and my message to Liberals in Queensland is : let us focus on exposing
the clarity of that choice. Let us focus on pointing out to Queensland
voters that you either stick to the stability and the security and
the safety of what we are offering or you go back to Labor's
failed deficit debt policies or you embrace a dangerous experiment
which would undermine the savings of the people. Now I think if
it is explained in that way there is a very clear choice.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, isn't' that one of the main problems
that we keep hearing about the strong foundations of the economy
and how well things are going and yet people have been tightening
their belts and tightening their belts and not feeling any of those
benefits and they just don't believe you any more?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well when you talk about strong foundations you talk about a structure
that can withstand a storm. If I can just use the analogy of a house
and the Australian economy is built on strong foundations and there's
been a squall, a very very heavy storm, people might even say a
hurricane from Asia. And whilst it's kept us indoors, we have
not been able to do as much we would have liked to have done, the
house has stood up against that storm, that hurricane, and it's
still there. And when it abates we will be able to go about our
lives in the normal way. Now if we hadn't have had strong foundations
the house in fact would have been blown over. And I think it is
very important that we understand that if we hadn't reduced
the deficit, if we hadn't gotten rid of Mr Beazley's $10.5
billion deficit, if we hadn't have delivered the lowest interest
rates for 30 years, if we hadn't have delivered the lowest
inflation rate in the OECD area, the damage from Asia would have
been much greater. Although some of the comments from the World
Bank have been exaggerated in the past couple of days, the Asian
economic downturn has been very severe and if our economy had been
weaker, if we hadn't have gotten rid of Mr Beazley's deficit
and tackled the problems we inherited, a lot more damage would have
been done to the Australian economy. Now, I know a lot of people
say well all you're talking about in effect, protecting us
against things having been worse. Well that is partly true but that's
very important because if anybody thinks that it couldn't have
been any worse they're completely wrong. If our economy had
not been strengthened by us the Asian economic downturn would have
done horrendous damage. There would have been higher unemployment
and savings would have been attacked and we would now be as a nation
lamenting the fact that we hadn't taken the measures that my
Government undertook two-and-a-quarter years ago.
TUCKER:
Right. You've agreed to take calls, very kindly. 1300360612
is our number if you'd like to put a question to the Prime
Minister this morning. I don't want to hog up all the time
but I would like to slip one more question ion before we go to the
calls. Would you prefer to look across the Chamber and see Labor
MPs or One Nation MPs?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'd prefer to look behind me and see a sea of Liberal and
National Party faces.
TUCKER:
That doesn't really answer the question though, with all respect.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think with great respect, it's a sort of an irrelevant
question. Politics is about going to the people with positive ideas
and winning the majority of seats and frankly my business is to
get Liberals and Nationals elected. I think the idea that a Prime
Minister and a political leader should see politics in terms of
keeping others out as distinct from getting himself in, is negative,
and that is why I think it's irrelevant question. My goal in
life is to get Liberals and National Party members elected to the
national Parliament. My goal is to explain to tho people of Queensland
and to the people of Australia that in these challenging times the
real safety and security and stability is to be found in supporting
the Coalition. Not in going back to failure or risking dangerous
experiments.
TUCKER:
All right. Let's take some calls now. James, you're first
on the line this morning. Good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning Carolyn, good morning Mr Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning James.
CALLER:
My question is, is there any compensation or any likelihood of
a tax exemption for the general public in your tax package.
PRIME MINISTER:
A tax exemption for the general public?
CALLER:
That's right, a tax amnesty.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, from time to time the Taxation Office makes decisions in
relation to individual tax payers but we don't have in contemplation
as a Government, a tax amnesty. What we have in contemplation is
a reformed tax system which makes the whole thing fairer and we
certainly won't be increasing taxation. One of the promises
I made when I announced tax reform was that we would ensure that
the overall tax burden did not increase. But we do need a fairer
a system and we do need one that takes the load off the backs of
our export industry and that's why we're looking at replacing
existing inefficient indirect taxes with a broad based indirect
tax or a goods and services tax. And also introducing significant
reductions in personal income tax. It will be a package, and it
will be fairer and it will be better and the public will like it.
TUCKER:
Annette, good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning Carolyn. Prime Minister, we have maintained private
health insurance over the whole of our lives but it's becoming
more and more increasingly difficult. We received our tax certificate
yesterday saying that we are entitled to the full $450 claim on
our tax but at the same time our premium has risen from $195 to
$216 for a four week period. Now you know, those increases are absolutely
outrageous and it's no wonder that fund membership is dropping
at an alarming rate. What on Earth can be done to stem the tide.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Annette, I understand your frustration about that. I'm
glad you acknowledge that as a result of my Government coming in,
your premium is $450 a year cheaper because of your family's
entitlement to the taxation rebate. Health and private health insurance
as part of that is one of those areas that's always under examination
by the Government. We remain very strongly committed to private
health insurance. I personally, like yourself, have had personal
health insurance for myself and my family all of my life and I'll
always keep it because I think it's a very valuable insurance.
But I do understand that it's become a more expensive product
and I do understand that it's a bit of a vicious circle. Premiums
go up which forces more people out which in turn pushes premiums
up further and fewer people in the younger age bracket are in, and
proportionally more people in the older age bracket who are the
greater claim on private health insurance are members. So, I understand
it. Can I say Annette that the concern you expressed is a very common
concern and Governments do listen to those expressions of concern
and it's an area that remains under very constant review. I
think that's all I can say at the moment.
TUCKER:
Thanks Annette. Helen, good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning Carolyn, good morning Mr Howard.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
CALLER:
I'm a Liberal voting self-funded retiree. My late husband
retired 35 years ago and we saved all our working days for our retirement.
With regard to the GST, no one has a clue as to how much wholesales
tax is levied at what rate, and on what articles. Could the Government
make it abundantly clear for the general public to comprehend how
the GST will effect us. Might I suggest a comprehensive A-Z list
of all articles that attract tax and the rates being mailed to every
tax payer. I feel sure, if we the tax payers had this information,
the Government would have an easier time with the tax change. What
do you think Mr Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I agree with you and I can assure you that that information
will be made available. I read in the paper this morning, so it
must be right, that the Business Coalition is going to run an advertising
campaign starting either next Sunday or Monday, pointing out the
cost of the wholesale sales tax on everyday items and the fact that
for example if you buy caviar, which not many of us do, you don't
pay any wholesale sales tax, but if you eat certain biscuits which
most of our children do, you pay 12%. But on things like toothbrushes
or toothpaste which you pay sales tax, and there are many household
items where you pay very high levels of tax. An example I often
use is that if you are wealthy enough to buy a Lear Jet, you don't
pay any wholesale sales tax, but like the rest of it, if you buy
a family car, you pay 22%. Now, all of that will be pointed out
in great detail and I'll be very disappointed if after this
whole exercise is completed that the great bulk of Australians aren't
experts on the inequities and the anomalies of the existing wholesale
tax system, and can I also say to you as a self-funded retiree,
that we certainly haven't forgotten that group of Australians
and one of the really good things in the last budget was an announcement
that we were going to extend the Seniors' Card to self-funded
retirees, with effect from the first of January next year, in a
way that I think it will reach something like 90%-95% of all self-funded
retirees in Australia and that's on top of course of the extension
of the taxation rebate so that people at the same level of income
as self-funded retirees are treated the same as pensioners. But
I am very much aware of the need to explain those wholesale sales
tax anomalies and I can promise you that there'll be a lot
of information pouring out on that subject over the weeks and months
ahead.
TUCKER:
Will you be looking at further compensation for self-funded
retirees, Mr Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not just self-funded retirees Carolyn. One of the five principles
I laid down last year that there should be adequate compensation
for those who needed it. I want to assure people on fixed incomes,
I want to assure people on benefits, people who need the help of
the safety net, that they will not be disadvantaged by our taxation
package. Now, they will see the detail when it comes out and that
won't be too long into the future. I'm not going to say
exactly when, but we have made a lot of progress with the package
and there will be plenty of time to look at it and examine it and
to see the benefits of it and also to see the protection. In the
long run, the purpose of tax reform is to strengthen the economy
and in the process of doing that, we must protect people on fixed
incomes. Their savings are important, that's why they shouldn't
play around with experimental economics and I think it is very very
important that people understand that will be a lot of compensation
for people who need protection in this tax package.
TUCKER:
Fred, good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello Fred.
CALLER:
I'd just like to ask one question. In relation to the double
dissolution, you have three triggers for a double dissolution, is
that correct?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's correct.
CALLER:
Why is everybody concentrating on Wik when the other two are just
as important as Wik?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, perhaps you should ask those who are focussing on it. It's
just that Wik has had more publicity. The other two relate to reforms
to the Public Service, and also Unfair Dismissal changes that will
help small business, and that is of particular benefit to Queensland,
and because there's a very high proportion of small business
men and women in Queensland, but those other two measures are very
important, I agree with you. We've just got all the publicity
because there's been a huge debate about Native Title for a
long time and it is important, particularly for Queensland that
we get this issue resolved. Now, it is not my fault that it is still
unresolved. I worked for months and months and months to get a compromise
that was fair to everybody and gave everybody a decent run, and
now I'm being asked to compromise even further. Well, I'm
not going to sell out the interests of the farmers of Queensland
or indeed anywhere in Australia and therefore I'm asking the
Labor Party and the Democrats and others in the Senate to pass the
bill and indeed to pass the other two bills. And if people don't
want a double dissolution, well they should be putting pressure
on the Democrats and the Labor Party and Senator Harradine to pass
our fair, balanced, Native Title Bill. It's not, in a sense,
our fault or our responsibility. Those who have blocked the legislation
of the Government with a 44 seat majority in the House of Representatives
carry the responsibility for the delay and the frustration.
TUCKER:
Do you see it as a powerful weapon to be taking to the election
as Rob Borbidge has described it?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm certain that in States like Queensland and Western Australia
there is a very strong level of support for what we're proposing.
I don't see it Caroline, as a weapon, I see it as necessary
for Australia's future, because a lot of investment is hanging
on clearing up confusion about Native Title. I don't see these
things as weapons or tactics or strategies, I see them as beneficial
to Australia. We can't go on with the uncertainty surrounding
Native Title, and we didn't create it. It was created by the
legislation of the former Government and we are now trying to respond
to it. And we said before the last election that we would remove
the uncertainty surrounding Native Title and that's what we
went to the people on and that's what they voted for, but the
Senate won't pass our amendments. So, what are we to do but
to contemplate in those circumstances, if we want the changes made,
what are we to do other than to contemplate a double dissolution?
TUCKER:
We are fast running out of time and I do want to sneak one more
question in before the news. I apologise to those people we didn't
get to, we're just going to have to get you back, Mr Howard.
Many people believe the State election was a dress rehearsal for
the federal election. If that's the case, how are you going
to sell the GST when every other political party is against it,
it would seem, and if you are standing firm on that, are you worried
it is going to appear to be intransigence instead of choosing the
best option for the country?
PRIME MINISTER:
I never regard individual State elections as dress rehearsals for
federal elections. I think there are differences and there are different
issues. I won't be selling a GST. It's a mistake to suggest
that I am. I will be selling taxation reform, which a GST or a broad
based indirect tax could well be part, but there's no way I'm
going to go to the public and say I'm going to put a Goods
and Services Tax on top of everything else, that would crazy, and
people would be justified in saying no. But what I will be doing
is saying to the public that the next step that's needed to
strengt