JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, the Opposition's offer must look more attractive
to a GST surely to the battlers?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think every battler in Australia has got to ask himself or herself
what would be the use of a personal tax cut from the Labor Party
if it were more than eaten up in higher interest rates. And one
of the indisputable facts, and this is not rhetoric, is that my
Government has been the Party that has delivered the lowest housing
interest rates this country has seen for 30 years. Mr Beazley had
13 years. Housing interest rates went to 17% under his government,
20.5% for small business. Under my Government, housing interest
rates have fallen to the tune of $300 a month off the repayments
for an average loan, and that is the equivalent of a pay rise of
$100 a week for the average wage and salary earner. So, let me say
right at the beginning to the taxpayers of Australia, a tax cut
more than eaten up with an interest rate rise, and if Mr Beazley
were to win the next election, interest rates would go up again.
I mean, that's the biggest risk for the average Australian
about a future Labor Government. This is not political assertion
and rhetoric, this is fact. When we took over, interest rates were
at this Himalayan level and over the last two-and-a-quarter years,
they've fallen in the way that I've described.
JOURNALIST:
But he's pledged to keep the Budget in the black and he's
said that this measure will do everything....
PRIME MINISTER:
He said the Budget was in the black before the last election. I
mean, you've got to look at what people do in Government, not
what they say they will do if the public puts them back. Now the
facts are clear. We are the party that has delivered the lowest
interest rates in 30 years. He was the Finance Minister of a Government
that delivered the highest interest rates in 30 years. Now, against
that backdrop, the biggest risk of all of a future Labor Government
is the way in which through their big spending approach and their
high deficit approach they would once again plunge this country
back into higher interest rates.
JOURNALIST:
It would help all the voters, wouldn't it, if this shadow
boxing would stop and you both put your cards on the table. When
are we going to see your tax package and their tax package, and
will there be enough time before an election to scrutinise them?
PRIME MINISTER:
There will be time for people to digest what is in our tax reform
approach, plenty of time, and in any event, Mr Beazley has not really
put anything on the table. I mean, all he really says is that he'd
like to give a popular tax cut. Well, I mean, what Opposition leader
wouldn't say that. What Opposition Leader wouldn't like
to do that, but that has to be put against the ordinary reality
of the impact of higher interest rates that would inevitably follow
the election of a Beazley government on those tax cuts.
JOURNALIST:
He's said he'll show his if you show your's. I mean,
when is it going to be out there?
PRIME MINISTER:
Matt, we have said all along that we will unveil our tax reform
plan, and it will be comprehensive, it will be the logical next
step in providing security, safety, and stability to the Australian
economy in a sea of Asian economic turmoil, and all of our policies
are against that background. All of our policies are about delivering
safety, security and stability to the Australian economy in a very
difficult regional economic environment and our tax reform plan
is the next necessary element in providing that safety, security
and stability.
JOURNALIST:
And presumably a cut to Diesel Fuel Excise, we see?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm not going to get into specifics, but I can say to
the people of rural Australia that when they see the total tax package,
they will see it as a fair one, and unlike the policies of the former
government that were brutally insensitive to men and women on the
land in Australia, it will be a policy that rural Australians will
like.
JOURNALIST:
What about health, education, those kinds of things. I mean, we
do have a problem with health don't we? The AMA says it's
given up talking to Michael Wooldridge, it's focussing its
attention on you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's not correct, that is not correct. I mean, let
me say that Michael has done an outstanding job as Health Minister
and under his leadership we've seen some remarkably innovative
programmes. I mean, look at the lead that he's taken on child
immunisation. When we became the Government, we had immunisation
levels that were at third world standards. They were disgraceful,
and we've done something about that.
JOURNALIST:
Health funds are still bleeding to death...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, health funds would have been in a far more parlous state,
far more parlous state then they are now if we hadn't introduced
our incentive. But that is one of those areas where no sensible
government ever closes the book and says that you can never do more,
you can never make further changes, but you've got to bear
in mind that compared with the health systems of other developed
countries, ours is still a remarkably good and remarkably strong
one with very high quality health care, provided by our doctors,
and by our hospitals, and by our other health professionals.
JOURNALIST:
Is part of the problem, as the Treasurer says, that people walk
into a doctor's surgery expecting the service to be free when
in fact the taxpayer is paying?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there are a combination of views that different people have
on it and I'm not going to conduct a seminar on health policy,
much and all as I respect the AM programme, I don't think it
is quite the right environment for it.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, you are under some pressure in the Senate in terms
of the GST for example. You've even indicated that if they
knock it back as the Labor Party has certainly promised, that you'd
be prepared to go to the polls a second time. Is that a real prospect?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know about being under pressure. I mean, the
obvious...
JOURNALIST:
Well, there's Telstra, there's GST....
PRIME MINISTER:
The obvious thing Matt, is that despite the huge mandate we got
at the last election, the Opposition parties in the Senate have
been obstructionist and what the height of that obstruction was
Mr Beazley's claim that even if at the next election we are
returned along with a tax reform plan we take to that next election,
then he - if he is leader of the Labor Party - will encourage the
Labor Party to block any tax changes even though the people may
have approved them. Now, the point I made then and I make again
is that is the height of arrogance. I mean we are meant to have
a democracy where if the people speak, politicians listen. There
is one thing that the Labor Party didn't understand at the
last election was that it had stopped listening to the Australian
public. And it sounds as though it hasn't learnt anything from
the last election. It still refuses to listen to the Australian
public. I mean our view is that we've put a tax reform plan
down and if we win the next election with that tax reform plan,
we ought to be able to get it through the Parliament without obstruction
from the Labor Party and the Australian Democrats or, indeed, any
other minor parties who may be gathered along the way.
JOURNALIST:
And if you don't get through with that or Telstra......
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh look, we'll deal with that if and when it arises.
JOURNALIST:
It's certainly possible though is it not?
PRIME MINISTER:
Matt, what I'm drawing attention to is the arrogance of an
Opposition Leader who says : "I don't care what the Australian
people say, I will have my way whether they like it or not".
Now that is political arrogance. That's the sort of arrogance
that caused Paul Keating to suffer at the hands of the Australian
people at the last election and Mr Beazley is repeating the Keating
arrogance.
JOURNALIST:
Do you agree with the idea of changing the tax mix, the prospect
that social services is objecting to?
PRIME MINISTER:
I agree with getting rid of an outdated, old-fashioned wholesale
tax system that imposes a penalty on our exporters and makes them
very uncompetitive with other countries. I believe in getting rid
of other unfair elements of our tax system that penalise effort
and hard work. I am not going to get into the intricacies of the
plan that we will be bringing down except to assure you and your
listeners that we are not going to introduce a plan that hurts poor
people and we are certainly going to be very sensitive to the needs
of the underprivileged in the plan that we bring down.
JOURNALIST:
I notice the Maritime Union and Chris Corrigan were in talks over
the weekend and last week. Does that surprise you, it certainly.....
PRIME MINISTER:
Nothing surprises me on the waterfront Matt.
JOURNALIST:
Your redundancy package is still on the table is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look, our position is as it has always been and that is that
we want reform on the waterfront because that would be good for
the Australian economy. We want to get rid of compulsory unionism
on the waterfront because that is bad for the Australian economy
and, as far as I am concerned, if plans emerge, understandings emerge
that meet those criteria, then it's fine. I mean, we have never
wanted as the end result the destruction of a union. We've
never wanted people to lose their jobs but we have wanted a productive,
competitive waterfront that is good for the Australian economy.
JOURNALIST:
So if these talks result in some of the work being contracted out,
you'd be happy?
PRIME MINISTER:
I am not going to make any advance judgements on what might come
out of the talks or whether those results meet the criteria that
we've laid down. We've specified certain policy positions
as a Government in relation to the redundancy payments and those
policy positions remain. What is being discussed.....
JOURNALIST:
But the deadline was today was it not?
PRIME MINISTER:
What is being discussed between Mr Coombs and Mr Corrigan is a
matter for them. I'm not privy to those discussions and, quite
frankly, it's appropriate that the parties to the dispute talk
it out between themselves without the interference of the Government.
JOURNALIST:
A quick question before Indonesia. Do you have a media black list
as it's been reported.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't have a media black list.
JOURNALIST:
So you don't know anything about it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Matt, I mean I talk to you on a regular basis.
JOURNALIST:
You talk to me, exactly.
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean we have very civil exchanges don't we?
JOURNALIST:
What about Indonesia, Prime Minister. President Habibie is somebody
that you and everyone else thought was political dead-meat'
last week, is now running the country. How long do you think he'll
last and are you encouraged by this apparent opening up of the prisons?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, just before I talk about the opening up of the prisons, you
made a few heroic assumptions in that question about dead-meat'
and so forth. The line I took last week and the line I now take
is that the Government of Indonesia is something for the people
of Indonesia and not for the people of other countries to decide.
I am encouraged by what I see in relation to the political prisoners
but it's early days yet and whilst, on the basis of what has
been reported and on the basis of what has occurred on the surface,
it is better that political prisoners be treated in a liberal fashion
than in a harsh fashion. It would be premature to jump to too many
conclusions. We want to see more openness in Indonesia, we've
made that clear all along. We recognise that that's not going
to occur overnight. His prime responsibility is to restore stability
to Indonesia, to ensure that international respect for the management
of the Indonesian economy returns as soon as possible and along
the road I also hope that there is more openness, more freedom and
more capacity for people to speak their minds than there has been
in the past. I think we would all welcome that. Now whether it comes,
and at what pace it comes, is a matter for the Indonesian people.
But we will always be on the side of urging the Government of Indonesia
to open the place up, recognising that the culture there is different,
and also recognising that countries don't appreciate hectoring
from the sidelines. And one of the things I believe Australia has
been able to do is to quietly get its point of view across. You
always know in Indonesia where Australia stands in relation to something,
but at the same time retain the channels of communication with the
power authorities in Indonesia and the channels of communication
with the Indonesian Government. I think that's the right and
the most diplomatic way to handle it.
JOURNALIST:
That being so, nonetheless, is it time even given that the Information
Minister there now presided over the deaths of five Australian journalists
in East Timor. Is it time for an act of self-determination in Timor,
is it time for the Australian Government to go public?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we have said repeatedly and, indeed, the last time I was
in Indonesia, this subject was raised again that we want movement
by the Indonesians in relation to East Timor and it remains now
a major irritant to the rest of the world and legitimately so. And
it would obviously be to the increased reputation of the Indonesian
iously be to the increased reputation of the Indonesian
Government. And it would obviously be well received if there were
movements in that direction in East Timor.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, thanks for joining AM.
PRIME MINISTER:
Pleasure.
ENDS