E&0E................................................
KELLY:
Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
KELLY:
Can we start with your Government's call to stand Nick Bolkus
down while he is being investigated by the Australian Federal Police.
Yesterday Nick Bolkus revealed he was told by the Federal Police
he is no longer under investigation. Were you aware of that?
PRIME MINISTER:
We are asking that he be stood down because he deliberately divulged
the contents of confidential affidavits which had the effect of
prejudicing the attempt to recover Christopher Skase's ill-gotten
gain. I mean, we want him to go because he should never have done
that, I mean that was the most reckless, irresponsible, cheap, tawdry
thing for him to have done. That's why we want him to go.
KELLY:
Earlier in the week though the questions were all in the context
of his being investigated by the Federal Police.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they were certainly were in the context yesterday of him going
because he had no business divulging the contents of a confidential
affidavit and the fact that he told the press that, you know, this
is all off the record and I mustn't be doing it was an indication
of his guilty state of mind. I mean he has been caught red-handed
doing something very wrong, indeed reprehensible, for somebody who
would be the Attorney General of the Commonwealth and that is why
he should go and most particularly why Mr Beazley should have the
courage to get rid of him.
KELLY:
Well Nick Bolkus says there were plenty of copies of these affidavits
floating around in the hands of the press and there were plenty
of articles around to show that. The Federal Police..
PRIME MINISTER:
That doesn't excuse it though. Do you mean to say if a libellous
document comes into your hands and it also comes into my hands I
can excuse the libel when I publish it by saying, oh Fran Kelly
already had a copy of it. That is no excuse. That is the most pathetic
excuse of the whole argument, I mean he did the deed. The fact that
copies may have been in the hands of journalists does not excuse
him as the alternative first law officer for what he did.
KELLY:
Ok, well so the Federal Police say the investigation into the leaking
of the Skase court documents, which as you say, were obviously confidential,
is continuing. If it is not Senator Bolkus they are looking at,
can you guarantee that it is not someone in a Government Minister's
office guilty of the leak in the first place which spurred the first
press article with all the details.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have been assured by Senator Vanstone and I believe her,
that it was not her or her office and I have also been told that
the journalist who broke the story has indicated to anybody who
cares to ask that the story did not come from Amanda Vanstone's
office or from Amanda Vanstone.
KELLY:
It is necessarily, I mean you are running very hard on this. Certainly
the Government has taken it very hard. To run a censure motion against
a Senator in the House of Representatives is a very unusual thing.
PRIME MINISTER:
But it is a very serious matter.
KELLY:
Is it also a signal that this attack is a vehicle for you to have
a big go at Kim Beazley's leadership credentials. You have
been running pretty hard on that...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we have been asking the Australian public to look at what
Mr Beazley stands for. I mean he stands for higher interest rates,
he stands for putting the deficit back into the region of $10.5
billion that we inherited when we came to government. I think it
is legitimate, as you enter an election year, for the public to
be aware of what the alternative government stands for. Now on this
particular issue, we weren't anticipating it necessarily arising
this week, but you deal with issues as they come along. But certainly,
in the lead up to the election and there is going to be an election
in the next 12 months, we all know that...
KELLY:
We'll come to that.
PRIME MINISTER:
It is only fair and proper that the public see what both sides
of politics stand for. That's the nature of the contest and
that's the nature of the choice the public has to make.
KELLY:
Well, let's look at some other issues that have arisen this
week. You started the year with the resignation of your Speaker,
Bob Halverson. It was unexpected. Why did Bob Halverson tell you,
why did he say he was quitting?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, if you want to know more about Bob's motive, you should
talk to him. He has made a statement. I indicated my gratitude for
what he had done as a Liberal Party colleague, as a Chief Opposition
Whip and as a Speaker and I said that I hope because of his ability,
perhaps at some stage in the future his services might be available
in some other way for the country.
KELLY:
High Commissioner to London, perhaps?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look Fran, what I said is what I said. What he said is what he
said. I have got nothing more to say.
KELLY:
There have been media reports that he has told colleagues he had
lost all respect for you and that is why he was standing down. Did
he say anything like that or is it...
PRIME MINISTER:
I am not going to canvass what was in the conversation. He made
a statement and that statement stands and I have given a response
and that's it.
KELLY:
Did you stand by your election policy to move towards a genuinely
independent Speaker in the House of Reps and, if so, what evidence
is there to suggest that you have moved towards that at all.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, to start with, what I wanted to do was to make parliament
more accountable. Now I have done two quite dramatic things. To
start with, unlike Paul Keating, I turn up to every Question Time,
unlike Paul Keating I allow 20 questions a day. You have to go back
25 years to find a situation where the government of the day allows
20 questions a day. We are an infinitely more accountable executive
to the parliament.
KELLY:
That's true but you did make specific promises about the role
of the Speaker. You did, in fact, refer to the Westminster system
of an independent Speaker.
PRIME MINISTER:
The Speaker has had an enormous independence. Enormous independence.
KELLY:
What about reports that Government Ministers have....
PRIME MINISTER:
You keep talking about reports. You keep talking about reports
Fran.
KELLY:
You deny that Government Ministers have...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I'll tell you what, I believe that our behaviour was
proper in all ways, entirely proper. There is nothing improper about
a government, a Minister from time to time in the argument and cut
and thrust of parliament disagreeing with or putting a contrary
view to a Speaker's ruling. There is nothing wrong with that,
that happens all the time. I can remember Fraser doing that. I can
remember Whitlam doing that. I can remember Hawke doing it and I
can remember Keating doing it. There is nothing unusual about that.
KELLY:
Let's turn to a major reform of your Government, the $1.7
billion shake-up of the CES job placement agencies. Are you confident
your new system can't be and isn't being rorted?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look Fran there are literally hundreds of companies that have won
contracts. They were won as a result of an arms length tender process.
See the Labor Party has got a bit of a dilemma on this, they have
got to make up their mind. In relation to that Natural Heritage
Trust they say Ministers shouldn't be involved but in relation
to the job placement system they say Ministers should be involved.
Now what we did with the job placement was to say: right we will
give it to the department, the Minister will stay away from it,
we'll let an independent tender process run and now when a
few people who have missed out start complaining and alleging rorts,
the Labor Party is saying: oh Kim, you have got to intervene and
overturn that decision.
KELLY:
Ok, well let's look at that...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no but I just. What is really happening here Fran, is you have
got a completely new system. It's an exciting system. Three
to four times as many job placement points of reference than under
the old system. This is, we are trail blazing the world with this
new system and it's obviously got to be given an opportunity
to work. It comes into operation on the first of May. It is an attempt
to focus on better outcomes for the unemployed and naturally some
of those people who have had contracts of various sorts, who have
missed out in the tender process are going to be unhappy. Now, I
understand that but I have to say, in defence of the Government,
we had an independent system, we had it checked by probity experts,
they all gave it a big tick. Now if people have got complaints then
there is a procedure for handling those complaints but we played
by the book on this.
KELLY:
Well that's true but had that....
PRIME MINISTER:
And that's what really matters.
KELLY:
Has that thrown up some problems? I mean the example we are hearing
of in Lakemba, the man being awarded a million dollar contract,
no office, no phone, no desk, no typewriter and now talk he is going
to sub-contract virtually out all the work. Is that a teething problem
or is it something you are concerned about and are asking your Minister
to have a close look at?
PRIME MINISTER:
Fran, you can't have it both ways. You either have an independent
tender process..
KELLY:
But it has got to work.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well hang on, it is. So don't say it is not. It is. I mean
this is the point. We decided to have an arms length system and
the fact that you talk about that man in Lakemba, well the system
doesn't come into operation until the first of May. He complied
with all of the conditions and the judgement was made, not by David
Kemp, not by John Howard, not by a member of the Government, it
was made by an independent tender process. Now what you are really
saying and what the critics are saying is that independent tender
process was in some way wrong or corrupt. Now I think that is a
very dangerous allegation to make. It is unfair and you have got
to substantiate it before you pursue it.
KELLY:
Prime Minister, yesterday you met with Tasmanian Independent, Brian
Harradine. You promised him your tax package, when it is revealed,
will provide some special measures to assist families with children,
financially. What measures do you have in mind? What did you promise
Brian Harradine?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I didn't go into any particularity but I did repeat to
him and I repeat now that when we restructure the tax system, families,
dependent children, will be big winners. I made that plain in August
of last year when I announced tax reform, we gave families a lot
of help through the family tax initiative and it has long been one
of my policy goals in public life to improve the tax system to give
greater recognition to Australian parents who have the cost and
the responsibility of raising children. I believe our present tax
system is still too insensitive, far too insensitive to the cost
involved in raising children. And that tax position of families
has steadily declined over the years and I will want to see in that
tax reform package Australian families get an even better deal than
what they have so far received under this Government. They have
done very well under this Government but I want to go further and
that's basically what I told Brian Harradine.
KELLY:
And what's the chances of families seeing your tax package
before the budget comes down in May?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the tax package will come out well before the election so
people can make a judgement. Beyond that I am not going to talk
about timing.
KELLY:
Prime Minister, this week there has been a lot of economic news
which included a trade report that said employment growth will slow
later this year because of the Asia situation.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no the rate of increase will slow. It didn't say there
would be an absolute downturn.
KELLY:
All right the rate of increase will slow.
PRIME MINISTER:
It will still go up but it is just that it won't go up quite
so sharply.
KELLY:
You told your Party room this week that the election will be when
the timing is right. There is obviously a lot of speculation about
election timing. I guess that means when you can win, can you win
with the employment rate dropping and presumably unemployment going
up?
PRIME MINISTER:
Fran, I am not going to spend the next nine,10,11,12 months speculating
about whether we can or can't win. Let me say right here and
now, I don't take the public for granted, I have got to run
very hard to win the next election. We live in volatile political
times. I owe the Australian people a conscientious, hard working,
committed performance as Prime Minister this year, which I intend
to deliver and I have begun to deliver. I also promised the Australian
people that we will be exposing the alternative. We will be reminding
them that that cut in their interest rates which is worth a $100
a week pay rise will be at risk if Labor wins because of their high
deficit policy. We'll be drawing their attention to a lack
of an alternative economic strategy, their desire to end our attempts
to reform the waterfront, their indifference to tax reform, their
desire to keep yesterday's taxation system because they don't
believe in reform.
KELLY:
Prime Minister if I can ask you finally about image, The Bulletin
reported this week that John Singleton, the advertising agent,
told someone, your side, that if he was running Labor's campaign,
which he is not, it would be Kim Beazley good bloke, John Howard
mean so-and-so. Is that why you are targeting Kim Beazley's
image so hard this first week back because you agree with John Singleton
that Kim Beazley's image is positive with the voters right
now.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I haven't read that article and I don't know that
I have found myself in agreement with Labor's erstwhile advertising
campaign manager ever.
KELLY:
So you are not concerned about your image perhaps being John Howard
mean so-and -so...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I tell you Fran I am not going to spend the next eight, nine,
10,11,12 months analysing the analysis. A Prime Minister or an Opposition
Leader shouldn't do that. He or she should be talking about
issues that are relevant to the Australian public. What the Australian
public wants to know is about our record. They will be reminded
that we've reduced interest rates by record amounts. We have
converted a deficit of $10.5 in two years into a surplus, that we
now have had jobs growth of 145,000 over the last five months.
KELLY:
But how do you think they see you, Prime Minister, Australian voters?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that doesn't matter. I will find that out at the election
won't I?
KELLY:
Ok, so you are not troubled but your harsh budget cuts and some
of those measures have made people look at you as, in a negative
light, as a mean...
PRIME MINISTER:
Fran, I think that most of the Australian community, in the light
of what has happened in Asia, are applauding the fact that the Government
had the courage to turn Mr Beazley's concealed deficit of $10.5
billion into a surplus. It's reduced our interest rates, it's
protected against the worst of the Asian downturn, it has given
us the fastest growing economy just about in the Western world and
for the homebuyer it has been the equivalent of a $100 a week wage
rise. Now that is not a bad package in two years. I don't think
the Australian public is unhappy with that. I think they, now, in
retrospect, admire the courage of a government that was willing
to do what we did.
KELLY:
It sounds like we are going to hear that list of claims for a long
time between now and the election whenever that is. Prime Minister
thank you very much.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
[Ends]