E&OE............
Ladies and Gentlemen, the retreat finished this afternoon and you have a
copy of the declaration that was issued out of it. There's a very strong
emphasis in that Declaration on the importance of improving access for all
countries in the forthcoming World Trade Organisation discussions in Seattle
and the generation of any new round, particularly greater access for developing
countries and that, of course, is very much what Australia wants. It remains
our very strong view that the forthcoming Ministerial meeting in Seattle
must produce a new round, where everything's on the table, agriculture as
well as industrial products and services, and we'll continue to push very
strongly for that between now and at the Ministerial meeting in Seattle.
The rest of the discussion today revolved around a number of, I guess, constitutional
things. There was a very lengthy discussion on Pakistan and there's a very
great level of concern about the military coup d'etat in that country and
the suspension of Pakistan from the Councils of the Commonwealth continues
with a monitoring of the situation by the CEMAG group, that is the Commonwealth
Ministerial Action Group, with a view to further steps being taken in relation
to Pakistan's membership of the Commonwealth if the situation does not alter.
I should also mention that Australia will become consequent upon Mr McKinnon's
election as Secretary-General, the Commonwealth of Australia will become
in the person of Mr Downer, a member of CEMAG. Mr Downer will replace Mr
McKinnon. It was also decided today that there would be a review - given
that it's 10 years since a similar review took place - of the workings of
the Commonwealth and Australia is going to be one of the members of the
group of nations that will be undertaking a review of the operations of
the Commonwealth.
There are, I think, ten members out of the total membership of the Commonwealth
on that review group and Australia along with countries from - reflecting
a proper geographical spread of the Commonwealth membership - will be on
that group.
The retreat, of course, provides as always at these meetings an opportunity
for, as well as the formal session, a number of bilateral discussions in
an informal atmosphere. I should mention that I had the opportunity of a
discussion with
President Mbeki about the progress that South Africa is making in its new
and improved dispensation and I expressed the view to him that considering
the enormous challenges that the country faces that a great deal of progress
is being made. I have to say that he impresses me as an extremely intelligent,
committed, able leader of this country and someone who is following very
effectively in the footsteps of Nelson Mandela. - necessarily a different
person, coming with different gifts and from a different vantage point,
but I found him to be a highly intelligent and effective chairman of the
group and given the enormous challenges that South Africa necessarily faces,
given her history, he presents, I think, a very reassuring presence not
only to his own country, but also to the rest of the world.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, would you claim the trade outcome as a win and what did
you have to do to get the States that were less keen on open trade to come
across on it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think the clinching argument for anybody on this is that it's all
about access and the only way in which poverty will be alleviated in any
country or any group of countries is through a number of steps, one of which
is to get the greatest amount of access for the products of that country
in the markets of the world. If globalisation is to mean anything to the
poor countries of the world, it must mean that those countries have greater
access for their products in the markets of the richer countries and it
seems to me to be elementary and basic that if you want to improve the living
standards of the least developed countries in the world, you must improve
access. No matter what else you do, and necessarily of course, the right
domestic economic policies have got to be followed and I found it very reassuring
to hear for example from the President of Uganda, a country that has gone
through incredible pain, both politically, socially and economically over
the last 20 years, speak eloquently at the conference of the importance
of private sector investment and of the tragedy of many of the Asian businessmen
and women being chased out of that country by Idi Amin and what grievous
damage the loss of entrepreneurial flair and skill did to the economy and
the social structure of that country and that was to me very reassuring
that there is such a stark recognition of the importance of the private
sector, the importance of capital investment, the importance of getting
ones domestic house in order. He made the point that in 1965 Uganda was
only that far behind South Korea as far as per capita GDP was concerned,
but in the 34 years that have gone by since then an absolute chasm has opened
between those two countries and he was candid and realistic enough to say
that was largely due to domestic mistakes that his country had made. And
what I guess I'm saying is to lift countries like Uganda and many of the
poorer and less developed nations of Africa and the rest of the Commonwealth,
you need two things - you need the right domestic policies and that is in
the control of the leaders of those countries, but you also need to give
them access. And I guess if the World Trade ministerial meeting cares at
all about the less developed countries they'll give them access.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, do you think that because of their relative lack of power
the developing nations do have more problems in terms of gaining market
access than a country like Australia and if so, are there concrete steps
that can be taken to assist them in their plight?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Jim, as you know everything's relative. We might have more clout than,
in terms of economic strength, than many other countries but that hasn't
bent the common agricultural policy as much as I would have liked it bent
over the last 20 or 30 years. But I think the advantage of a meeting like
this is to drive home to a country like Australia and also to the less developed
countries that are also like Australia wanting to export things like agricultural
produce that we have a common cause. And the Cairns group is, in another
context, is a manifestation of that and we do have a common cause.
JOURNALIST:
So, Mr Howard, isn't the problem less the developing countries and more
the European countries therefore what was Britain's attitude on the question
of more access and especially on agriculture?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, they didn't raise any objections. I didn't hear any objections from
Mr Blair.
JOURNALIST:
Are you hopeful then that Britain having put its name to this declaration
that Britain will work behind the scenes to convince Europe to open up the
trade barriers?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I am not saying that. I mean, I am an old campaigner when it comes
to access into the European Union. You have heard my remarks on that. But,
look, we got a declaration. I think it's good, I really do think it's a
good declaration. And if you can get a group of nations as broadly based
and as diverse as the Commonwealth countries including, you know, four or
five nations which by any measure are amongst the better off nations of
the world and that, of course, includes Australia, going right through to
some of the very poorest. If you can get them all agreeing on some principles
I hope that will help to make a difference. But the sharp end of it all,
the business end of it will be when we get to the ministerial meeting and
a lot, of course, will depend as it always does at these gatherings on the
determination of the United States and the attitude of the European Union
and also the attitude of the Japanese.
JOURNALIST:
So Mr Blair didn't make any contribution on this at all?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Mr Blair made.I mean, he can speak for himself but all I am saying
is that the declaration was not, sort of, rung out of anybody, the declaration
was quite formally supported by everybody.
JOURNALIST:
Does that mean the Commonwealth will now speak as one voice.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think it means that, it just means that at this particular meeting
the leaders of the 54, is it, members of the Commonwealth were willing to
put their name to some broad principles about trade and I think that is
a help. I mean, everything helps a bit in something like trying to get greater
access to world markets. It's been a long struggle, I don't expect everything
to be achieved at Seattle but it's very important that we keep the momentum
going.
JOURNALIST:
Were there any proposals for specific internal or intra Commonwealth trade?
PRIME MINISTER:
No.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, you foreshadowed an initiative of some sort at the end of
the retreat, are you in a position to tell us what it is?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'll be announcing tomorrow a number of measures in relation to our
financial contribution to a number of the Commonwealth agencies that we
are going to increase by 10 per cent a year our contribution to the Commonwealth
fund for technical development. We are also going to renew our three year
commitment to the fund that we established at the Edinburgh meeting and
we'll also be providing some additional financial support for the training
of people in trade negotiations which will be of particular value to some
of the less developed countries.
JOURNALIST:
And what sort of dollars are involved here?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think you are looking in relation to the first an increase of something
like $7.2 million to almost $10 million. And the second about $1.5 million
and the third a lesser sum than that, less than half a million.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, did President Mbeke take up your invitation to visit Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, my understanding is that it's, sort of, under active consideration.
I think there's some discussions going on about an appropriate time.
JOURNALIST:
Did you put it to him though?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I put it to him earlier.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, you mentioned the absence of Chief Anyaoku as perhaps a problem
for Australia in its window to Africa..
PRIME MINISTER:
Absence of.
JOURNALIST:
His departure as Commonwealth Secretary-General as being a problem for Australia
getting access to Africa.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't remember, when did I say that?
JOURNALIST:
Oh, you just indicated that having an African as Commonwealth Secretary-General.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't think I said that. I mean, if I did say that I shouldn't have
but I don't think I did. And I don't think I have said anything that was
meant to convey that. I mean, he has done a very good job. I think what
I was trying to say, Dennis, the other day was that one of the great advantages
of the Commonwealth is that it gives Australia a window into Africa that
we wouldn't otherwise have. My recollection is that that is what I said.
But I think the Chief has done a great job.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, why did the Government decide to impose the GST on premium
tickets to the Olympics?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, because the original basis of the GST rebate was that SOCOG had no
flexibility in relation to the pricing. I mean, the reason they came to
us and said we have got a problem with the GST is that they said they were
locked in internationally by the IOC, they had to charge a certain amount,
they had no capacity to absorb it. Now, what I have said to the Premier
of New South Wales is that we weren't told about the premium. See, when
we agreed to provide, what, $50 million. I mean, it's no small matter. We
weren't told about the premium tickets and clearly there's a capacity to
absorb the GST in relation to premiums. I mean, what I have said to the
Premier of New South Wales is that in relation to the ordinarily priced
tickets our commitment remains that there will be a GST rebate. But in relation
to the premium tickets we see no reason why it can't be recouped from the
people who buy the tickets. It seems to me to be an unreasonable imposition
on the rest of the Australian taxpayers. And can I just clear one other
thing up, this decision was taken before the referendum. I saw in a clipping.
JOURNALIST:
So you wrote to the Premier before the referendum?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the decision was taken. I forget when I was signed the letter. It
may have been the day before or the day of, I just don't know, but the decision
was taken. And any suggestion that there's some kind of payback in relation
to people raising the question of my opening the Olympic Games that is nonsense,
absolute nonsense. This decision was taken on a matter of principle. I mean,
we were misled.
JOURNALIST:
Why didn't you announce it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Why didn't I announce it? Well, I am trying to maintain, you know, a reasonable
cooperation with the New South Wales Government.
JOURNALIST:
What about claims that it's payback for the SOCOG ticket fiasco?
PRIME MINISTER:
Why would it be a payback? I mean, the fiasco, the difficulties that are
being encountered by SOCOG, I mean, that's not something that is specifically
directed at the Federal Government.
JOURNALIST:
You have been critical of the way SOCOG's handled it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think everybody has been, I mean, you can't not be critical of it.
For heaven's sake. It is a very unfortunate situation. But, Fleur, there's
a very simple principle involved. We were asked by SOCOG to rebate to them
the GST or to pick up, effectively pick up the cost of the GST so they wouldn't
be out of pocket. And the argument they used when they approached us was
that they were obliged by the International Olympic Committee to charge
a certain price and that they had no flexibility. We now find that in relation
to a significant number of tickets they have a hell of a lot of flexibility.
In those circumstances I can't for the life of me see why the rest of us
should carry the responsibility of the GST in relation to that segment of
the tickets for which they are charging a premium.
JOURNALIST:
Apparently the case is that it's going to cost, that these premium ticket
holders now can't be charged the extra so SOCOG is going to have to pick
up the tab.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, look, we are perfectly happy to talk to SOCOG. But the principle is,
and nobody should imply from that that we're changing our mind, I mean,
I don't know what.if they want to talk to us we'll be very happy to talk
to them.
JOURNALIST:
Would you be happy to meet some of the costs if they.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, look, no, no, I am not saying.no, we are not. Look, our position is
that we were misled.
JOURNALIST:
Isn't there a danger though that.or a possibility that the taxpayers get
hit again because if SOCOG has a shortfall it'll come back onto the taxpayers
of New South Wales?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but there has to be a point at which the people organising the Olympic
Games accept responsibility for prudent financial management and it's a
good start when you ask a Federal Government to relieve you of the burden
of the GST to tell them the full story. I mean, we are not happy that we
were not told the full story and, I mean, we have a responsibility to the
rest of the Australian community to ensure that where the GST can properly
apply, can properly apply and be properly collected from people then it
ought to be. I mean, we have no right in terms of our responsibility to
the rest of the Australian community to say, well, it doesn't matter what
price some people are paying for tickets even though we were told one thing
and another thing has happened we'll just forget about that.. I mean, there
has to be a point where the people who are organising this have got to accept
responsibility and it's not good enough, as far as I am concerned, to say,
oh well, look, there's nothing we can do about it, you know, we'll have
to hit the taxpayer again. I mean, I just don't accept that first blush.
If they want to talk to us well they can talk to Jackie Kelly or one of
my Ministers about it, or the Treasurer. But what I said to Mr Carr was
very simple. The basis of our commitment was that you, SOCOG, had no flexibility
because the International Olympic Committee required you to charge a certain
price and you had no flexibility. We now find, although we weren't told
of it at the time, that in relation to a chunk of tickets there's a lot
of flexibility. Now, I think we'd be a pretty negligent Federal Government
if we just said, oh, that doesn't matter.
JOURNALIST:
The decision, just to get this clear, the decision to inform the New South
Wales Government.
PRIME MINISTER:
That decision was taken.
JOURNALIST:
. that Cabinet.
PRIME MINISTER:
It was discussed at Cabinet and the decision was taken before the referendum.
Now, I can't remember the exact date the letter was signed, I think it may
have been.I think I may have signed it the day before. I saw some suggestion
in the paper that I signed it the day of, I don't think I signed it the
day.I don't remember signing any letters the day of the referendum.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think this is symptomatic of a wider pattern of bad behaviour and
deceptive behaviour by SOCOG..
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh look, I am not going to extrapolate in the general from the particular.
I am dealing with a very precise situation and I remain, as I have said
repeatedly before, as somebody who wants to see these Olympic Games be a
tremendous success. And that is in a sense one of the reasons I didn't make
a huge song and dance about it when I wrote to the Premier. And it's not
payback, it's in no way related to other matters. And my actions in relation
to other matters were designed to take any political heat out of the conduct
of the Games. But you are talking about $50 million and you are talking
about perceptions of fairness about the application of the GST.
JOURNALIST:
Why did you write the letter and not the Treasurer, I mean, it's obviously
a tax matter? What ,you were government to government leader or something?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you know, the normal method of communication between the Commonwealth
and the States is the Prime Minister to the Premier, that's the normal method
of.that's the generic method of communication and then it gets a bit more
specific, then others deal with some of the details. But that's the normal
way of doing it.
JOURNALIST:
On another SOCOG matter, Mr Howard what do you think of the treatment of
General McCaffrey?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he is a guest of Australia and he should be extended all courtesies.
And he should be, in my view, be given all the courtesies that are properly
due to a senior person in the American Administration. I don't know anything
other than the story that was in The Australian on Saturday
about a letter that Mr Coates, I think it is, has allegedly written. Now,
I don't.I haven't seen that letter but I think the man should be given all
courtesies. He's a guest.
JOURNALIST:
But you issued the invitation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, well, of course, I understand that. That's all the more reason why
he should be treated courteously.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, could.
PRIME MINISTER:
This is the very last one because you have got to feed haven't you?
JOURNALIST:
Could I just get your reaction to the release of James Peng, how much credit
does the Government take for his release?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I am very pleased that it's happened. We campaigned long and hard
in the framework of the human rights dialogue that we have established with
the Chinese Government. You may remember a couple of years ago we decided
to establish a human rights dialogue and framework for discussing particular
issues and this was one of them. And, I am pleased it's happened, I don't
know that I want to say much more than that. But I am glad that he is back
with his family and it does demonstrate that there is a lot of constructive
goodwill in the relationship between Australia and China recognising as
I always say when I talk about relationship that we approach a lot of things
from a different vantage point but it doesn't prevent us finding common
points of agreement on certain issues and agreeing on a framework to work
out some of our problems. Thank you.
[ends]