E&OE....................................................................................................
JONES:
Australia's number one cricket supporter is on the line, Prime
Minister John Howard. Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
JONES:
What about that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Fantastic. Can I say, I think the real sort of turning point for the
team and the thing that made last night possible in the first instance
and really sets us up to win on Sunday was Steve Waugh's century
in the encounter last weekend against South Africa.
JONES:
Absolutely.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think that is the best one-day innings I have seen not only for
the circumstances in which he batted but also the pressure that he
was under. And I'd like to join I'm sure millions of other
Australians in congratulating the team, in wishing them luck for Sunday.
I don't think everybody will be at work first thing on Monday
morning and I think everybody will understand that. But this has been
an extraordinary series and for sheer excitement you couldn't
beat last night. And you couldn't, I think, beat you couldn't
but feel enormous admiration for our team because they were being
bucketed, they were being written off and to win all of those games
in a row and only a couple of weeks ago people were talking
about them being out of the final six and certainly not in the semi-final.
JONES:
When Herschelle Gibbs dropped that catch, Steven said to him, because
they'd been sledging one another, Steven said to him, you've
just dropped the World Cup.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I agreed with what he just said a moment ago that the ball that
bowled Gibbs last night was a fantastic ball and I think psychologically
that would have had an enormous impact on the result last night.
JONES:
So the Prime Minister's feeling a bit dusty, he's been up
all night too.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm very tired.
JONES:
Very tired. Well look, I'm going to tire you a little bit more
because now to the tough stuff. It is a quadrella now in Industrial
Relations Cobar last year, Woodland Lawn, Austel Pacific last
year, now Oakdale. How many more companies will go under leaving employees
in the lurch before someone tells employers this can't happen?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I can't answer that but I can say that we are already discussing
with the States changes with to the Corporations Law to deal with
companies that arrange their affairs to defeat their obligations to
employees. We are, in relation to the latest one, we are asking the
Securities Commission to investigate whether there has been a breach
of the securities law. I don't allege that there has but I'm
asking, the Government is asking that that be investigated. And you
will remember that in relation to Cobar we ended recovering a great
bulk of the money that was owing to the men as a result of action
being taken by the Securities Commission to chase the company. And,
I mean, you are right in saying that in relation to Cobar they were
left in the lurch at the beginning but as a result of action taken
by the Government 85 to 90 per cent of the money outstanding to them
was recovered. And I wouldn't want your listeners to think that
that didn't occur.
JONES:
But I just want to make a point to you, because the CFMEU, the union,
and often they are quite militant people but on this one...
PRIME MINISTER:
[Inaudible]
JONES:
Quite, well let me just say to you, they've been campaigning
for some time to develop a structure where worker entitlements are
secure in the event of the collapse of a business and they say that
coal miners already enjoy protection of their long-service leave entitlements
by having a central fund...
PRIME MINISTER:
They do.
JONES:
...to which all coal companies are required to make a contribution.
Now, why wouldn't such a fund be available so that no workers'
entitlements will be lost or all workers' entitlements are protected?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we are going to discuss the feasibility of establishing that
sort of thing on a wider scale.
JONES:
But don't you reckon you're being a bit slow on this, I
mean...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you can criticise. I mean, I mean I am very sympathetic to what
has happened to these men.
JONES:
But that won't pay the bills, will it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, it won't pay the bills. I accept that. And one of the
things that we're seeking to do is to investigate whether we
have any, there are any avenues of pursuit against the company. And
I'm not saying there are because...
JONES:
The union tell me that Peter Reith's Department is trying to
dismantle the central long-service leave fund.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look, can I just say, in relation to that, we're not going
to do things that are going to remove existing security for workers
in relation to their basic entitlements. Now, as to the ultimate impact
of other changes to the industrial relations law there, of course,
is a long running debate between the union movement and the Government
and it's probably not productive to go into that now...
JONES:
No, but I mean, isn't this the business about the difference
between the workers and the employer at the end of the day is that
the employer makes a big quid, he can drive the Rolls Royce and have
the boat on the harbour and the holiday home in the south of France.
Now, he can't then say...
PRIME MINISTER:
They're not all [inaudible]
JONES:
No, I know they don't but what I'm saying to you, if you'll
just bear with me, they are now saying that, oh well, we inherited
this problem and this was all part of the collapse of Clutha, all
those years ago, the Clutha Group in February 1995 and the subsequent
funding of a new $2 company to operate the Oakdale mine using employee
entitlements and the employees knew about all this. I mean, that's
surely not an employer defence, is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think that's an employer defence but I also
don't think it's a correct categorisation of every one of
these situations to talk about Rolls Royce's and the south of
France. I mean, many...
JONES:
Well, we're speaking metaphorically but I'm simply saying
that's being an owner and employer.
PRIME MINISTER:
But it also conveys an image that whenever a business goes broke the
proprietor of the business waltzes away with the money. I mean...
JONES:
Well, this bloke owns other coal mines [inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
That is one of the reasons why we are asking the Securities Commission
to have a look at the matter. I make no judgements. And I remind you
again, in relation to the Cobar situation, that as a result of action
taken it was possible to recover a lot of the money that was owing
to the men. Now, I'm not saying that is going to be duplicated
in this case.
JONES:
But see, if you could have a central fund into which long-service
leave entitlements are paid, why can't you have a central fund
into which annual leave's paid and severance pay is paid and
retirement pay is paid? It's so simple.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that is being examined at the present time. Now, there are pluses
and minuses. I know at the moment it sounds all plus but the more
money that small businesses are not able to invest in the day-to-day
running of their businesses the lesser will be their operations.
JONES:
Oh yes, but it's not their money. I mean, your industrial laws,
that's employee money.
PRIME MINISTER:
I know but the point I'm making, Alan, is that in reality because
of cashflow needs many companies, many firms actually use this money
for the day-to-day operations of their business...
JONES:
Shouldn't, shouldn't employ people if you can't pay
them.
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand, I understand that but you often, quite rightly, argue
the case of business and commercial reality, I'm saying to you
that the business and commercial reality of many small firms is that
they need this cash for their day-to-day operations.
JONES:
But part of employing someone and going into business is knowing that
you must pay the wage plus.
PRIME MINISTER:
As long as you understand, and those who support such an approach
understand, that if you apply that kind of system in relation to all
of those entitlements you will have less money for small business
to invest in its operations.
JONES:
People listening to you would say it is not their money to invest.
PRIME MINISTER:
No...
JONES:
They are holding it in trust to the workers.
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand that but I would say to them in reply, that is correct
but in reality what happens, because of the cashflow needs of small
businesses, they effectively use that in their day-to-day operations.
JONES:
So I can't afford to pay my electricity bill so I'll go
and take John Howard's weekly pay and that will help me pay the
electricity bill...
PRIME MINISTER:
We're not talking about weekly pay here because...
JONES:
Well, the blokes would be better off taking it in one lump than having
all these appropriations put aside.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I mean, look Alan, I'm not disagreeing I mean, you
are arguing a very strong case but I am pointing out to you the consequences
of it and that is a judgement that we will have to make and the community
will have to make.
JONES:
So what do we say to these miners right now, Prime Minister of Australia,
just have a good weekend?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't say that. I don't say that. I'd point out
to them that we are investigating the behaviour of the company. We've
asked the Securities Commission and I'm not making a judgement
that the company's done anything wrong at this stage. I don't
know enough of the circumstances. And as has happened in other cases
it could well be that as a consequence of that investigation something
will occur.
JONES:
When will the miners know?
PRIME MINISTER:
I can't tell you that. I may be able to tell you that next time.
JONES:
Is this urgent?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's certainly urgent...
JONES:
While these people are being sacked you are having a dogfight in the
Parliament over Warren Entsch. I'm not suggesting it's of
your making but can you understand how the public see the misplaced
priorities...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I couldn't agree with you more on that. I mean, while the
Labor Party was raising Warren Entsch I was trying to get a decent
deal for Australia's lamb exporters by talking to President Clinton.
I mean, I couldn't agree with you more. That was a complete waste
of time. The man's not done anything dishonest. He's not
taken a penny. He's not taken the public down. He's not
doing anything wrong. He didn't try and use his position to win
that contract. I mean, it's an absolute load of nonsense.
JONES:
And can I also just say to you, and I know that you and Jenny Shipley
were doing excellent work in relation to the lamb issue...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I hope so, I'm not sure yet.
JONES:
Well, you don't know. I mean, they are putting...
PRIME MINISTER:
We don't know the outcome yet.
JONES:
Well, they are putting American business and American farmers first
and perhaps we have to think some time down the future about doing
that as well. But could I even say something to you, that as all this
was going on are you aware, and I'm sure you're not, that
there could be up to 20,000 homes in hailstorm damaged Sydney that
will not have a roof over their heads before Christmas and when they
get a roof over them they will not then have a house underneath them
because what is underneath is unliveable? I'm just wondering
if the Prime Minister of Australia is aware of the appalling trauma
that these people are suffering and no one, not a person from Federal
Government, not a person from the New South Wales Government, has
actually stepped foot inside one of these homes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's not right, I have.
JONES:
How, you couldn't possibly have set foot inside those homes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Alan, I'm sorry, I mean, I'm not making a big deal
of it but I actually visited the area the weekend after it occurred.
I know the area very well.
JONES:
Do you know these people won't have a home to live in until after
Christmas?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah I know, but I mean, let's just...
JONES:
Okay, well you've been there.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not saying I've got the answer to every one of the nation's
problems. But I mean, don't say to me that I haven't
nobody's set foot and the Prime Minister has. I mean, I'm
not saying that's the answer...
JONES:
Then I can't believe you wouldn't have been...
PRIME MINISTER:
[Inaudible]...in proportion.
JONES:
I can't believe you wouldn't have been moved.
PRIME MINISTER:
I was and I was also...
JONES:
To do what?
PRIME MINISTER:
I was also tremendously, I was impressed by the, as always in these
situations, by the resilience and co-operative spirit of the people
that were involved.
JONES:
But they don't have a house, can you believe this, they don't
have a house until after Christmas? They won't have a roof until
Christmas if they're lucky. Now, under the roof there's
no home. These are Australians. This is not Kosovo or Macedonia.
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand that Alan but I can't, I mean, no individual in
public office is responsible for natural disasters but what we are
responsible for...
JONES:
For the response.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the response and I'm not trying to evade our responsibilities
but the response is primarily at a State level as you know.
We offered the resources of the army from the very beginning and they
weren't taken up. And I'm not trying to score a political
point on that but I have to say in defence of the Government that
we were willing to do that. And all of the ordinary natural disaster
relief arrangements that come into operation on an occasion like this
were available and in operation. I am very much aware of the difficulty
in which those people are living. I've spoken to people who've
lived in that area. I'm very familiar with that area and as I
said earlier, I've visited it and I'm personally very conscious...
JONES:
That's the rhetoric, where's the action? What are we doing,
what are we doing?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, in the great bulk of cases, as I am told, insurance claims are
being processed. There are some where are there are disputes and some
of those disputes arise from the fact that some people elected not
to take out insurance.