E&OE....................................................................................................
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Neil.
MITCHELL:
Open Family plans to open a safe using house in Melbourne for
heroin addicts and is also looking at Cabramatta in Sydney. Do you
support that?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't. Although I have to say I know nothing of it
other than what I have read in the newspaper and seen briefly on
television. I notice that the Victorian Police Commissioner has
expressed some concern about it. It is ultimately a matter for the
State authorities to decide, that involves totally the operation
of State law. I think this whole debate will, I mean, if you spend
your whole time getting my reaction and Mr Kennett's reaction
and Mr Carr's reaction to each particular proposal without
giving all of us an opportunity over a period of time to develop,
or go on developing a considered response to the problem I think
we are in danger of trivialising the debate. Because too much public
focus in the last few weeks has been on whether you are for or against
a heroin trial. Now, I am against it. Mr Kennett and others are
for it but I think most people agree that whether you are for or
against it it is not the biggest argument in town about the drug
problem and I think it would be a great pity if because there are
differences between key political figures on some of these issues
they consumed most of the airplay on the debate rather than some
of the longer term issues. Now, I am not seeking to play down those
differences and....
MITCHELL:
But it has turned a bit political hasn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think you would not find in anything I have said anything
that is party political. I have not attacked Mr Carr.
MITCHELL:
No, but your Health Minister's belted Mr Kennett around the
ears.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think, well, I think Jeff is a bit rough on Michael. Michael
is an excellent Health Minister and to say that Michael is bashing
the interests of Victoria is a bit rich. I mean, he has got national
responsibility as the Health Minister and he is doing a first class
job. But look, I am really not interested in this side of the debate,
it's too important for that.
MITCHELL:
But there are all these issues coming up aren't there?
PRIME MINISTER:
Of course.
MITCHELL:
Safe using houses is one. And if it was to work and it would have
to be, it'd probably have to be national, you couldn't
just do it one or two suburbs, it'd have to be done properly.
Is it worth looking at?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I am not attracted to it. You have asked me that, I've
given you that answer. I mean, we could spend the next 20 minutes
talking about it but I am not.
MITCHELL:
Well, there are other ideas coming up, NSW DPP is talking about
treating addicts like diabetics.....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I have indicated a reluctance, to put it mildly in relation
to that. We have a view that you treat this at three levels. You
do put more resources into law enforcement and I don't make
any apology for that. No government can walk away from that responsibility
difficult though it is. You don't stop putting money into police
because burglary goes on.
MITCHELL:
Are you talking about Federal Police?
PRIME MINISTER:
I am talking about customs. I mean, our Tough on Drugs strategy
has $290 million invested in it and of that $290 million $165 million
goes towards Federal Police and customs and $125 million goes towards
education and rehabilitation. When you bear in mind that we have
the total customs responsibility and we have an international responsibility
in relation to the location of Federal Police in places like Thailand
that is an appropriate balance and people who say that I am only
worried about law enforcement are ignoring the fact that we are
putting what 40 per cent of all of the money we dedicate towards
this problem, we are putting that into education and rehabilitation.
I have never taken the view that you only respond to this problem
with law enforcement measures but I have always taken the view that
that is a very strong part of it. And all governments have to maintain
their surveillance, maintain their vigilance on that front but at
the same time you also have to put money into rehabilitation and
into education.
MITCHELL:
Are you putting enough in there.....I've been getting
a lot of calls that you can't get rehabilitation when they
need it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I guess the answer is that there is never enough. I mean,
we have put more money into this at a national level than any other
government. Now, that is not meant to be a political strike against
the former Federal Labor Government, it's just a statement
of fact. And I am happy to talk to the States and others about other
areas where we can help. We have obviously got to be satisfied that
the money goes to the right people. I am trying to involve all of
the volunteer agencies as much as possible.
MITCHELL:
So there could be more money if needed could there?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, in something like this the answer to that has to be yes
but it has to be more money from the States as well. I mean, if
there's an idea on the part of the States that because this
is a big national issue then the Commonwealth will pick up all of
the responsibility without asking the States to put more resources
into it well we'll expect them to play their part. Now equally,
I am not offering an open cheque but I am very concerned about this
issue. I don't pretend to have all of the answers, I do not
want to politicise it. I don't think there's anything
unhealthy in the fact that Mr Kennett and I might have a different
view on certain things. These are issues that defy the normal political
categorisation. We are all creatures of our own values, our attitudes
and our own experience and we all try to do our best to reach the
right conclusion. I don't think Mr Kennett's views on
this broad issue are very different from mine. We both hate it,
we are both trying to respond as best we can....
MITCHELL:
And I think everybody is frustrated, aren't they?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, of course they are.....
MITCHELL:
And I guess that's the point, I mean, the Premiers'
conference that you have got coming up, you suggested there'd
be new ideas put on the table. Can you give us any indication of
what ideas.....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we're still working on, we're developing some
further approaches and they are still in their formative stages
and we hope they will help. You have got to keep doing this. No
government on earth is going to solve this problem but you can make
a difference. But it's very important we don't trivialise
it.
MITCHELL:
I think the welfare groups and some of the other people are trying
to push the envelope and that's for the same reason.....
PRIME MINISTER:
I do understand that.
MITCHELL:
But is it time do you think to look at some of the envelope pushing
if you like? It seems a more dramatic propositions being put up
simply because of a sense of frustration?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I understand why people are putting them up and I can only
respond honestly to you that I'm not attracted to things like
heroin trials. You and I discussed this before and I've said
well you may disagree with me, some of your listeners may disagree
with me, some will agree with me. I haven't made a political
calculation on it. I'm just responding as best I can on the
merits of the debate. And based on having a bit of a look at what
has occurred overseas I don't know of one unambiguously successful
example overseas of a heroin trial. There's not one.
MITCHELL:
That's interesting you say you haven't made a political
calculation, it's been claimed by particularly people in Victoria
that you have...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that is just wrong.
MITCHELL:
....based on campaigns from sort of the New South Wales rednecks
that it is a bad thing.
PRIME MINISTER:
New South Wales rednecks? That's a new political category!
MITCHELL:
... Alan Jones or the Sydney Telegraph ...
PRIME MINISTER:
But hang on. I mean have you thought that on some issues some
of the views expressed through both of those organs may be right,
on other issues they are wrong.
MITCHELL:
Of course, ... you respond to them because of political pressure....
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I am not making....I don't think anybody could accuse
me of responding to political pressure on a lot of things. I mean
most people told me I ought to have met Gerry Adams and I didn't.
Most of the newspaper columnists said that I should meet him. I
think there's only been one editorial in the country supporting
me on that. So if you do a sort of calculation of political pressure....
but I just made up my mind on what was my evaluation of the situation.
I'm not....but look, drugs is a different issue than any
other and I'm not making a political calculation. I am trying
to arrive at conclusions in a conscientious way. I do not want to
have diversionary arguments with Mr Kennett or indeed any other
State Premier not for reasons of sort of political protection.
Look if Jeff Kennett and I had a blazing row on this it is not going
to make any great difference to either his political position or
mine. The important thing is our differences on this on one or two
issues are minor compared with our common commitment to work together
as closely as possible to try and solve the problem. And I say thing
to Mr Carr. I have not tried to make political capital out of this
issue in the context of the New South Wales election. I'll
attack Mr Carr on privatisation, and economic management and other
things where I don't think he's doing a good job. That's
a difference issue. This drugs issue is above and beyond that and
I want to try and keep playing it that way.
MITCHELL:
Is it true that there's some division within the drugs council,
council on drugs....that Brian Watters has been told to pull
his head in....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not saying that he's had to pull he's
had to pull his head in, but of course there...
MITCHELL:
I think he will.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, of course he won't and I hope he doesn't. When
it comes to an understanding of the human misery of drugs there
are none better in the country at giving voice to that understanding
than the people like Salvation Army officers. And the many other
people who work at the coal face, or sharp end to use the clichs.
Look Neil, I'm sure there are differences of opinion within
that council. Because that council reflects not only Commonwealth
appointments but also State appointments. It represents a range
of views and I would be quite astonished if that council didn't
reflect the range of views on this very difficult issue throughout
the whole community.
MITCHELL:
You're meeting with the FBI director today. Well it has to
be done obviously to see what ideas he's got but do you think
there is any direct relationships that can be tied between Australia
and the United States on this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think our societies have a lot in common. We have a lot
of dissimilarities as well. And I've never been somebody who
thinks you can transfer directly from the American experience to
Australia. But I can't see any harm in seeking his views, getting
a run down on their experience. I was going to meet him anyway.
We're going to talk about things other than drugs. And when
I said I wanted to talk him about the zero tolerance policing, anybody
who's interested in any kind of law and order or police issue
would naturally want to know a bit more about what's happened
in New York. Now whether you believe in zero tolerance or not, the
fact is that New York ten years ago had an horrific reputation,
an horrific reputation around the world, and everybody says that
it's a much safer and more congenial place. Now...
MITCHELL:
And the problems have moved elsewhere.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well some people say that, others say they haven't. Now surely
we should at least be interested in that. And I'm not going
to suddenly say what applies in New York is relevant to Melbourne
or Sydney but if you are broadly interested in the subject you ought
to at least view what they've got to say.
MITCHELL:
Well that's true but they also do arrest people who....
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, I'm not arguing, I've never argued for that. I
mean I certainly have no tolerance for drugs in schools. I have
no tolerance for drug pushers. And I think most Australians, whatever
their views are on other things would agree with that. And I don't
think there's really any argument about that across the political
divide. But you've got to be interested in an approach to law
enforcement that has cut crime by the rates that it has been cut
in a city like New York.
MITCHELL:
Do you think the courts are tough enough here?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I don't think you can give a broad brush response to
that. I mean as an individual I'm surprised sometimes at the
leniency of some sentences. On other occasions I'm not. It's
very, very difficult, very, very difficult issue - sentencing and
it is easy to get emotional about it and it's very issue to
take pot shots at the judiciary and I don't think from my position
I should do that.
MITCHELL:
Fair enough. If it's okay we'll take a couple of calls
on this issue and then we'll move on to other matters. Hello
Norm, go ahead please.
CALLER:
Yeah Mr Prime Minister, I'm a barrister who practices in
criminal law. Look I've got bills to pay and mortgages to meet
and stuff. And I mean if you legalise heroin how am I going to pay
my bills? I mean if I can't do burglary trials or drug importation
trials. If people don't commit crimes because of drugs....
PRIME MINISTER:
I'd be interested to know your surname so I can look it up
in the law almanac to see whether you are a barrister of the law.
CALLER:
I'm happy to tell you off the air. I'm not going to
tell you on air. I just think it would be terrible if you legalise
it because I wouldn't be able to pay my bills.
MITCHELL:
I think we'd call that sarcasm. We'll take the name
off air and pass it on if you like. Hello Anne, go ahead.
CALLER:
Hello. Look I'm at the moment, I'm very tired, I have
my daughter at home. She's been using heroin for over 12 years.
I can't get her into a medical detox to then for her
to move on into another detox, she needs to go to a therapeutic
community. I think that everybody is missing the point with all
of this. With the heroin addict and the polydrug user which my daughter
has been. If they can't shoot up heroin they'll shoot
up valium, alcohol, any drugs that they can get their hands on when
they are desperate and as ill as my daughter is. Using recreation
drugs leads to this dreadful dreadful illness. What I think needs
to happen, my daughter came home and I had very strict rules. Now
she can't enter my home if she is stoned or intoxicated because
that is the only way I can survive and deal with this.
MITCHELL:
What do you think needs to happen Anne?
CALLER:
Well what I think needs to happen is the minute they need help
I think that the government has to because this has been
an ongoing problem. We need an immediate medical detox, we need
beds. My daughter has Hepatitis C, I'm wearing disposable gloves,
I haven't slept for two days, I'm emptying buckets of
vomit. And I'm also you know endangering myself to becoming
a health risk. I don't know if I am making any sense.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes you are making a lot of sense. I sympathise with your position
I've talked to a lot of parents in similar positions.
And you're arguing as I understand it that there should be
more detoxification, more rehabilitation facilities so that those
who want to try and break the habit in medically appropriate and
medically supported circumstances can do so. I think you're
right. I think that's utterly...I can't argue with
argue with anything you've said. I don't think any human
being could. I feel very sorry for you.
MITCHELL:
Hello Michelle.
CALLER:
Yes good morning Neil. Good morning Mr Howard.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
CALLER:
Mr Howard, I'm a former narcotics agent with the disbanded
narcotics bureau which was disbanded 20 years ago. It was actually
formed in 1969 and disbanded 10 years later. But now we're
20 years past that down the track and we've just had a very
bad news week down here. The drug enforcement situation has deteriorated
under both Coalition and Labor governments. The functions of the
drug enforcement went in 1979 across to the Australian Federal Police
rather than being an autonomous - set up as it was...
MITCHELL:
Okay, Michelle, are you saying there should be a dedicated agency?
CALLER:
Absolutely.
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Michelle, I'm familiar with that argument because I think
as a former Minister responsible for the narcotics bureau through
being Business and Consumer Affairs Minister I remember the arguments
for and against. I think it's one of those arguments that will
go on forever. You can't separate drug seizures from customs
but you equally can't separate drug seizures from ordinary
police activity. And the big seizures that we've had in recent
months have been as a result of co-operation between the Federal
Police the customs and the State police. And there's really
no alternative in a federation such as Australia than to have co-operation
between State and Federal authorities and within federal agencies.
You will never get the States surrendering their police responsibility
in this area.
MITCHELL:
Are resources an issue here, though? We're talking about
resources...have the Federal Police got enough money?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we've certainly put an enormous additional amount of
money into them over the last 12, 18 months. And some of that money's
only just now beginning to flow through. Now, you can argue that
there wasn't enough in the past and I'm not going to argue
the toss about that and once again, I'm not going to try and
apportion blame but the past is the past. We have put a lot more
resources into it and if there's a need for further resources,
well they'll be made available. But you've got to be sensible
about this and there is some evidence already emerging that those
additional resources are starting to make a difference.
MITCHELL:
We'll take another quick call. Peter, go ahead please.
CALLER:
Hello, Mr Howard. Hello, Neil Mitchell.
MITCHELL:
Hi Peter.
CALLER:
I used to be a former [inaudible] in law enforcement police involved
in drug law enforcement. I just want to point in a direction
you're going to speak to the FBI because they police America.
It's a bit different to our country. Canada has the same problem
when the heroin floated in....specifically picked out by the
drug laws. And it's very similar to our society with a large
coast line and a population concentration in vast areas of wilderness.
And they were flooded, as we have been, in 1991 and it might be
an idea to have a look at how they've coped with things. We've
had it