E&OE....................................................................................................
PRIME MINISTER:
Any questions?
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we had a good and direct discussion about a number of things.
We talked about security arrangements for the Olympic Games. He won't
want me to go into any detail on that but it's obviously something
that's important to the Australian Government as well as to SOCOG
and we're well satisfied with arrangements in relation to that.
And then I had a discussion with him about crime and law enforcement
generally in the United States and, most particularly, about drug
issues.
There's no doubt from my discussion that there is very strong
support within the United States for the zero tolerance policing methods
that have been used in New York and a number of other cities. Contrary
to what has been claimed by many in Australia, what has been done
in cities like New York has not resulted, according to the Director
of the FBI, in the problem being moved to another part of the country.
He said that that is disproved by the statistics and he quite strongly
rejected that. I asked him whether there was any support of significance
within the United States for different approaches to the drug problem
such as heroin trials or so-called safe injecting processes. He said
there wasn't. He said there was very strong support for the programmes
that were being implemented in that country.
Now, I've made it plain in the past that I don't automatically
extrapolate American experience or American attitudes to Australia.
It's a question of listening to what other countries do. It's
a question of making your own judgements about what is suitable in
Australia. And it was on that basis that I spoke to him and I think
it would be absolutely ludicrous for somebody in my position, given
the concern that I have about this issue, not to take advantage of
the opportunity of talking to the Director of the FBI and to get first-hand
from him his own views. He believes that they have had very considerable
success over the last 10 to 15 years in reducing the drug problem.
He gave a very powerful, I thought, explanation as to why such things
as heroin trials were inadvisable when he said that it would send
completely the wrong signal to younger children, to younger people
and to children in that in the one sense you were asking them not
to take drugs and yet in the next sense you're in effect giving
it some kind of legitimacy in saying that there was some kind of government
safety net and government protection available if you did adopt the
habit.
Now, they were his views as expressed to me. I think it's been
a valuable opportunity to hear from somebody who heads probably the
best-known law enforcement agency in the world. The American experience
is not automatically relevant to Australia, it never is and it never
should be. But, equally, given the size of the country and the dimension
of the drug problem in that country, it's absolutely ludicrous
just to completely ignore the American experience. But it's like
all of the experiences that you hear of in relation to these issues,
you take them into account and then you make a value judgement of
your own.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he certainly didn't I didn't hear anything
this afternoon to suggest that my view was wrong, let me put it that
way, at its softest. But as I say, in the end you make your own judgements
according to the experience in your own country. But I said before
that I can't find any place in the world where a heroin trial
quote has "been a success".
JOURNALIST:
Did Judge Freeh make any comment about the future of Australia's
own opiate industry in Tasmania if Australia was to adopt any form
of a heroin trial?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, he didn't, he didn't.
JOURNALIST:
He didn't say anything about that at all.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, he didn't. He did canvass, in some detail, the steps that
are being taken by the United States to increase pressure within the
source countries and increase the policing effectiveness within source
countries. And I think that's a very important element, not only
for the Americans but also for us. One of the by-products of the increased
resources that we have put in here in Australia is that we have been
able to get more Australian Federal Police officers in the source
countries. Now, I understand that 98 per cent of the heroin that comes
into Australia comes from one source in Asia and the fact that we
have been able to get some additional officers into countries around
there and to build up in recent months to build up contacts and sources
of intelligence in that area that has been a particular benefit in
the efforts of our own law enforcement people in dealing with the
problem.
JOURNALIST:
Is that country you are referring to Burma or Thailand.
PRIME MINISTER:
The former.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible] what consideration have you given to...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I will have a look at that, yes. I mean, within reason all of
these things should be looked at.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I am having a look at a number of things at the present time.
I mean, it's very obvious that an important element of an effective
strategy is to have adequate resources available for the treatment
of people who wish to kick the habit. And there's nothing more
distressing in this whole debate than to be told by somebody that
their child or they themselves are trying to find treatment and they
can't get it because there's too great a demand for the
treatment or the detoxification process.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] are you proposing more federal funds?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we are looking at the whole thing. I am not going to, sort of,
on the run say we are going to do this or do that. We have said that
we're looking at a number of options and we will take some proposals
to the Premiers' conference. We have invested $290 million in
a four year programme of which $125 million is going towards education
and treatment and $165 million towards enforcement. Now, given our
responsibility for customs and our national responsibilities that
is not a bad balance. As is always the case you can always argue a
case for more resources into a particular area but the treatment part
of it is very important. The education part of it is very important
and so is the law enforcement part. You can't ignore any one
of those three areas, they are all very, very important elements of
the Government having an effective response and the very, very important
elements of the Government working together with the States to have
an effective response.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible].. zero tolerance in relation to young people....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, have you just arrived have you?
JOURNALIST:
No, I just thought you might be able to give some more detail.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he was a very, look, he was a very strong supporter of the zero
tolerance policing methods that have been adopted in the United States
both in relation to the impact they have had on reducing crime, the
quoted figures of where the murder rate in New York had fallen from
something in excess of 2,000 to less than 500. He completely repudiated
the proposition that all that meant was that the problem had been
shifted to another part of the United States. Now, they were his words,
they weren't mine because I asked him that. I said that a criticism
that had been made in Australia in recent days of what had occurred
in New York was that all that had happened was it had been shifted
somewhere else to New Jersey or somewhere else. Now, he said that's
not right. Now, you know, you can argue with him and....I beg your
pardon?
JOURNALIST:
Has that hardened your resolve?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it's not a question of a hardening my resolve. When I talked
about zero tolerance I have talked about...well, we have been through
all of this before and I am talking about having a very tough attitude
towards people who deal in drugs, we are talking about a very tough
attitude towards drugs in schools. We do have a zero tolerance approach
towards drugs in schools and I think all State education authorities
ought to and it's my understanding they do and I think it's
a highly desirable approach. Now, as far as policing is concerned
generally that is a separate issue. Now, I am not going to give public
lectures to the various State police forces about how they run things.
But naturally as somebody not only as Prime Minister but as a citizen,
somebody who's interested in a safe and secure community, I'm
naturally impressed when I see a city like New York cut its murder
rate from over 2000 to less than 500. I mean if you have more than
a passing interest you have to sort of ask the odd question and say
how did that come about.
JOURNALIST:
On a different matter, what influence did the letter from Mr Melrose's
father have on your decision not to meet with Gerry Adams?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I decided not to meet Gerry Adams before I new of Mr Melrose's
letter, or before I received it. But I was certainly reinforced in
that view when I read the letter which I did a few days ago.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] into with the letter?
PRIME MINISTER:
I beg your pardon.
JOURNALIST:
What sort of issues did he go into with the letter?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think you should ask him. I mean it's an intensely traumatic,
difficult, personal, private issue for that family, as it would be
for any of us in that situation. But my decision in relation to Mr
Adams was made some time ago and it was based on the very proper belief
that just because you tolerate the visit of somebody to your country
doesn't mean to say you endorse what he stands for or what he's
done. And I feel very sure that the decision I took in relation to
meeting him was absolutely correct. And I say that as somebody who's
followed the events in Northern Ireland very closely and as somebody
who's full of admiration for the contribution of people like
John Hume and David Trimble to the peace process. They are the people
who are most deserving of praise and esteem for what has been achieved
in Northern Ireland.
JOURNALIST:
What's his advice on Olympic security Mr Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we discussed it. I mean you wouldn't expect me to go into
the detail about.....no well I can't say anymore than that.
I mean look he obviously gave some general advice. I mean I have every
confidence in the security arrangements that are being made. I have
a lot of confidence in the Australian security agencies. He spoke
very warmly of the association between the FBI and our security agencies.
And I said that our security agencies were of a very high quality
and I had a lot of confidence in them and a lot of respect for them
as I do for our police. And I said before and I say again that I think
policing in any country is very difficult and the police are deserving
of a lot more understanding and support than they often get.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard [inaudible] cut quite substantially into the budgets of
law enforcement agencies in your first term at a time when heroin
was beginning....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not...I mean we can debate the impact and you know
what I've said before when I've been asked that question
about the quarantining of the impact of cuts that were made in 1996.
The undeniable fact now is that there are more resources available
for the fight against drugs at a national level than ever before in
Australia's history.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, did Judge Freeh say anything...did he say there were
any flaws in the current drug policy we have here?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he didn't but then it wasn't really his brief to sort
of run the ruler over it. I mean I didn't say, you know, what
do you think of our approach? I asked him questions about the approach
in the United States. I mean he wouldn't presume to get into
that anymore than I would presume if I were visiting the United States
to run the ruler over their approach to a particular thing. I asked
him particular questions about particular issues, and I've given
you a summary of his responses so far as they're pertinent to
the current debate in Australia. But it was a very interesting meeting
and I'm glad I met him.
[ends]