PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
26/07/1999
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
11132
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP RADIO INTERVIEW WITH ALAN JONES - 2UE SUBJECTS: Prime Minister's birthday; health system; Oakdale - workers' entitlements; business tax reform;

E&OE.............

JONES:

Prime Minister good morning.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good Morning Alan

JONES:

Happy birthday.

PRIME MINISTER:

Thank you, that's very kind of you.

JONES:

What does the Prime Minister do on his birthday?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I think, just what a lot of other people do on their birthdays,

they spend it with their family and that's what I intend to do. We'll

have a small family dinner tonight as a tradition not only in our

family but, I guess, millions of others around Australia because special

occasions are always things that you spend with the people who are

closest to you and.

JONES:

Do you think.sorry.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, and that's what I'll be doing. Apart from that it will be a relatively

uneventful day.

JONES:

Do you think your humble background may have redefined your attitude

towards public policy and, indeed, the attitude of the Liberal Party?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I guess my background, which is pretty typical of the background

of millions of Australians, has had some impact on the Liberal Party.

There's nothing elitist or exclusive about the Liberal Party. It is,

to use a popular expression of mine, very much a broad church. We

do represent all sections of the Australian community and long may

it be so because political parties are, if they are to be effective,

are expressions of community values and community attitudes. And if

we can express those values and attitudes in policies then we do good

things for the community.

JONES:

Just on that basis then, I mean, your mum and dad were not well off,

they were comfortable, not well off.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, my father was very hardworking.

JONES:

That's it. But see, your mother, they brought up four children and

the mother didn't work. Do we do enough for families today when it

seems almost impossible for them to survive with one bread winner?

PRIME MINISTER:

We are now doing more under our tax system and it will do even more

from July of next year but, I guess, we never do enough. The world,

mind you, has changed. In my mother's day virtually no women with

children worked. It was a different society. It is easier now to combine

family and work and I think the ideal policy is to give all men and

women an effective choice. Those who want one of the parents to be

at home, normally but not always the mother, full-time while kids

are young should be financially able to do so.

JONES:

They don't have that choice, do they?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, many of them don't, although some of the taxation changes we are

making at the moment will make it a little easier, a little easier

for them to exercise that choice. On the other hand, there are some

people who choose to combine the two roles. And it's not the for Government

to sort of sit in judgement and say which is right or which is wrong

but what it is the role of the Government to do is to provide the

families with the effective choice. And I think we're improving it,

although we still have a long way to go.

JONES:

But see, we had a basic wage which was fundamental to the industrial

wellbeing of our community over many, many years and it was designed

to provide for a husband and his wife and, at the time, three children.

And when that become eroded we then had to have child endowment to

compensate families for the fact that the basic wage didn't meet those

conditions. And at the time of your mum and dad and my mum and dad,

I mean, basically, while you mightn't have lived glamorously, there

was always food on the table and it was adequate for your survival.

That isn't the case today, is it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, it is the case for the great majority of people. I think what.

JONES:

They can get by, you think, on one income.

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh no, no, no.

JONES:

See, they can't. See, your family could.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, I'm not, I'm not, I mean, there is an increasing number of families

where both mother and father and work.

JONES:

Yeah, they have to.

PRIME MINISTER:

They do. Some of them do it out of choice because they feel they have

better fulfilment out of that and what it really gets back to, Alan,

is choice. Now, when you reflect on the past there are a lot of good

things about the past, there are also things about the past that I

think we've moved on from. And I always think in life and also in

setting public policy the best approach is to combine and preserve

the best things of the past but also recognising that in other areas

the world has got to change. And the world we are living in now continues

to change and you have got to get the right balance between..

JONES:

Sure. But if you are a young couple - and you have got three young

children and there's a couple of young blokes sitting around the studio

here now - to buy something - they're just married - to buy something

for $300,000 you'd struggle to get it for $300,000, but you are going

to need a deposit of $30,000. That's almost impossible for kids today,

young people 25 year olds, to actually save that deposit without both

of them going out to work.

PRIME MINISTER:

That is undoubtedly true and particularly so in some parts of Australia

such as Sydney, less typical [inaudible]. It varies, it does. But

that is undoubtedly true and in that sense the world is different.

JONES:

That puts a lot of pressure on marriage.

PRIME MINISTER:

It does. On the other hand there are opportunities that people have

now that an earlier generation never dreamt of. So there are pluses

and minuses have changed in evolution.

JONES:

Just on that under 30's, you were quoted at the weekend of saying

that the under 30's are more interested in outcomes than they are

in ideology. Do you think public debate though is still unfortunately

dominated by ideology? That is why we have opposition, for example,

to unfair dismissal laws. After two times being elected you still

haven't been able to get those proposals through, they are being beaten

by ideology rather than reality.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, Alan, I naturally agree with that statement because I think

it is silly that those laws have not been put through. But I do think

we are still.public debate is still too much about ideology rather

than practical outcomes. I do think younger people are interested

in what produces a good result rather than whether it conforms with

a particular ideology. Now, that is a sweeping generalisation and

like all generalisations there are plenty of exceptions.

JONES:

Well, can we take some exceptions because the outcome in the health

debate at the moment, you have got a very distinguished figure in

health, Professor Dwyer, saying his hospital, Prince of Wales, is

technically bankrupt. You have got very reputable people at Westmead

saying: we just can't survive. They are closing down beds every month.

So the outcome seems to me to be appalling and to many but we cling

to the ideology of Medicare.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, that's a fair question. I think the outcome in this country

although it is badly flawed is still a lot better than the outcome

in other countries around the world. I would rather, I have said it

before, but I would rather on a battler's wage get sick in Bankstown

than the Bronx. You'd be far.well, it's true, you'd be far better

looked after. Or for that matter, Birmingham. Because this country's

health system, for all the brick bats that are that are thrown at

it, does have certain strengths..

JONES:

But there are people in emergency wards who are getting no care.

PRIME MINISTER:

Alan, I do not deny that. My generalisation, I guess, is that it's

still a fundamentally sound system with a lot of weaknesses. Now,

the States say: let's have a Productivity Commission Inquiry. Well,

we've had one of those already into the Commonwealth area of responsibility

which is private health insurance. We are looking at that. I am a

bit sceptical.

JONES:

They are wanting us to go beyond that.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, they're mixed. Some of them do and some of them don't. Some

of them want a means test.

JONES:

So do we leave it as it is?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, I think you continue to change it but you keep the basic structure

which is a Medicare complemented by private health insurance. And

we have put.in the last year we have put $1.5 billion more resources

a year into private health insurance, we have promised to double health

and medical research in this country and we have also increased [inaudible]

by 17 per cent.

JONES:

You have got Professor Dwyer saying his hospital is bankrupt.

PRIME MINISTER:

Professor Dwyer I know and I respect him. I acknowledge that there

are many areas that need repair and change but you don't throw out

the whole system. I mean, this is a mistake we made a long time ago

when..

JONES:

We did.

PRIME MINISTER:

..We had a very good system and because there were a few gaps we threw

out the whole system and that was a mistake.

JONES:

And what we had was better than what we have got now.

PRIME MINISTER:

. but you can't go back to that. What you have to do is try and make

the present system better.

JONES:

What you can't go back to saying that basically if you could afford

your own health care you pay and public hospitals are for those in

need. I mean, that was a pretty simple system wasn't it?

PRIME MINISTER:

But one of the things that underpinned that system a generation ago

was the honoury system involving doctors. I don't hear doctors saying

they'll go back to that system. One of the things that underpinned

the less expensive delivery of health care a generation ago was the

lack of equal pay for women. Now, I am certainly not in favour of

that.

JONES:

But you had a guns' summit and a tax summit. Do you think we need

a health summit? I mean, this is critical stuff.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, I am not in favour of a health summit. I don't think summits are

the stuff of good decision making. I think what has to happen in the

health area is that people who are elected, that's the governments

of the States and the Commonwealth have to keep making decisions to

improve the system.

JONES:

But we have never spent so much money in our lives on health care

and the system in some parts is diabolical.

PRIME MINISTER:

We don't spend nearly as much as say the United States.

JONES:

Should we?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, we shouldn't because in the United States is an enormous amount

of wastage.

JONES:

But what do you say to the people who can't get into an emergency

ward today? I mean they are in diabolical straits and their ambulances

are being turned away today here in New South Wales, and they urgently

need care. What do we say to those people?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I think the first thing you say to them is that you recognise

that there's a problem and you look to the government that has the

responsibility to do something about it. Now we do have a division

of responsibility in health. We look after private health insurance,

the States look after public hospitals. Now we have done something

about private health insurance. We have increased the resources to

State governments. This is not...

JONES:

[inaudible] Bob Carr's increased expenditure for public hospitals

enormously.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, that's true. But I mean this is not a finger pointing exercise.

But you can't have a situation where every time there is a deficiency

found in one area you turn around and say we've got to dismantle the

whole system. That is ridiculous.

JONES:

There does seem to be people going into public hospitals that should

be paying an arm, and there's all those people say, if they then paid

that money could be turned back and invested into improving the system.

But if people going to doctors everyday for nothing when they should

be paying. Now Brian Howe, who wasn't sort of a raging conservative

let's say, he actually talked about a co-payment when you went to

the doctor. That was bowled over when Paul Keating said he'd unwind

it in order to get the leadership off Bob Hawke. Now if Brian Howe

can talk about a co-payment, surely it might be time for us embrace

it by now.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I'll come to the co-payment in a moment. On the question of a

means test for public hospitals, in order to collect a significant

amount of money out of that you would have to apply the means test

not to well off people, but to middle Australia. You don't collect

enough money in order to justify a means test unless you bring it

down to an income of about $45,000 for an individual.

JONES:

Well that's not on.

PRIME MINISTER:

No I know it's not on. But you see I make the point Alan that people

talk about a means test as though you can collect billions dollars

by charging well off people when they go into public hospitals.

JONES:

But they won't go into private health insurance if they can go into

the public hospital for nothing.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well you have the phenomenon now of some people who've got private

health insurance going into public hospitals and the reason they're

doing that is because of the gap. We are doing something about gaps.

JONES:

So is the system called Silver Cross but your Health Minister continues

to oppose, and I've written to you about that but..

PRIME MINISTER:

But of course Silver Cross as I understand it, and I don't have all

the details with me, as I understand it Silver Cross and groups like

it don't comply with all of the other conditions that other private

health insurance funds are obliged to comply with.

JONES:

But my understanding is that they do.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well..

JONES:

I'd be happy to talk to you.

PRIME MINISTER:

I will make another examination of it.

JONES:

I'd like you to.

PRIME MINISTER:

You've provoked me to do it.

JONES:

All right. Just on outcomes, 125 workers at Oakdale has not received

the payments of awards to which they're entitled, and indeed you've

got three Ministers - Nick Minchin, John Fahey and Peter Reith - refuse

to meet these blokes August 10. Now all those miners told me those

Ministers agreed to meet them in July, but then said oh look we can't,

we going to be away in July. Now when we're talking about outcomes

there are 200 companies in this country in the last two years have

done just the same thing to their workforce. How do we improve those

outcomes?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well that issue was discussed at our Cabinet meeting last week and

there's some further work being done on it, and it will be discussed

again in the very very near future and I don't want to say anymore

[inaudible].

JONES:

Will they get their money?

PRIME MINISTER:

All I can say at this stage is that we are looking at a number of

options, and I don't want to unduly raise expectations, but I'm very

sensitive and I've said to you and others before to that particular

issue and I hope that [inaudible] similar issues can be resolved in

a fair manner, and one that pays regard to the needs of small businesses

in particular not to have to tie up money which is otherwise used

in a day to day sense now for the operations of those businesses.

JONES:

Yeah. Well you see they've done the fair days work but they haven't

got the fair days pay.

PRIME MINISTER:

No.

JONES:

Isn't an argument though Prime Minister to make the payments that

have to be made by small businesses, I understand your point, shouldn't

they be tax deductible at the time at which they are set aside, rather

than at the time in which they are paid to the workforce. That seems

to be the problem. I mean if the small businessman could get tax deductibility

immediately he makes the provision rather than when he actually pa

11132