E&OE................................................................................................
CORDEAUX:
Good morning sir.
PRIME MINISTER:
How are you Jeremy. Nice to be with you again.
CORDEAUX:
What is this business about you taking to the air on New Year's
Eve to settle us all down about the millenium bug? Are you serious?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well somebody asked me a question. I got an invitation from Richard
Alston would I do so. And I answered affirmatively. I don't know
whether he's got anything in mind. I don't have any particular
plan but obviously....let me put it this way, I certainly won't
be making plans to avoid travelling on New Year's Eve although
normally I don't. I normally spend New Year's Eve with my
family. But I did indicate that if I were invited I would do so.
CORDEAUX:
I wouldn't have thought it a wise career move.
PRIME MINISTER:
Gee, you don't have much faith in the system.
CORDEAUX:
I guess that's true. You say that this referendum on the republic
might not be the last say. Why? Why not just have the referendum.
It won't succeed and then we can put all this nonsense to bed.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Jeremy, you know my position. I'm not in favour of change
but I was simply saying yesterday what was an obvious truth and that
is there's nothing to stop, if one referendum fails, there's
nothing to stop another one being put some time in the future. I'm
not saying that I'm advocating it. I'm not saying that I've
got any plan in mind to have a series of referendums. I was merely
answering a question. There is nothing to stop another referendum
being held if this one doesn't produce a result which a majority
of Australians some time in the future want. I mean it's all
I'm saying because under our Constitution you can have referenda
as often as you like. But it is the case that Australians don't
like having too many referenda and if this one is defeated my anticipation
is that it will be some years before another one is held but there's
nothing to stop another one being held. But equally it may not be
held for some time in the future. I think too much has been made of
what I said. I was merely stating the Constitutional position. Unfortunately
anything that I say on this issue is seized upon by those who have
an opposite view than I have on the Constitution as some kind of dark
plot to influence the result. Now everybody knows my position. I will
be voting no' in November, and I will be voting yes'
in favour of the new preamble which I began discussing yesterday with
Les Murray, Australia's most eminent poet. Now that's my
position. Everybody knows it and people shouldn't try and read
something sinister into what I said yesterday. If people want a republic
according to the model put forward by the convention they should vote
yes' in November. If they either don't want a republic
or they don't want a republic in that form well presumably they
will vote no'. If the referendum is carried we'll
become a republic on the 1st of January in the year 2001,
the centenary of federation, and that is an entirely appropriate date.
If there is a no' vote well as far as I'm concerned
it's off the agenda for some time. I wouldn't be seeking
to bring it back in the foreseeable future but somebody else in the
foreseeable future may. That's the point I was simply making
and there's nothing strange about that. And people should not
read some kind of sinister, devious, machiavellian plot on my part
into it.
CORDEAUX:
Well as you've steadfastly refused and I think you're right,
to say sorry. Now I see this morning that there is some talk about
a declaration of reconciliation which means we would profoundly regret
injustices of the past if we got an apology or we got forgiveness
from Aboriginal people. Is this up and running or....?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that document that was in the paper this morning appears to be
the first draft of the Council for Reconciliation's declaration.
Obviously somebody has decided to give it to the newspapers. The Chairman
of the council, Evelyn Scott, wrote to me earlier this week enclosing
that document and some other drafts and I've written back saying
thank you for the first draft, we'll have a look at them, there
are some things in it that the Government can agree to and there are
some things in all of the documents that we can't possibly agree
to and others we think could be better expressed. I want to be positive.
I would like to try and have a document of reconciliation. I don't
know whether it can be achieved and I hope the debate does not get
bogged down entirely on this issue of whether the present generation
assumes responsibility for the claimed misdeeds of earlier generations.
My reason is not that I don't as a human being feel profoundly
sorry for injustices carried out on any Australian in the past. I
do. But I have always taken the fairly simple view that the current....you
can only apologise for things that you yourself did wrong. And if
I have not been part of any wrong doing and if I'm not part of
a generation that's been part of that wrong doing I've always
had a difficulty in assuming responsibility for the claimed wrong-doings
of earlier generations, particularly when those acts were sanctioned
by the law of the country at the time and in many cases the people
involved in them believed that they were doing the right thing. Now
there's a court case going on at the moment and I don't
want to talk about the particulars of that, it would be improper to
do so, however it's quite plain from other evidence that's
been given on this issue that not everybody who was involved in these
practices did it out of ill will. In fact most of the people did it
with great good will. And while now we don't agree with the practices
and wonder why they happened, at the time the community sanctioned
them and they thought they were doing the right thing.
CORDEAUX:
Sure sure. Malcolm Stewart talking with Derryn Hinch this morning
says that British athletes may boycott the Olympic Games if they feel
the Queen has been insulted and snubbed by you opening the Olympic
Games rather than she.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well who's Malcolm Stewart?
CORDEAUX:
Malcolm Stewart's a correspondent in London.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, well I don't really care what Malcolm Stewart thinks on
this with great respect to him. Let me make a prediction. There will
be a very large British team here.
CORDEAUX:
Are you familiar with the Parliamentary Member, Gerald Kaufman in
the UK?
PRIME MINISTER:
I've heard of him yes.
CORDEAUX:
A British Member of Parliament said the International Olympic Committee
would violate its own charter if Queen Elizabeth doesn't open
the 2000 Olympics. What do you think of that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm indifferent to his view. The Queen of Australia acts
on the advice of her Australian Ministers. Not on the advice of Mr
Kaufman or indeed anybody else. I don't think there's any
violation of anything involved. I indicated when I was the Shadow
Minister for Industrial Relations in the Opposition, when our party
was led by John Hewson and Paul Keating was the Prime Minister of
Australia, that I though the Prime Minister of the day should open
the Olympic Games. I haven's sort of set this up to suit my own
position. I just think it's appropriate that the Prime Minister
of the day should open the Olympic Games. Now that's been my
view. It's not being disrespectful to anybody. I'm in fact
in favour of the present Constitutional arrangements. I don't
go out to offend the Queen or indeed anybody else but I just think
it's appropriate that the Australian Prime Minister of the day
open the Games. Now, as I say, I arrived at that position long before
I was either the Leader of the Opposition or, indeed, the Prime Minister.
I was, in fact, in effect advocating that as things then stood that
Paul Keating should open the Games because he was the Prime Minister.
CORDEAUX:
There's a meeting in Sydney of financial gurus to discuss the
Asian crisis today. As far as our economy is concerned I guess really,
apart from the record deficit, it really wouldn't get much better
than this, would it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's very strong, Jeremy. And even the current account
deficit is only a record in dollar terms. As a percentage of our national
wealth each year it's not a record. And our capacity to pay for
it is better now than it's been for 15 years. In other words,
we are borrowing a lot of money abroad to finance that deficit but
our capacity to repay that money is better than it's been for
15 years. So, even that should be put into perspective. But our economy
is very strong indeed. It is the envy of many other nations. It's
stronger than most thought it would be and the fundamentals are very
good. And I think the Australian community deserves thanks for the
way in which it's worked hard and effectively because it's
wage and salary earners and Australian businessmen and women that
have really made this strong economy. Governments can provide the
framework but it's the people who deliver the goods. And I want
to thank the people of Australia for the contribution that they've
collectively made to delivering such a strong economy that all of
us can be very proud of. And our exporters have responded magnificently
to what has happened in the Asian Pacific region. And through a flexible
exchange rate we've shifted our exports to other destinations.
Now, we need to press on. We shouldn't get complacent. We need
to continue reform. We need a new tax system. We need to further reform
our industrial relations system. And we have to keep working on innovative
ways of further reducing unemployment, which although at an eight
or nine year low is still far too high.
CORDEAUX:
There are some worrying signs coming out of China, which up until
now seems to have been pretty well unscathed, do you think as far
as Australia is concerned we are well and truly out of the woods?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we are through the worst of the Asian economic downturn. I can't
guarantee that we'll continue unhindered, uninterrupted, indefinitely,
no Prime Minister can do that. But we are through the worst of the
Asian downturn. And for so long as the United States' economy
remains very strong and the European economies remain as they are
reasonably strong then there ought to be no new shocks around the
corner from the rest of the world because we have lived for some years
now with a depressed Asian economy and, particularly, a very sluggish
Japanese economy. The American economic strength is very important
to us and to the rest of the world and the signs are that that will
still remain very strong. But you've got to remember that if
you're running growth at 4.7%, which we are at the moment, even
if that were to come off a bit down to something in the threes, we
would still be doing extremely well, extremely well.
CORDEAUX:
I think the Australian public would thank you. I don't know how
you could sort of test this but my gut feeling is that the Australian
people are grateful for your stand on this heroin debate where you
refuse to submit to the pressure which is all around you to have some
sort of heroin trial.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Jeremy, I hope they do because my stand is sincerely meant.
There are a lot of things in relation to drugs where I believe I have
common cause with State Premiers on both sides of politics. We all
want more law enforcement measures and we've put more money into
that. We all want more education for children against commencing the
drug habit. And we all want more resources put into treatment. So,
as to about ninety-five per cent of the debate I think there's
common ground. Unfortunately there's a huge focus on this question
of a heroin trial because it's an easy thing to report and it's
an easy thing for people to get emotional about. There is no evidence
of any successful trial, hard evidence of any successful trial, anywhere
in the world. Only this morning, before this programme, I read some
fresh material about the trial in Switzerland and that indicated that
the results coming out of that were, at very best equivocal, and on
a more negative construction, close to a failure. Now, it still goes
on but there's no clear evidence around the world that this thing
works and it just really does send, in my view, the wrong signal.
CORDEAUX:
Well, it defies logic.
PRIME MINISTER:
It does.
CORDEAUX:
If you're an alcoholic, you don't kick your habit by being
given free alcohol.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that is a very good way of putting it. And you cannot simultaneously
say to somebody - this is a very bad thing, don't start it, the
substance will destroy your life...
CORDEAUX:
Absolutely.
PRIME MINISTER:
...but you also say to them, but hang on, if you do start it, we
will provide an environment in which you can continue it if you're
unable to break the habit. Now, I can only imagine, as you can, how
difficult it must be for people to break addictive habits. But unfortunately
life is full of difficult situations for people. All sorts of circumstances
are difficult. And this idea that if people are hooked on it it is
some way implicitly acceptable that, you know, they not be continually
encouraged to the maximum extent to break the habit, I think, is quite
unrealistic.
CORDEAUX:
The extraordinary thing is that in all the reports I've
seen that report you referred to this morning they talk about
the affect on crime. So if you give somebody free heroin he won't
break in and steal your video tape recorder. But it fails to report
that it does nothing to get people off heroin. It just contains the
problem and, inadvertently, promotes the problem.
PRIME MINISTER:
It does that and, of course, it also raises a whole lot of practical
questions. My understanding is that if somebody were on a heroin trial
they would require dosages of three, four, five, six a day. Now, you
just think about it. Unless people are, in effect, to go to a centre
that number of times a day or stay permanently in a centre, which
either of which options would involve a lot of resources, pressure
might then arise for them to be able to pick up the supplies of heroin
and take it with them. Now, that could open up all sorts of possibilities.
CORDEAUX:
Jeff Kennett's saying that he's going to go it alone, what
would you say to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm not sure that he has said that. People have reported
that he's said that. They're having a meeting today and
I expect that there will be a lot out of that meeting that I can support.
And I certainly want to work with the Premiers. I had a talk with
Mr Olsen about the issue, very briefly, in Adelaide earlier this week.
I want to co-operate with Mr Carr, the Labor Premier of New South
Wales and, indeed, with Kerry Chikarovski, if she replaces him later
this month. I'm not interested in political differences on this.
I just want to get a good outcome. But my understanding, Jeremy, is
that you can't have a heroin trial anywhere in Australia without
the Federal Government amending the Federal Narcotics Legislation
to permit the importation of pharmaceutical grade heroin. Under the
current Federal law such importation is illegal and the law would
have to be amended to allow it. Now, that's my understanding
and that is the basis of people constantly saying, well the Federal
Government has vetoed it. Well, we won't change that law. Now,
obviously if people believe they can do things notwithstanding that
law, well, I guess they will endeavour to do that. But that is my
understanding and I think my advice is right.
CORDEAUX:
Would you consider introducing draconian penalties to be applied to
drug pushers, convicted people who push this wretched stuff?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there are very heavy penalties at the moment but most of that
is dealt with by State law.
CORDEAUX:
You see the problem with that is that you see these television reports
with people on the platform at Cabramatta and people in Redfern quite
openly selling heroin. They are obviously not frightened of being
caught.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that is perplexing, although, in fairness to the police who
have a very difficult job, we do seem to be having more success recently.
But predominantly the police effort against drug pushers is a State
responsibility. I don't say that to shift the load or the blame
in any way but that's just the way our system operates. We have
Federal Police who, of course, are involved with our customs service
in stopping it if it comes into this country but once it's here
the actual selling of it to people is a breach of State law and attracts
very heavy State penalties. And I have no sympathy, nobody has any
sympathy, with drug pushers. They are the scum of the earth.
CORDEAUX:
Prime Minister, could I get a quick comment from you on this, what
appears to be, shift of focus in defence policy where we would be
concentrating more on overseas expeditionary forces. I see that former
Defence Secretary, Alan Wrigley, he rejects the move to overseas involvement
as a strategy. He says it doesn't work, it's too expensive
and it should be scrapped.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I heard him on the radio this morning criticising it. What is
involved and this is very much in the sort of exploratory stage
at the moment what is involved, as I understand, is a recognition
that in future it is more likely that Australian military activity
will be involved in relatively small activities in other countries.
Now, I would have thought that's common sense. And, I mean, even
over the last few years we've been involved in quite a number
of peacekeeping roles. We did, of course, send some combat forces
in great combat readiness to the Gulf last year. They weren't
needed but they were nonetheless sent. I would have thought what is
being contemplated here is making sure that our military capacity
is geared in recognition that from time-to-time we may have to deploy
people in different parts of the world in relatively small numbers.
Now, it's not intended that we sort of permanently station people
overseas. I think, perhaps, there's been a misunderstanding or
a misinterpretation deliberately or otherwise of what's involved.
And I heard what Alan Riggley said this morning. I don't agree
with his criticisms of the Defence Force or the Defence Department's
culture. They have their own culture but that's not surprising.
They are a unique group of people. They are the only group of people
whose job it is to put their lives on the line for the rest of us
and that does make them, along with our police, it does put them in
a rather special category. It's hardly surprising, therefore,
they should develop a bit of a culture of their own. I don't
think there's anything wrong with that.
CORDEAUX:
You would have also heard this morning that Centrelink, apart from
their telephone gridlock, have got other problems like half a million
people have apparently been caught defrauding the system, yet only
less than one per cent of that half million have been prosecuted.
That doesn't really sort of add up, does it Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think it does. My understanding is that what happens is that
a lot of people who make errors, they make re