PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
05/11/1999
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
11185
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP INTERVIEW WITH STEVE LIEBMANN TODAY SHOW, CHANNEL NINE

Subjects: Referendum, Constitutional Preamble

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

LIEBMANN:

Prime Minister, good morning to you.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good morning, Steve.

LIEBMANN:

Would you agree as we sit here this morning it would seem that Australia

is going to remain a monarchy with the Queen as Head of State?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I'm not sure what the outcome will be. Of course many people would

dispute whether our present arrangement has the Queen of the Head of State,

many would argue, as I do, that the Governor-General's the effective Head

of State, drawing his authority from our constitution. A prediction - I

don't know. I've learnt after Victoria to suspect the opinion polls. My

feeling is that it could be close. I hope the republican model is rejected

because I don't think what is on offer would give us a better system than

we have now. I think it would give us a worse system so that's why I'm voting

no.

LIEBMANN:

Can you tell me why, when 91 percent of Australians don't want the Queen

as their Head of State, when the majority of Australians would prefer, in

the broad sense, Australia was a republic and probably the majority of your

parliamentary colleagues would feel the same way, why you don't?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I'm not sure that some of those figures are right. I mean, that 91

percent derives from a poll that asked people intending to vote no why they

were voting no. And the greatest number said exactly what I just said and

that is that they don't want to change the present system because they believe

it works extremely well. And many of them, another 33 percent, said they

were worried about the way in which the republican model would work. I mean,

my view is to argue for what I think is best for Australia. I think we're

better served staying with a system we know is good and we know works, we

know is democratic, we know allows this country to be totally independent

around the world. Now, people can criticise that view but it's a wholly

legitimate, authentically Australian view. We are careful, sceptical people

of change unless we're satisfied that it is change for the better and I

think we are right to be sceptical, we are right to be suspicious of people

coming along and saying there'll be a new Nirvana if we become a republic.

I mean, that's just not true. This is a good and decent country and if the

public vote no on Saturday it will continue to be a good and decent country.

Now, in the end, you've got to make a judgement about what you think is

better for the country and my opposition to change is based on a belief

that an accident of history has given us a remarkably effective system and

I just don't want to risk changing it for something I'm unconvinced is better.

Now, that's my view.

LIEBMANN:

Talking of views, Michelle Grattan, in the Herald and the Age

this morning is saying that you would be the first Australian Prime Minister

to urge Australians to reject the question that your government has advanced.

PRIME MINISTER:

I think I can turn that on its head and say I am the first Australian Prime

Minister to facilitate the Australian people making a choice in favour of

something that I personally don't support. Most prime ministers in the past,

if they haven't supported something they haven't put it up. But I recognised

the desire on the part of the Australian people before the turn of the century

to have a vote on this issue. And even though I'm personally against it,

I put it up. As Tom Keneally said at the Constitutional Convention it was

the ultimate act of grace on my part being opposed to a republic to nonetheless

give people a vote on it. So surely, if I may, I hope without being immodest,

say that is a point in my favour rather than a criticism of me.

LIEBMANN:

Given that the Queen is by law.

PRIME MINISTER:

The Queen of Australia, the Governor-General effectively by convention.

LIEBMANN:

But can you tell me why Australians should have to share the Queen as our

Head of State with numerous other countries from New Zealand to Barbados?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, you make a judgement about that. That's one of the things you put

in judgement. You say, well, okay, she's the Queen of Australia and she's

also the Queen of a number of other countries and you think, well, okay,

that's one argument. You then ask yourself, is that sufficient reason to

sweep away a system that has worked so very effectively? Now, they're the

judgements people have got to put in balance. Now, I say on balance it's

not. And that was the view I put at the Constitutional Convention. Now,

if people disagree with me, well, of course they'll vote yes. I mean, in

a sense, this is what the debate is all about. I mean, we are an independent

democratic country. Everyone knows that. Everyone knows that this has its

own distinct identity. Nobody mistakes an Australian anywhere in the world.

I mean, to suggest that we've got to vote yes to be Australian is absurd.

That is the implication in so much of the republican advertisement. Their

great failure in this campaign, in my view, has been they haven't persuaded

us that this country will be better. I mean, you change something when you

think it's going to be better as a result of the change. I don't believe

in change for its sake.

LIEBMANN:

But why not encompass the best of the past with a move forward?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I don't think this model does that. I really don't. I mean, this model

will have a President instantly dismissable at the will of the Prime Minister.

This model will not.

LIEBMANN:

Yeah, but there are riders attached to that.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, the rider is that what you get a vote of the House of Representatives.

Well, can I say as the Prime Minister commanding a majority in the House

of Representatives I would be hypothetically unlikely to do that unless

I knew my party was going to back me. So really the endorsement by the House

of Representatives means nothing.

LIEBMANN:

You said yesterday, I think I'm quoting you correctly, Australia's stability

will be better preserved under our present system. Does that then mean that

if we became a republic we would be less stable?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, what it means is that our present constitution is better able to cope

with a crisis than the model on offer. I mean, any old constitution works

when you don't have a crisis. I mean, you don't need a constitution when

you don't have a crisis. But every so often some stress will come along

and you need a constitution that handles the stress. And the test of a stable

constitution is how it handles stress. So what I'm saying is that in the

event of instability the present constitution would handle it better than

the one on offer.

LIEBMANN:

Does tomorrow's result have to be a resounding one either way?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, tomorrow's result will be what the Australian people want it to be.

I mean, I hope that there's a resounding yes vote for the preamble which

is the other question because the preamble is an opportunity for republicans

and anti-republicans alike to combine to make an aspirational statement

about our future. And for the first time we'll be putting something decent

and noble in the Constitution about the indigenous people. I hope it is

resoundingly carried. Look, I think the other one will be close. I don't

know what the margins will be either way. I hope it's defeated. I hope it's

defeated in every State. I think that would be good but, Steve, the customer's

always right in these things. If the public votes no on Saturday, well,

I accept that. That's the outcome I've been advocating. If they vote yes,

I will accept that too.

And can I just say, I notice in the last few days people are saying, oh

you know, if it goes down, there'll be great bitterness and division. I

don't think there will be. This is not that kind of country. We've had a

fair contest and.

LIEBMANN:

Has it been fair, there's been a lot of deceit and lies on both sides?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, yes, well, if you accept that, I don't know if I necessarily do but

if you do, well, they've sort of cancelled each other out. I mean, everybody's

had a go. The question is patently clear. The question describes exactly

what the change is - the President replacing the Queen and the Governor-General

and that President being chosen by two-thirds of the members of Parliament.

I mean, that is what will happen if you vote yes. Now, people who complain

about that are really sort of, you know, reflecting on their own inadequacy

but I think this will be a stable decent country if it goes.

LIEBMANN:

Either way.

PRIME MINISTER:

Of course it is. We're a stable, decent good people.

LIEBMANN:

As you said, the customer's always right.

PRIME MINISTER:

Absolutely.

LIEBMANN:

Nice to see you.

PRIME MINISTER:

Thanks.

[Ends]

11185