Subjects: Visit to Cairns; Cabinet meeting; lagoon; airport; sugar industry; drought; Noel Pearson; Iraq; Gold Card; immigration; visit to PNG; GST; Al-Qaeda fighters; cricket tour of Pakistan.
E&OE...........
MCKENZIE:
Mr Howard, good morning and welcome.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning John. Great to be back in Cairns again with my good friend and colleague Warren Entsch.
MCKENZIE:
Actually I was just trying to pick a few moments ago how often you had been up here in the time since you';d been Prime Minister, and I must admit I can';t remember what we came up with – six or seven.
PRIME MINISTER:
I have been up here six or seven times as Prime Minister. That';s an average of at least once a year. It';s a great place to come.
MCKENZIE:
You';ve been coming up more actually since you';ve been Prime Minister than before in Opposition, if I remember rightly.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh probably, yes. I try to as Prime Minister, particularly when Parliament is not sitting, to get right around the country. We';re having a Cabinet meeting here in Cairns tomorrow and that';s part of the pattern of having Cabinet meetings in different parts of Australia, and certainly getting them out of Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne.
MCKENZIE:
Talk to me about… well the lagoon, did you go for a walk today?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I did. I went for a walk and it was low tide. But I gather the locals are working on reversing it.
MCKENZIE:
Well exactly. That is a very good point. I';m glad you brought that up because that';s fair to say.
PRIME MINISTER:
Nothing is impossible in far north Queensland.
MCKENZIE:
I know and we accept that more has to be done beyond the lagoon. But you';ve seen the work being done.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I have, yes.
MCKENZIE:
The point I';d like to bring up to you once again, and I did on your last visit… I don';t know whether it';s possible because that';s only six months away now – we';ll see the opening of the lagoon. Is there the prospect of perhaps having you back for that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';d like to do that, and I know that Warren wants me to. And I';ll keep working on it. And so will he.
MCKENZIE:
I know it';s a fairly sensitive political issue, but you have I think put about nine or ten million…
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes we have indeed.
MCKENZIE:
The State Government also has been extremely generous so I don';t know how we';re going to sort that one out.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';m sure we can all be civil.
MCKENZIE:
Definitely. Let';s move on to some of the issues of the day now. And firstly the airport – looking locally at the moment. The airport hub. Now Joe Hockey has been strong on this. I understand you';ve been actively involved too. Now we';re talking admittedly quite a few years away, maybe nineteen years away from now. What are your feelings loosely about converting ultimately our airport facilities here to make them adequate for the number two airport in Australia if you like?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';ve got an open mind on those things. If the market, if I can put it that way, drives this in a particular direction, then we';ll facilitate that. I mean it';s not the role of Government to say we';re going to force this to be the number two or number three or number one, or whatever. But if the demand is such that that is the sensible way to go, then we';ll help it. If the demand is not, then we obviously don';t. But look, this airport has expanded and this part of Australia';s growth potential for the future is enormous, and it is something that could occur but it';s not something the Government nominates years in advance.
MCKENZIE:
No, but you are looking at it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have a very open mind about it and nobody would be more pleased than I if it were to occur.
MCKENZIE:
Moving on quickly to one of our big issues up here – the plight of the sugar industry. You';ve said you';re here with your Cabinet to meet local people and sort out problems. What may you be able to do? I suppose it';s fair to ask you firstly the things you can';t do, because there are many sugar growers up here putting many propositions to your Government at the moment for relief and you haven';t been embracing them all that enthusiastically.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well John, it is a problem. I will see the representatives of the industry this afternoon. We won';t take final decisions on this issue tomorrow, but Warren Entsch as the local Member and Ian Macdonald, the Minister, will both brief the Cabinet meeting tomorrow on conditions in the industry. I'll have first-hand information from the industry leaders this afternoon and we will fairly and sympathetically address what is put to us. It';s very difficult. We can';t do anything about the world price. We did give a lot of help - $60 million of help back in 2000 and 2001. We';ve had a range of propositions put to us. I am sympathetic. I know how important the industry is to many communities right up along the Queensland coast especially. And I don';t want to see those communities go to the wall. But dealing with taxpayers' money has to be, if it is to be provided, it has to be provided in circumstances where there is change, significant change, to make the condition of the industry more viable in the future. Now some of the changes we hoped might have occurred a couple of years ago as a result of the money we gave then, did not occur. And that';s one of the things that I';ll be talking to the industry about this afternoon. I am sorry for them. I think they';re in a very difficult position and I want to help, but I';m very conscious that different parts of the Australian community have claims on Government assistance, and ought to try and do it in a way that also offers a hope that we don';t return to this situation again in a couple of years time. But around the world, the situation with the sugar industry is not good and the price is very depressed. And it';s not an easy situation. But I';ll be there listening sympathetically. I can';t give an open cheque. I';ll hear what they';ve got to say. We';ll talk about it again tomorrow and then Cabinet will address it in more detail within the next couple of weeks.
MCKENZIE:
On an issue farther afield, the drought which is now spreading across the country. Just loosely, if you can encapsulate your thinking on where the Government might be heading there. You';re here in north Queensland…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well what happens with drought is that you really have a two-stage process. The immediate response is under… the arrangements that have been worked out with the States is the States provide immediate assistance and then if the drought is prolonged then what are called exceptional circumstances are declared, and the Federal Government steps in with income support and other relief. Now those arrangements will continue. I am keeping a very close watch on this and the Federal Government, let me give you assurance that the exceptional circumstances arrangements will be honoured in full by the Federal Government and we won';t be reluctant to help. We weren';t reluctant to help in the past, and we';re never reluctant to help where natural disasters are involved. And I hope that we can work with the States. This is not an issue where State and Federal Governments should argue with each other. Nothing annoys the drought-stricken farmer more than to hear State and Federal Ministers arguing about who should be doing what. This is one of those things where people should just sit down and work together and stop all the nonsense between State and Federal Governments.
MCKENZIE:
Yes. While we';re on that note, let';s tap into your thoughts on the situation in Cape York, particularly with the Aboriginal community. There';s been some very encouraging signs. Noel Pearson now seems to be embracing in loose terms your concept of practical reconciliation. He';s saying now it';s time for Aboriginal leadership in Australia to move away from left thinking and embrace the thinking that you';ve espoused more frequently now. I know Warren Entsch recently has had talks with Noel Pearson. They seem to be getting closer and closer to a common position. Warren is in fact talking with Noel about the wisdom of establishing these detoxification centres adjacent to hospitals in the Aboriginal communities. And this would go a hell of a long way to allaying the fears of so many up here that we';re about to see many, many of those problem drinkers in Aboriginal communities heading for the coastal cities. You know the State Governments now are going down this path of closing down the canteens in the communities. There are real problems there but hopefully with some stronger communication with people like Noel Pearson and Warren Entsch, we may actually see a much more practical solution here.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I won';t give it the connotations of left and right. That';s for others to do. I welcome a lot of the things that Noel Pearson has been saying. I found the Charlie Perkins memorial lecture that he delivered last year, which I read in full, a very interesting document. I saw him recently in Coolum for a while and we talked about some of these issues. I';m happy to talk to Aboriginal leaders at any time about achieving practical gains and practical outcomes. His emphasis on self-responsibility and self-empowerment is one that I share. I don';t only share it for Aboriginals, I share it for everybody. I mean individual self-responsibility and self-esteem is the heart of good citizenship for all of us. And a lot of the things he';s saying are sensible. His emphasis on zero tolerance and his loathing of substance abuse and the devastating effect it';s having on indigenous communities, is accurate and understandable and ought to be supported, and sends a very powerful message to many in the community who have an unrealistic view of what is needed to bring about change. So I don';t want to politicise it. I don';t want to overestimate what can be achieved. I am always ready to talk to indigenous leaders from anywhere in Australia about practical ways – I';m not interested in a political argy-bargy – I';m just interested in achieving good, noticeable, genuine outcomes for Aboriginal people.
MCKENZIE:
Let';s go on to international matters now before we take some open line calls. Iraq has been very much in the news the last couple of days, particularly what Alexander Downer has had to say on the virtual inevitability of some sort of conflict if America takes that direction. You haven';t been quite so forthright but almost so. And now Mr Downer and yourself I guess are under fire from Mr Crean. Also the Grains Council of Australia are very critical of putting under threat an $820 million export arrangement with Iraq. Talk to me about this. Are you vulnerable in this area?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well let me say a couple of things. There are two allegations being made. One of them was made this morning on the AM programme by the Grains Council and the Chairman, Keith Perrett, made the quite erroneous claim that we are out ahead of everybody else, including the United States. Now that is wrong. That claim';s been made by a number of people. It is completely and utterly wrong. What the Government has done is to make it plain that this is an issue that the Australian community has got to debate and its got to think about. I know that the Americans have not made any decision, the Americans are looking at a whole range of options. We put ourselves in a position to be aware and abreast of American thinking and developments in America on this issue. Nobody wants military conflict and the reason why we have a difficulty at the moment is because Iraq has failed for years to comply with resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. I mean, let's go back to basics. If the Government';s critics are saying – use diplomacy, use the United Nations. Yes that';s fine, couldn';t agree more. But the United Nations Security Council has passed resolutions, which have been systematically defied by Iraq. Now, we are not out in front of America. We have not made any commitment. I noticed my predecessor in my office but one Bob Hawke on television yesterday, saying that we had given I think he described it as an open-ended commitment – we haven';t. Bob Hawke is wrong. We have not given an open-ended commitment to the United States. We are not out in front of the United States. What I have done is to take the Australian people into my confidence and I owe it to them to say what I think the options are. And I expressed a view about the likelihood of American action and the likelihood that we might be requested to be involved. Now, there';s nothing Rambo about that. I was telling what I believe to be the truth. Now, I reject completely this argument from Bob Hawke and Simon Crean, very interesting that the prime minister but one before me is being rustled up by the Opposition to get involved in these things, but I';ll let that go. I reject what both Simon Crean and Bob Hawke have said. We are not in a situation giving an open-ended commitment. And I also heard Mr Crean this morning show that he was demanding a parliamentary debate. Well, doesn';t he read the papers? I said last Monday that if there were at anytime in the future any Australian involvement, there would be a parliamentary debate. I mean, of course there should be. There was parliamentary debate in 1991. There was a parliamentary debate before our commitment to East Timor. So I';d say to Simon Crean, Bob Hawke, I';d say to the spokesman of the Grains Council get your facts right, don';t accuse the Government of things it hasn';t done, give the Government credit for keeping the Australian people in our confidence. And nobody wants military conflict anywhere in the world. It is awful. I don';t like it. Australians don';t like it. Equally, we have to deal in reality and the reality is that so far Iraq has, with great impudence, ignored the resolutions of the Security Council. I mean nobody … Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, repeatedly says that. I mean, it';s indisputable that Iraq is in breach. Now, I hope that breach is repaired. I';d like to see them tomorrow – righto, we';ll let the resolution flow, we';ll let the weapons inspectors in, if they find any weapons of mass destruction, let them be destroyed, let them be dismantled. Now if that were to happen, nobody would be happier than I would be. We';d all be happy. Now if that does happen, that would obviously completely alter the complexion of the whole thing. But in that sense, it';s in Iraq';s hands. So, before people start making false accusations that we';re running ahead of America or we';re you know, out in front and giving open-end commitments - check the facts, check the record. And I just refute those allegations totally.
MCKENZIE:
You may of heard Simon Crean also this morning sounding less than enthusiastic about the effectiveness of these quotas, an increasing number of women…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, a good amendment of thinking in you Simon if that is true. I mean, that';s been my view always. I think that quotas are insulting to women. The Liberal Party doesn';t have quotas and we never will. I can';t think of anything more insulting then to say, in effect, to somebody – you are the candidate because you are women, not because you';re a quality person, or to say to someone – you';re the candidate because you are a man. Well of course there are fewer women in parliament than men because history of society, until recent generations, has been that women have been less involved in the paid workforce than have men. But that is changing very rapidly and it would be a matter of time only before you have a rough equilibrium, but I don';t care. In a sense, in the end what matters is the quality of policies. And I mean, just because the party has 50% women in parliament, doesn';t mean it looks after women equally as it looks after men. I mean, it';s the quality of the policies that matter. I have always regarded quotas, gender quotas, as an insult. We';ve never had them in the Liberal Party and while I am the leader of the Liberal Party, we won';t have them. And frankly, I don';t think anybody in the Liberal Party seriously supports quotas.
MCKENZIE:
Look, I';ll just ask you to put those headphones on. We bet to get to some of these open line calls because there is a quite a queue up now. We';ll go straight to Sid. In fact, it';s Sid Hooper on the line. Morning Sid, you';re talking to the Prime Minister.
CALLER 1:
Good morning, Prime Minister. Welcome to Cairns.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello, Sid.
CALLER 1:
Mr Howard, now if I could just ask you one question. At the end of the war 1946, [inaudible] occupation of Japan, in which I enlisted, I was a member of the AIF for 18 months. I was posted to Hiroshima. I don';t have to tell you really, I guess, that the detail [inaudible] in Japan at the end of the war was to clean up their war machine…
PRIME MINISTER:
You were in the British Commonwealth Occupation?
CALLER 1:
For 18 months at Hiroshima, just not long after they dropped the bomb. Now I also believe what anyone with qualifying service which is, I would of thought to be [inaudible], would have been qualifying service. After the 1st of July, over the age of 70, was entitled to the Gold Card, which gives us the [inaudible] more medical health services. I mean, I';ve recently had word back to say that I do not qualify because of my…now what my qualifying service. What does it take, could you tell me what it takes?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the situation with the Gold Card is that it is true for anybody 70 and over. And what';s defined as qualifying service and that to date I don't think does include the service that you';ve been in. And this is something that is forgoing consultation with the RSL and others and over the years, has been given a particular qualification. Over time things get, when the definition of qualifying service and so forth can be altered, but I think it';s in yours is one of the things that I';ll just keep under review. But at present, it doesn';t.
CALLER 1:
It seems a little bit tough and Vietnam guys, they';ve got it pretty rough. Your second wife now is entitled to the Royal Service Pension and after…
PRIME MINISTER:
I think the answer to this is that you have a certain number of things that people put to you and we did extend the Gold Card recently. And you know, I think as time goes[tape break]
CALLER 1:
… Mr Howard, I';m 76 now and it would be lovely to know that our war widows were taken care of.
PRIME MINISTER:
I do understand that (inaudible).
CALLER:
Does that mean to say we';re not going to get the gold card?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, it doesn't, it just means that at present the way it';s applied doesn';t include your service, it does include other service but it also means that the eligibility rules… [tape break]
CALLER 1:
…to get a gold card.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it';s fair to say the gold card is people who were involved in active service, it started really people who were involved in World War I and the same conditions were applied in relation to people in World War II and then it was extended for people with qualifying service and that definition has been liberalised over the years and could be liberalised further. But I mean I suppose in the end a Government has got to do everything it can within the resources available and we have a lot of competing claims on those resources and we try and balance them as fairly as we can.
CALLER:
I support your comments very much Mr Howard, but I still can';t see how my service doesn';t qualify for a gold card. Thanks very much.
McKENZIE:
We';ll move onto Sid, Les rather. Go ahead Les, you';re talking to the Prime Minister.
CALLER:
Good morning and welcome to Cairns. Look I';m just wondering, in relation to illegal immigrants with the locking of appeals and that where they are staying in Australia for extending years and that. Is it possible for the Australian Government to introduce legislation like other countries are looking at that such appeals once they';ve been rejected the appeals must be lodged from a country other than Australia. In other words they must leave Australia and then lodge their appeal. That would certainly speed up the stays in Australia and all this humbug that's being encountered by the Government.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have recently tightened the law to try and speed up the determination process. We can';t get everything we want to on these issues through the Senate because the Labor Party and the Democrats from time to time block legislation and they have the numbers. We have tightened the situation and that means in affect that people who';ve exhausted their right of appeal, and do not have the right to be here subject to our obligations under international refugee conventions, must go back. Now we';re working on that and people are returning to other countries, the process is slow but I think we';ve done, in all the circumstances, we have done an effective job, we have stopped the flow of boat people to this country and the policies that the Government introduced last year that were roundly attacked by our political opponents have shown have been effective because we haven';t had any new arrivals now for months. We';re working as fast as we can to eliminate the backlogs and there aren't too many backlogs in detention centres now. I think we';ve got a reasonable balance in our law but we would always like to make it in as effective but equally as fair as possible.
CALLER:
Yes, with this new legislation that has been introduced with these 7000 (inaudible)…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well hang on, people in the Labor Party and refugee groups are saying that. The High Court found that in two cases there had been procedural unfairness, they didn';t find that those people were really refugees after all. And those two cases go back to the refugee review tribunal and it is far from certain that automatically means that there are another 7,000 people in the same situation. So I think the critics of the Government in some respects put words in the mouth of the High Court Judges.
CALLER:
I realise that there';s only (inaudible) people, but I';m just saying (inaudible) original question, to speed it up (inaudible) 2 or 3 years. Is it possible to bring in legislation that once they';ve been rejected, any appeal must be made from outside Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it would be not possible to get through the Parliament legislation, we';ve said that if somebody';s primary application was rejected by the immigration department they had no right of appeal to the refugee review tribunal. I don';t think Parliament would accept that. I think it';s fair that people have the opportunity of going to a refugee review tribunal, it';s really the prolongation of legal proceedings after that that causes the difficulty and that is what we';ve tried to block off a bit.
CALLER:
You';re not actually barring them from appealing… from a country other than this country where they are.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';m just putting the proposition to you sir that I don';t believe such legislation, even if the Government were of a mind (inaudible) to do it, would get through the Parliament.
McKENZIE:
Thank you for your call. We have to move on. Now I want to talk to the Prime Minister briefly about this new direction in controlling the number of people overstaying their visas, I understand there';s going to be a crackdown there. There has been the expression of some concern from people in the tourism industry this morning that this move may in fact tarnish that welcoming image we have overseas.
PRIME MINISTER:
Can I say that is ridiculous. I heard Mr Brown and somebody else this morning on radio, I mean sometimes you wonder if these people feel they've got to say something just for the sake of saying something and they blurt it out. I mean this is all about just making certain that people who come here on a certain basis don';t stay on some other basis. What';s wrong with that? I mean we';re criticised by often the same people who are being too lenient on people who overstay visas but too tough on people who try and come here in other ways. I mean all we';re saying is if you overstay a visa then you';re liable to be asked to go home. There';s nothing wrong with that. And we';re not picking on anybody, all we';re doing in relation to this so-called profiling is making certain that groups who are more likely than others to overstay their visas, that is kept in mind. But there';s some suggestion that you know we';re going to be more friendly to Caucasians than to Asians. I mean that is absurd. This country';s tourist future lies with people all around the world. By the year 2010 we could well have more visitors coming to Australia from China than from Japan. Now we';re the last country in the world that is going to be unfriendly to visitors from Asia, we';re friendly to everybody who comes to this country in a lawful fashion. And people who don';t come here in that way, if they can establish refugee situation, well they';re dealt with fairly. But we';ve been over this argument so many times, but can I just say to those people who';ve had a go at us over this, really find something more useful to talk about, don';t just generate a problem. I mean if the spokesman for the tourist industry really cares about the future of the tourism industry the last thing they could say is make is statement on Australian radio to the effect that we';re unwelcoming to people from non-Caucasian countries. I mean that';s just ridiculous.
McKENZIE:
While we';re onto legal immigration, you';re heading up to Port Moresby tomorrow, you';ll talking to Sir Michael Somare who';s just been recently re-elected. He has said that he';s bringing to an end the arrangement made by his predecessor with you over keeping these people who you don';t want in Australia in camps in PNG. Does that put under threat your whole Pacific solution as it';s been referred to?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don';t think there';s anything that he';s said that has put anything under threat. I';ll talk to him tomorrow about this, I think it's probably better that he and I have a discussion rather than my react to reports of what he said. I look forward to working with him closely, I appreciate very much what Papua New Guinea did last year and that arrangement has worked well and of course the demand for additional places in Manus, and indeed in other parts of the Pacific, it is no longer there, certainly not there at present.
McKENZIE:
Yes. Could that be a seasonal thing though?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, you don';t have … it's now nine months, the last boat that I';m aware of was in the first week of November of last year, that';s nine months ago. You don';t have a wet season that lasts for nine months.
McKENZIE:
The Kokoda Trail, this is going to be interesting to know, well the day after tomorrow you';re going out to Isurava for this establishment of this memorial up there, I think there are vets up there today (inaudible). Just talk to me about this and what this means to your personally.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it';s most important what it means to all Australians, this will commemorate the first defeat inflicted on land on the Japanese army during World War II and it is one of the great feats of Australian soldiers in history and it';s a very important moment to commemorate and important , of the men who were there, that';s the most important thing, it means a lot to me as Prime Minister, it means a lot to me as an Australian. But I';m in the company probably of millions of Australians including (inaudible).
McKENZIE:
Also I just want to talk to you, we got another call, I know we';re running out of time, I';ll just pass this question onto you from a caller, are the states getting their share of the GST money yet? Caller said he heard from local member, state member, Dr Leslie Clark that the states are yet to see any GST money.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that is a bit rich, Queensland will be better off under the GST than it would have been if the old arrangement that the Federal Labor Party wanted to keep had of continued and Queensland would be better off in relation to the GST arrangement with effect from the beginning of next financial year. They are already getting the GST money, they have been getting it for a couple of years, and until it builds up beyond the point where they';re getting more we have guaranteed that they';ll continue to get the same amount as under the old arrangement. And the need for that guarantee will disappear at the end of this financial year for Queensland and Queensland will be the first state in Australia to be better off under the GST and that will start, in other words Queensland will start being better off under the GST from the beginning of the next financial year and Mr Beattie himself acknowledges this. He said when he announced all that extra money for education about eight months ago in response from a question how are you going to pay for it Premier? He said out of all the extra GST money. So Queensland will be much better off under the GST with effect from next year and it will build over the years ahead and all other states will be a similar position. The GST is good news for the states, that's why despite what they said publicly, they raced, they grabbed the pen out of my hand to sign the agreement, they were so eager.
McKENZIE:
Just quickly before you go, another international development overnight, I understand 16 alleged operatives of Al-Qaeda have been handed over the Saudi';s by Iran, that';s absolutely fascinating as a development and obviously would be taken at first blush as a step in the right direction. They';ll be aware that any intelligence gathered is going to be passed onto the United States who so recently referred to Iran as one compliment of the so-called axis of evil.
PRIME MINISTER:
I did hear that report. It is encouraging on the face of it, I don';t at this stage know anymore than what has been reported on the news. I would share your view that they will know that the intelligence is going to be passed on. It';s an encouraging development and in the vein of the remarks I made earlier if there is some change of attitude and quite a willingness of some to to work with the United States, and some countries have co-operated in very dif