Subjects: Iraq, United Nations; George Bush; Tony Blair; Prime Minister's visit; Zimbabwe; troika;
E&OE...........
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, apologies for the delay.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, that's okay. Good to talk to you again, Neil.
MITCHELL:
Well, thanks for your time. Are there any circumstances under which you would support action against Iraq without UN approval?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to deal with that question in a direct yes or no fashion at the present time because when you're in a situation, as we're in at the present time, you are working through the United Nations and it is a situation that is still clarifying itself. What I propose to do is to respond to each part of an unfolding situation as it unfolds. There are a number of parameters, the most important one is that we can't just leave the thing alone, and ignore it, and pretend that it's going to go away and cure itself. Another is that it's highly desirable to try and get the maximum level of international support and commitment to an achievable outcome and that's why we believe the United Nations is properly involved.
MITCHELL:
Do fear that the national support is fracturing a little, given the United Nations reaction?
PRIME MINISTER:
A bit early to be definite about that, Neil. You can't assume that because a Foreign Minister says that he thinks an existing resolution is adequate, that it follows automatically that his country would veto the passage of a further and tougher resolution. There's a lot of negotiation going on at the present time in New York about a resolution and the American's are trying very hard to get a new, tougher resolution. We support that. We don't accept the Iraqi Foreign Minister's letter as being the be all and end all of it. If there is to be any testing of Iraq's bona fide's about inspectors, that testing should take place against the background of a new, strengthened resolution.
MITCHELL:
Certainly, the prospect of bipartisan support in this country has changed. I spoke to Mr Crean about it earlier in the week. Would you, if necessary, be prepared to go into a conflict without the support of the Opposition?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Neil, we're not about to recommend to the Australian Parliament or to the Australian people, support for Australia entering military conflict. I still hope that military conflict can be avoided. And I think it's a huge mistake for me to start canvassing the hypothesis that military conflict can't be avoided and that is inevitably what I am seen to be doing if I start talking about going it alone, or bipartisan support, etc. Now, clearly whenever Australian troops are committed overseas - now I'm not talking about Iraq, I'm talking generally - it's infinitely to be preferred that there to be bipartisan support. And I would always seek as much as I possibly could to achieve bipartisan support if any military forces are committed abroad in the time that I';m Prime Minister. So, that's my general position. But in relation to this, I'm not going to say yes or no to that because inevitably that takes us a stage on and I'm seen to be saying well Howard says X or Howard says Y and people think, oh well he's made up his mind about military conflict. I've made up my mind about two things. I've made up my mind that this issue cannot be left alone, it's just not possible for the world to now walk away from the problem. But I also want to see the issue resolved, if at all humanly possible, in a peaceful way. It is right that the United Nations is engaged and we very strongly support the efforts that the Americans and the others are making to harness a resolution.
MITCHELL:
Do you, you also [inaudible] third thing, have you not? There should, or there needs to be a regime change, Saddam Hussein has to go?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I would like to see a regime change. But the greater priority as far as we are concerned is the removal of the potential threat that the use and possession, possession and use of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq's hands constitutes, that's the main threat.
MITCHELL:
George Bush has certainly been talking tough over the past few days. Do you support his language?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I'm not going to give a scorecard on the language of a Foreign Leader. I mean, how he addresses the American people and the world is a matter for him. His language is his language; my language is my language…
MITCHELL:
Okay.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not sort of going to give a judgement on whether his language is right or wrong. I mean, I support the policy approach the Americans are taking in the United Nations of trying to get a new, tougher resolution. And I certainly share the concern that the American Government has and the British Government has about leaving this issue unaddressed and unattended. But as to whether I would use certain language that he uses, well I'm just not going to respond that. I mean, clearly we're different people, we have different styles, we use different language.
MITCHELL:
How urgent is it? How urgent is it that this be resolved, the issues that you say that must be addressed, how urgent is it that they are addressed?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, is there a certain momentum already developed and I think the thing is working its way through. It's very important, particularly after the 11th of September of last year, that people understand we are living in a world now where unexpected and devastatingly successful terrorist attacks on free societies can occur in a way that we never thought before was possible. That has given a new dimension to international relations and I don't think we can ignore that.
MITCHELL:
Is it fair to say that the threat of such action remains stronger while Saddam Hussein remains in power?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think there's no doubt about that.
MITCHELL:
It makes it an urgent issue to address then?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, once again the word urgent can mean different things to different people. It is being addressed. I don't the think the world is going to suddenly loose interest in it and put it on the backburner for six months.
MITCHELL:
Tony Blair, you're visiting Tony Blair next week…
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, I am.
MITCHELL:
Why, what will that help to achieve…?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm going to Nigeria on Saturday night for a meeting on Monday with the President of South Africa and the President of Nigeria to talk about Zimbabwe - we're the Commonwealth troika. I'm the current Chairman in Office, and Mbeki's the previous one, and Obasanjo is the next one. So, we're the troika and we're going to talk about Zimbabwe. And it seemed to me as I was only six hours from London, that I would go on there and talk to Mr Blair both about Zimbabwe and also about Iraq. I'll also see the British Foreign Secretary and a few other people and then come straight back home...sensible thing to do as I was so close…
MITCHELL:
…I guess what I'm getting at is what role, what is the role that Australia plays on the world stage in this? Is it a significant role? What is our role on the world stage?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think we play a significant role given our size. One of the great contributions that Australia can bring bring is a perspective as an Asian-Pacific power in this part of the world, or nation in this part of the world, but also one that has very deep lengths with Britain and the rest of Europe and with the United States. We're in a rather unique position in that sense. We're not unrealistic about our role, but equally, we're not apologetic about our position. I mean, why? We are a middle range country with great respect and influence commensurate with the strength of our society and the role that we';ve historically played in world affairs. But equally we recognise that we';re a nation of only 20 million people, close to 20 million people compared with the size of the United States and the size of the European Union. But nonetheless 20 million people whose voices are heard and respected.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, if we may take some calls specifically on this and then move onto some other matters, as we';ve discussed before there is division in the community, there';s certainly not an overwhelming support for a possibility of a fight with Iraq. Peter go ahead please.
CALLER:
Good morning, Mr Howard. Basically I totally disagree with us going to war under any circumstances. I think that we';ve got a very peaceful country here, up until now we';ve had a terrorism free country. I think that you';re putting all that at jeopardy. I think we';ve got everything to lose and nothing to gain by this and basically it';s none of our business. It';s between America, Israel and the Arabs if you like and I think that you';re putting our whole peaceful country at risk. I really think we shouldn';t have gone to Afghanistan and I';ve got a. I firmly believe that we should not go any further, pull out while we';ve got a chance.
MITCHELL:
Thanks Peter, a reaction Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don';t agree that we can be indifferent to it and I reject the assumption underlying the comment by Peter that if you roll yourself up until a little ball and try and disappear you make yourself immune from any kind of terrorist threat. Terrorism is by its character indiscriminate, irrational and totally unpredictable and the idea that you can behave in a way that makes yourself immune from terrorism is ludicrous. I look at some of the countries around the world that are most prone to terrorism and many of them have been far more disengaged in world affairs than has Australia but it hasn';t bought them that immunity. The world is not like that.
CALLER:
Thanks Peter, Victoria go ahead please.
CALLER:
Good morning. If you support America';s call for weapons inspectors into Iraq, why aren';t you supporting a call for UN inspectors to go into India or Pakistan or America itself. And secondly what right does George Bush have to (inaudible) with Iraq';s offer of allowing weapons inspectors into Iraq as genuine and why aren';t you questioning him on it?
PRIME MINISTER:
What was the last…
MITCHELL:
It was a point raised by Nelson Mandela as well, what right has George Bush got to question whether Saddam Hussein is telling the truth on the weapons inspectors?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think he';s got every right given Saddam Hussein';s record.
MITCHELL:
Can I ask another question coming out of that, what right do we have to say Saddam Hussein is not the appropriate person to be leader of that country?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well you can have a view about whether somebody is a desirable leader.
MITCHELL:
But you';re talking about wanting a regime change.
PRIME MINISTER:
But I have made it very plain Neil that my priority, the priority of the Australian Government is getting rid of the weapons. That doesn';t stop me having a view. I mean he is a terrible ruler, her murders and tortures people, he denies people the most fundamental of human rights. I mean he used poison gas against the Kurds in his own country, used poison gas in the war against Iran, they routinely execute people on the barest suspicion, I mean we';re not dealing here with just a tough ruler.
MITCHELL:
But he has been like that for some years.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah I know but I mean you ask me the question what right have I got to question his fitness, I think every human being has got a right to react against that kind of behaviour, there are a lot of government';s around the world from time to time you';d like to see changed in even less despotic circumstances than Iraq';s. I mean you';re not dealing with somebody who is being chosen through the ballot process in a lawful open free fashion.
MITCHELL:
He was doing all these things at the time America was supporting him.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that goes to questions of why now and why not previously. It doesn';t go the question of whether you have the right. I mean I';m being asked myself why do I presume to have a view about whether he should go or stay, I';m telling you why I personally have that view.
MITCHELL:
Couple more calls and then we';ll move onto other matters. James go ahead please.
CALLER:
Good morning Neil and Prime Minister. I just want to support you Prime Minister on this position and I';m actually at a loss to think that if Simon Crean canvasses another point of view that we necessarily have to be a country divided, I think people can be, on this issue, bipartisan or they can take a position different to their normal political views.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look I agree with that, I';m not seeking any domestic political advantage of any kind out of this. I've said that I would like to the maximum extent possible to have a bipartisan approach and I';ve tried to do that and as I read Mr Crean and the leadership of the Labor Party at the present time, they haven';t ruled out continuing a bipartisan approach to this issue. That';s not how I read the Labor Party at the present time at all.
MITCHELL:
Thank you James, one more call, Shane go ahead please.
CALLER:
Mr Howard, I was going to ask if you would commit Australia to an attack on Iraq without UN approval but clearly you won';t give a yes or no answer to that question so I will ask if weapons of mass destruction is the issue why was the USA at the time of the Iran- Iraq war supplying Iraq with components for chemical weapons 12 to 15 years ago?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the question of what happened 12 to 15 years ago is a matter of legitimate debate. I have to deal with what the reality is today and I have to deal with the reality of the threat that Iraq poses. I also have to take account of the fact that since the Iraqi-Iranian war Saddam Hussein has demonstrated through the invasion of Kuwait in 1990 a willingness to be aggressive towards his neighbours without provocation. So you can';t have your attitudes frozen in time of 12 or 15 years ago, you have to deal with present day reality, in part influenced by subsequent conduct after those events.
MITCHELL:
We';ll take a break, come back with several other issues, in fact many other issues for the Prime Minister.
[commercial break]
MITCHELL:
In our Sydney studios, Prime Minister, Mr Howard if I may several quick issues. Some of your supporters on the backbench are raising your future as leader. Is it the right time to do that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't have anything to add to what I've previously said on that subject.
MITCHELL:
Do you agree with Mr Costello it is the wrong time to do that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I just don't have anything to add on it.
MITCHELL:
Have you spoken to any of them, …… Warren Enstch in particular is speaking publicly.
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't have anything to add.
MITCHELL:
Is this not the debate we need now? It's out there (inaudible).
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't have anything to add.
MITCHELL:
Can you explain why?
PRIME MINISTER:
Because I've chosen not to add anything to what I've previously said.
MITCHELL:
Can you explain to us your reasons why you've chosen that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think you have to explain a reason for every sort of utterance you make.
MITCHELL:
It's a matter of some interest to the people of Australia.
PRIME MINISTER:
I just don't have anything to add Neil.
MITCHELL:
Women on the frontline, do you support the prospect of female soldiers on the frontline?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well as I understand it women are involved now in about 80 to 90 per cent of military activities. The remaining frontline (inaudible) is something that needs to be talked through and I in the end would be guided very much by what the military people think. I don't think it's something that should be imposed on the military according to some doctrine of gender equality, I don't think that's the issue. The issue is our operational judgements and in those circumstances I'll ultimately be guided by what the military believes.
MITCHELL:
I seew an argument today that politicaisn should get a pay rise, do you agree with that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not arguing for a pay rise. I don't know where that came from, I saw the story. It';s certainly not government policy, we have a fair system, for adjusting MPs salaries, I think they go up in accordance with general wage adjustments, I don';t think the hard working Members of Parliament in this country are overpaid, I think they work very hard.
MITCHELL:
Are they underpaid?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, look, I'm not complaining.
MITCHELL:
You're getting more than the backbenchers(inaudible) it came up because of the Gold Card didn';t it (inaudible) Gold Card be cut back?
PRIME MINISTER:
I've lost you.
MITCHELL:
We'll take a very quick break and I'll have to talk to Sydney.
[commercial break]
MITCHELL:
Sorry Prime Minister we';re having a bad morning technologically, I guess you';d rather it had dropped out while we';re talking about the leadership.
PRIME MINISTER:
No Neil, never want to have you drop out on me.
MITCHELL:
The Labor Party';s talking about blocking the Telstra line rental increase, now what will the Government do if that happens, if they block it in the Senate?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we';ll have to consider what our options are, but it';s really very petty and small minded. I mean you can';t have a situation where you never have any price adjustments in an area like this. I mean you can';t on the one hand say that you want Telstra to be a strong profitable company and then at every inch of the way try and micro-manage as a parliament commercial judgements, I just think that';s unrealistic, it just demonstrates the absurdity in a way of the Government in the long term continuing to own half of what it is a huge corporation. I mean this in a sense feeds into the longer term argument as to why you can';t indefinitely have a corporation of Telstra';s size half owned by the Government.
MITCHELL:
Now presumably if that was to happen, if it's blocked in the Senate, that would jeopardise the other,well…
PRIME MINISTER:
It does have consequences, and this is a silly, wrong-headed, highly political interference with a commercial judgement and I don';t think that makes any sense at all, it just drives home the earth that how on earth indefinitely can we continue to have the commercial operation of a large company in which a lot of Australians now are shareholders become the subject of this political football.
MITCHELL:
Justice Marcus Einfelt,former Federal Court Judge, and remember this is Justice Marcus Einfeld, not Bob Ellis, has made the…
PRIME MINISTER:
The former Mr Justice Einfeld…
MITCHELL:
The former Federal Court Judge.
PRIME MINISTER:
I know Mr Justice, or former Mr Justice Einfeld very well.
MITCHELL:
… has compared the Woomera guards to SS guards. He says there';s been a frenzied, almost hysterical reaction to asylum seekers in this country. What';s your reaction to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well SS guards were part of a pattern of mass extermination of a race. They were part of a pattern of mass extermination of a race. I think it is just wrong and he should know that, to make such a comparison.
MITCHELL:
Do you find it offensive?
PRIME MINISTER:
I do yes. Quite offensive. I mean I don';t mind people attacking the policy but to endeavour in any way to liken what is occurring in detention centres to Nazi death camps. When you talk about SS guards you can';t subsequently say oh I wasn';t talking about the guards at concentration camps, I mean anybody of our generation, we all know what is meant by the term SS guard, I mean the SS were the evil of the evil, the most evil of the lot, and they were the people who carried out the dirtiest deeds. That is just outrageous that kind of comparison. I understand Marcus has a very strong objection to the Government';s policy. Although I don';t agree with this attitude I respect the strength of his feeling. I know him quite well but I do think on this occasion to make that comparison is offensive and it';s wrong and I think that is bringing a level of hyperbole and hysteria into the debate that';s quite unjustified.
MITCHELL:
Does your… is it correct as reported today your government wants to set up a national paedophile register? If so, how will it work?
PRIME MINISTER:
I must say that I';m not aware of that.
MITCHELL:
Okay, well thank you very much for your time, you wouldn';t like to buy a Collingwood footy jumper would you? Signed by all the players? We';re about to auction it for charity.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, are you going to auction are you?
MITCHELL:
Yeah.
MITCHELL:
What';s the reserve.
MITCHELL:
I think more than you and I could afford.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think there';s going to be a lot of very wealthy Collingwood supporters who will help you out on it.
MITCHELL:
Have you got a tip for tomorrow?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I was starting on my team, my heart is with St George very much against Cronulla, I think it';s going to be very tough for them. I';ll back Collingwood tomorrow and I';d like to see Collingwood win.
MITCHELL:
Thank you very much. Paul Keating';s not number one member still.
PRIME MINISTER:
Are they moving their ground?
MITCHELL:
They are. The home of the pies are going to Olympic Park.
PRIME MINISTER:
Sorry about that?
MITCHELL:
Yes I am. Bit of history, I think we';re wiping our tradition by allowing interstate interlopers into our game.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah I can understand why a lot of Victorians would feel that way.
MITCHELL:
Thank you very much for your time Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Okay.
[ends]