Subjects: LNG contract; relationship with China; sale of Telstra; Federal Budget 2002.
E&OE...........
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, the trade prospects in China. How will you present the argument that Australia is a reliable supplier of LNG?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well by pointing to the facts. The North-West Shelf venture has been up and running for years, it';s been a very reliable supplier both domestically and internationally. We are mature, sophisticated people in the energy area and we have a very good track record. And I';ll argue very strongly that reliability, continuity, stability are things just as important, if not more important, than sheer price comparisons. Without knowing of course exactly what the price comparisons are I';ll be arguing that there are a lot of things involved in decisions of this nature, not only the reliability and continuity of supply but also of course the relevance of these decisions to the overall relationship, economic, and its longer term prospects.
JOURNALIST:
How would you rate our chances of winning that contract?
PRIME MINISTER:
It';s going to be quite difficult, I would say that. I think it';s very difficult. I take the view that it';s my responsibility, my job, to give it the best shot I can and to argue very strongly. I think Australia has a very good case both on grounds of reliability and efficiency and also what this might mean to the long term prospects and the long term debts of the economic relationship between our two countries.
JOURNALIST:
Do you anticipate having to give the Chinese leadership any reassurance re: the tripartiate talks involving Japan and the United States?
PRIME MINISTER:
I';ll be very happy to deal with it, very happy. There is nothing in that that';s the least bit menacing to the Chinese, it shouldn';t be seen that way at all. And indeed one of things I will do in Beijing is to raise the desirability of resuming our own security dialogue with China. We shouldn';t taken (inaudible) references to things like security dialogues, they';re not code for some kind of international menace, quite the reverse. And I';m certain that there will be no grounds for any long term concern, I';ve already conveyed this view to the Chinese Government and moreover I';ll argue that it';s in our interest to resume the security dialogue between Australia and China.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what has 30 years of diplomatic relations with China meant for Australia do you think?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh it';s meant a much deeper people to people relationship, it';s meant that, for example, amongst other things after Italian, Chinese, various dialects I should say, using the term generically, is more widely spoken in Australia than any other foreign language. That we have a very deep economic relationship and we are engaging with a country which is a major world power. China is a big country of growing influence, of growing strength, and it stands to reason that it is a country with whom we should engage. Our exports to China have grown enormously over the last five years, it';s what our third or fourth best trading partner. And we can offer them a lot in relation to the Olympic Games in 2008. Without in any way being presumptuous about it I will indicate to the Chinese Government that if we can help in any way we will. And given the huge success of the Sydney Olympics I hope that';s borne in mind. But that is a matter for them. China will benefit enormously from the Olympic Games, I think it will be part of the dynamic of the changing character of the Chinese nation.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, your Treasurer is ramping up the rhetoric re: the sell off of Telstra. Would you now like to see it sold off sooner rather than later?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh our policy has not changed. Our policy is that we won';t sell further shares in Telstra until things in the bush are up to scratch.
JOURNALIST:
Are they up to scratch?
PRIME MINISTER:
They';re getting better. The scratches are lighter and they are getting better. But there are still things to be done but I';m pleased at the improvements and I hope there';s more in the pipeline.
JOURNALIST:
Do you believe that the sell off of Telstra is dependent upon, or that our ability to cover our health and welfare needs is dependent upon the sale of Telstra?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there are a number of reasons why we should proceed after things in the bush are up to scratch to look at further sales of Telstra. The obvious, how shall I put it, the contradictory character of the existing ownership structure. But look let's not confuse it. Our position is that we won';t sell further shares in Telstra until things in the bush are up to scratch. Things in the bush are getting better and obviously that';s good.
JOURNALIST:
Would you think that they will be up to scratch within this term of the Government?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I never like to sort of commit myself to those things Jim. I like to state the principle or the generic and work towards achieving that goal without making myself a hostage to some kind of tight timetable.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, a Newspoll shows that almost one in two Australians believe they';ll be worse off by the Budget. Does that figure surprise you?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think this was always going to be a Budget that was seen as tight and firm and holding back on expenditures in a number of area. And when that is the atmosphere in which a Budget is presented people tend to respond in that way to poll questions when they';re asked it. I think it was the right Budget for the time. It was, as I indicated to Federal Council, going to be appropriately firm. And it has been appropriately firm and I believe that the Parliament should pass it.
JOURNALIST:
You don';t believe that you';ve misread the public mood?
PRIME MINISTER:
No what you have to do in a Budget is do what is good for the long term interests of the economy and sometimes that involves taking decisions that in the short term are unpopular. Nobody likes things like prescription charges going up. But bear in mind that a lot of prescriptions that people fill don';t reach the safety net now. So there';ll be no cost impact for people in relation to those. But we can';t go on paying for something that';s growing almost exponentially without introducing some constraints and if we don';t do it now it will be harder later on. Now that';s not popular now but I think as time goes by people will accept well that was the right thing to do, we didn';t like it at the time, and said so, but gee I';m glad we did it because if we hadn';t of the thing would have become unafforable by now and we might be missing out on vital drugs or new drugs coming onto the list.
I think that will do.
Thank you.
[ends]