Subjects: Opening of the new ABC Ultimo centre; Embassy closure; terror threat; ASPI report; ASIO; Justice John Dowd; handguns; Peter Reith; drought.
E&OE...........
GLOVER:
We';re joined by the Prime Minister John Howard. Good afternoon.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello Richard.
GLOVER:
You';ve opened the new building. Do you like it?
PRIME MINISTER:
It';s very impressive. It brings everybody together. I don';t have to go from one location to another.
GLOVER:
And we save on real estate which…
PRIME MINISTER:
Of course it does.
GLOVER:
You';ve of course decided to close the Philippines Embassy in Manila. There has been some criticism from the Philippine Government that that';s really giving into terrorists. It';s making them able to close things down. Do you think we overreacted?
PRIME MINISTER:
No we don';t. I saw the intelligence this morning. It couldn';t have been more explicit. When I saw it I rang the Foreign Minister straight away and he';d already decided to close the Embassy. It would have been recklessly negligent on the part of the Government if it hadn';t of taken that action. It';s a very difficult situation. I';m sorry when these things occur, but what alternative do you have when you get an explicit warning that somebody is going to do great damage to an Australian Embassy and a particular country is nominated and the warning is very explicit. You really have no alternative other than to react in the way we have. In the long run the question of whether the terrorists win will be determined by a lot of things, including the willingness of countries such as Australia to stick with other like-minded countries in continuing to fight terrorism. But no Government can ever ignore its first responsibility to do everything it can to protect people. And in the process of doing that we have to preserve a sense of perspective and proportion, so when you have a warning as explicit as we received, you really have no alternative.
GLOVER:
Okay. I know that the Canadians and it seems the British have made the same determination.
PRIME MINISTER:
Similar warnings I gather have been given.
GLOVER:
Okay. Now you can';t tell me a lot about the warning, but do we know where it is coming from?
PRIME MINISTER:
We have suspicions but I don';t want to give voice to those because I don';t want to do anything at all that might in any way compromise the source.
GLOVER:
I guess it's Islamic fundamental extremism, is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Generally speaking that's behind all of the terrorism which is of concern to Australia.
GLOVER:
Okay, we've woken this morning in Sydney to these images on the front page of the local paper of the Harbour Bridge with guards, almost [inaudible] to the Premier today. We've got to start thinking in a totally different way and in a way that quite disturbing to Australia, isn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, I don't like it at all. I mean, I've grown up in Sydney and I've grown up of being used to seeing everything, anything and everything I want to do and I continue within the limits of the job and the responsibility I know have to do and want to do the same things. But we have to try and respond while preserving our open, free way of life. I think Australians who are greater adapters and one of the great capacities Australians have is to adapt to new circumstances for different challenges and to keep both a sense of perspective and also a sense of humour.
GLOVER:
Okay, but [inaudible] very difficult for this country which has never been invaded. Darwin and the war [inaudible] has never really been attacked on home soil.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it is different. But that doesn't mean to say we can't adapt. I mean, we have adapted to an enormous number of things and we do it rather better for a number of reasons. One of the reasons we do it better is that we don't have a class structure. Whenever you are required as a people to pull together to achieve a common goal, it's that much easier if you don't have a class structure. If people don't think, oh well he will have to or they will have to do something before I will have to or we will have to - Australians don';t think like that. By and large Australians think well, we together have to do something to make this work and to provide the appropriate response.
GLOVER:
Okay, but the one division we [inaudible] we could argue about class but we've certainly got this division in Sydney between the Muslims and the non-Muslim Australians, we see it in Baulkum Hills for instance, where this bloke wants to build a place of worship. And I think there's 4,500 complaints come in to that, there's only a handful of people in the area. We have got some tensions here that we've got to acknowledge, don't we?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, we do and we have to maintain not only our sense of proportion and our sense of humour, but also our sense of tolerance. I feel sorry for Islamic Australians because there are some in the community, a very small number who want to pick on them, and that's not fair and I ask them to stop doing so because it's not fair. I've met a lot of Islamic Australians who are very upset about what happened in Bali, they're very upset about terrorism, they're frightened about it as you and I are concerned about it. And once again, though I think the great majority of Australians are open, and tolerant, and welcoming, and they will overcome the prejudice of a very small minority.
GLOVER:
Okay. But isn't the role as people like you for instance that jump more quickly on their comments? For instance, like Fred Nile the other day about the Muslim women and the veil?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it's important for people in my position to do what I've just done and that is make a very strong plea for tolerance and a very strong plea for people to be treated as they deserve to be treated according to how they behave.
GLOVER:
I mean, you we're a little a slow on the uptake?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, look, I don't accept that. But, I mean, there's no point in going over that now. I mean, you can look at the transcript but I mean, there's no point in going over that. I've made my position clear.
GLOVER:
Okay. [inaudible] with the Prime Minister, John Howard. Now, your defence think-tank, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute said today, there's little evidence that Iraq would give weapons of mass destruction to al-Qaeda and in lots of ways Iraq, you're looking a little bit like a distraction in terms of the war on terror. Shouldn't we be focusing on al-Qaeda instead of going off on, really what is a separate issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it is separate in one sense, but that doesn't diminish its importance. I'm not arguing that there's a proven link between the 11th of September and Iraq, nobody has argued that. I'm not saying there isn't, let me make it clear. The point we have made and the point the United Nations have made, and remember the United Nations Security Council by a vote of 15-nil has called on Iraq to give up weapons of mass destruction and has called upon to Iraq to accept weapons inspectors under unprecedentedly stringent terms. So, this is not just me or George Bush, this is 15 members of the Security Council. And what I've said, and what many others have said, is that we want this solved through the United Nations. I don't want military conflict, but if you ask me can I be absolutely certain, can anybody be absolutely certain that a country like Iraq wouldn't allow weapons of mass destruction to get into the hands of terrorists, no I can't. And that is an added reason why Iraq should be disarmed, it's not the only reason, but it's in added reason.
GLOVER:
Sure. Well everyday that passes, the link between Bali bombings and JI becomes clearer, the link between JI and al-Qaeda becomes clearer in turn and yet we seem to be setting so much of our mental energy off on this other, well other show.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well to use that old expression you can walk and chew gum at the same time and this idea that because of what has happened, we don't worry at all about other challenges is a foolish idea…
GLOVER:
Would the Australian people be saying - for God's sake, John Howard, concentrate your mind to the north of Australia, concentrate you mind on al-Qaeda, concentrate our forces on the protection of the homeland, leave Iraq alone?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think the Australian people are wanting us, as we are doing and as we have always done, to give top priority to immediate defence and security challenges. But they also accept and understand that we have a wider role and we have a wider contribution to make through the United Nations Security Council. The ultimate nightmare in the world in which we now live would be for a country such as Iraq to allow weapons of mass destruction to fall into the hands of terrorists…
GLOVER:
Sure. [Inaudible] policy… make today, make today. That is more likely to happen.
PRIME MINISTER:
Can I just finish my point and then you quote me anything you like. The point I make is that unlike other countries that have weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has a track record of using them and if a country has a track record of using them, then the possibility is greater and the concern must be the greater.
GLOVER:
Okay. Australian strategic policy, [inaudible] defence has been…
PRIME MINISTER:
No, hang on. When you say our defence think-tank it's not a Government's body, it is an independent body. We provide funding just as we provide funding for the ABC. We don't control its editorial comments, as you know. And just as we provide funding to this organisation, I can assure you we don't control its editorials.
GLOVER:
Okay, I just put the idea to you that… the supply of weapons of mass destruction to al-Qaeda is, in their view, more likely to happen during the chaos while the US invasion than it is if you leave Saddam Hussein alone.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's a view that they have. It's not a view I share. In the end, these are judgements that different people will arrive at different conclusions …
GLOVER:
I mean, the most basic point I suppose is that you've got in Iraq this secular regime, mad regime, but a secular regime…
PRIME MINISTER:
It's worse than a mad regime. It is a very tyrannical regime and it's a regime that used poison gas against its own people…
GLOVER:
[inaudible] with Muslim fundamentalists from al-Qaeda. They're two different threats the world faces and we certainly…
PRIME MINISTER:… they are certainly in bed with Palestinian suicide bombers. It has in fact supported and funded the families of Palestinian suicide bombers and on top of that it has a long record in the past of having funded bodies like Abu Nidal not as active now, but bodies that have, I think, enjoyed a general description of Islamic fundamentalists.
GLOVER:
Okay. Can I just ask you, PM, about al-Qaeda and whether we've done enough in the past. We've had lots of debate about border protection, of course, in this country. But in the end it seems that despite this a number of people have entered this country and have been able to sit and listen to speeches by Bashir, rabble-rousing speeches presumably by Bashir on something like 11 occasions. They've been allowed to stay here. It seems pretty unmolested by ASIO have we had our eye off the ball.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, once again, this was a damned if you do, damned if you don't question. Until fairly recent times organisations such as this weren';t in the news, they weren't seen quite as the threat they were, certainly not before the 11th of September. We are a free and open society. We are a society that if you conduct ASIO raids, there's no shortage of people, including people in the media attacking the Government and ASIO for molesting and interfering with citizens going about their daily lives. I don't think that's a fair criticism of ASIO. It's a very difficult job running a security organisation in a democratic liberal society because people assume that they can go about their lives and their activities and they can go along and hear anybody they like without being molested. We take that view as a Government and most Australians think that unless you're breaking the law or you pose an immediate threat in some other way, you should be unmolested…
GLOVER:
Together we have the [inaudible] now to think ahead…
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, but you also…you can't, it's not fair on the basis of hindsight to turn around and whack the security organisation. Look, I have been in Parliament long enough to know that every occasion in the last 20 years where's there's been any attempt to expand the powers available to the security services, there's been a relentless attack on that by the media, by many people in your own news organisation, by many people on the left hand side of politics. Even now, even now we can't get through the Parliament as yet some very necessary expanses to the ASIO legislation and there is no shortage of people, including people on the bench who are prepared to attack us for going too far. So, I say to the critics of ASIO - ok, one day they're taking their eye of the ball, the next day they're wanting to assume powers that shouldn't be assumed in a democratic society. It's quite a difficult balance, like any other organisation they're not above criticism, but I think they've done in difficult circumstances a good job of balancing those considerations.
GLOVER:
Okay, you're listening to 702 ABC Sydney, the Drive Show, with John Howard, the Prime Minister. You mentioned these judicial critics and I suppose that's a reference to Justice John Dowd - the person who of course has been a member of the Liberal Party…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I know him very well in fact. We shared an electorate. I regard him as a person with whom I had a good friendship. I don't agree with his criticism. I have to also say I don't know where we sit with this whole notion of the separation of powers…
GLOVER:
[Inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't have security of judicial tender, which is fundamental and yet have somebody in that position attacking what is clearly a matter, a measure of public interest, but attacking in a very partisan way.
GLOVER:
Justice John Dowd was a guest on the Drive show a couple of days ago and here's a little of what he said.
John Dowd: We're talking about powers to detain people who committed no crime.
GLOVER:
Okay. That's the people being able to be held for 24 hours without a lawyer and [inaudible] up to a week…
John Dowd: … instance they walk out, they can be arrested again.
GLOVER:
So, it could go on and on you say?
John Dowd: Exactly. You know, we're dealing with sort of well-meaning, slight interruptions to power, we're dealing with the complete removal of the sort of protection that you or I have had for all of our lives.
GLOVER:
That was John Dowd earlier in the week on Drive. He said it's the case have not proved that ASIO needs these extra powers.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he talks about what we've been used to all of our lives and he's about the same age as I am. And I';d say to him that that we';re not being used to having our young people blown up in Bali all of our lives either. We';ve not been used to September 11. We';re living in a different world and in those circumstances it is necessary with appropriate safeguards to adjust. But I do have to make the point again that one of the things on which our system of government rests is the separation of powers. We accept the security of tenure of judges. It';s fundamental to our system. I really think we are getting too many examples now of judges who are straying into the partisan political area and I don';t think it';s a good thing for the judiciary. I believe in a very old fashioned way in the independence of the judiciary.
GLOVER:
So you say to your old friend - John butt out?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';m not using that expression. I';m simply making the point that once you assume the judicial mantle you have to leave the political field and that applies whether you';re a judge in the New South Wales Supreme Court, you are a judge of the High Court, you are a judge of the Family Court, you are a judge of the Federal Court. The concomitance of that is that judicial independence is respected and that politicians should not attack judges.
GLOVER:
Okay. The Prime Minister John Howard. Talking about your old mate, Mr Costello went on radio in Melbourne today. He seemed to imply that you and he have had at least some brief, private discussions on the topic of …
COSTELLO:
He';s talked about it publicly and obviously we';ve referred to that.
MITCHELL:
So it';s still his decision?
COSTELLO:
What he said publicly we referred to.
MITCHELL:
Privately?
COSTELLO:
Well we don';t take it any further than what he said publicly.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he couldn';t have put it better. I mean I';ve got nothing to add to that. He';s talking about the phrase that I';ve used in reply to Kerry O';Brien on at least twenty occasions. I';ve got nothing to add to what I';ve previously said on that subject.
GLOVER:
You';ve had private discussions I suppose….
PRIME MINISTER:
We have private discussions about a lot of things.
GLOVER:
You';ve had private discussions about the leadership?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I';m not going to add to what I';ve said previously on that subject.
GLOVER:
Are you going to still decide next year?
PRIME MINISTER:
I';m not going to add to what I';ve previously said on the subject.
GLOVER:
One of the news stories of the day that';s had a lot of interest here in Sydney is the whole issue of the handgun policy. We had Michael Costa, the New South Wales Police Minister, on earlier in the program and he did seem to be soft-peddling on the idea of banning all these handguns….
PRIME MINISTER:
I thought it was too and I';m very disappointed in that. I';m not soft-peddling and I';m very disappointed indeed to hear that any of the states are softpeddling and within the powers that we have under the Constitution we will do everything we humanly can to get the tightest possible control on handguns. This is a no-brainer as far as I';m concerned.
GLOVER:
And yet you haven';t got the agreement. I think you';ve got three states today….
PRIME MINISTER:
Well a curse on them if I can put it that way as well. There is no excuse for any of the states to baulk at the idea of having a total ban on handguns saving except those who are involved in properly recognised Commonwealth and Olympic Games sporting shooting.
GLOVER:
Okay. He says there';s no easy dividing line between those category…..
PRIME MINISTER:
That is a cop-out. They are the words of somebody who is trying to weasel out of taking a strong stand.
GLOVER:
Okay. He says the other issue, the real issue he says is the Commonwealth is not doing enough on customs…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean only the other day I launched an up-to-date state of the art x-ray facility in Melbourne which enables us to x-ray in 15 minutes giant containers which enable us to find handguns secreted inside other articles inside those containers. So we are doing enormous additional things. This is a cop-out. I mean I simply say to the New South Wales Government and all the state governments - are you serious about handgun control or are you trying to weasel out? We are very…..
GLOVER:
Okay why, is it about the March election and all those…
PRIME MINISTER:
I don';t know. You can talk to Mr Carr about that. I';m not going to allege that. I don';t know because I would have thought on an issue like this that he would have supported me. He said he did. I would have thought this was above party politics. I would have thought something everybody whether you vote Labor or Liberal, whether you like an individual or not, you will support this and I don';t get anybody complaining about this. Very very few.
GLOVER:
It is your belief though that the changes you brought in after Port Arthur have made a real difference to gun deaths?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that is the view of independent researchers. That is their view. I';m saying that it';s…..it hasn';t abolished murder but it';s certainly reduced the number of gun related homicides and that';s the measure and that is the view of independent research carried out in the United States.
GLOVER:
Okay. They';re saying a lot of the guns are actually used in crime in Sydney are actually illegally imported and they';re….
PRIME MINISTER:
Once again this is a cop-out. I mean what I';m talking about is banning the guns and then taking them out of the system. I mean that man who has been alleged to have committed a murder had access to seven guns.
GLOVER:
This is the Latrobe University….
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. It';s just extraordinary. And that happened under State law. That happened under Victorian law. The Federal Government doesn';t have any constitutional power in its own right to pass laws in relation to this. We have to pressure and cajole the states and we';ll continue to do that but I have a very simple position - we want all handguns banned except those strictly related to Commonwealth and Olympic Games sporting shooting activity. Now there can be no excuses, no ifs, buts, maybe. The states are either for or against that and I want to know from all of the states, and if it';s not resolved between the police ministers I will raise it at the Premiers'; conference meeting. There';s nothing more important. We';re talking about safety and security. People want protection against terrorists, they also want protection against random shootings as they wander around the street. I don';t want this country to end up like America, I don';t want Sydney to end up like Washington or some of the other….
GLOVER:
I think there is a connection. People';s patience with those issues is actually down because of the terror threat.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well of course and so they should be. I mean what they';re saying and to all of us, they';re saying to me as Prime Minister, they';re saying to Bob Carr and Steve Bracks - look forget your differences, agree on this, make it as tough as possible….
GLOVER:
And make the place as safe as possible.
PRIME MINISTER:
….make it a safer country. And I';m for that.
GLOVER:
News coming up in a second. Let me ask you two quick questions before we hit it. Peter Reith, is he going to be on the ABC Board?
PRIME MINISTER:
That issue has not been discussed by the Cabinet.
GLOVER:
You haven';t made that determination?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the vacancy won';t arise until next year and until then I';m not focusing on it.
GLOVER:
Okay. Have you got his name in the back of your head?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don';t actually have any name in the back of my head. Let me say I have a high regard for Peter Reith. I think…
GLOVER:
Because people say he';s a tarnished person because of the children overboard…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think he did a magnificent job as the industrial relations minister. I think what he did to reform the Australian waterfront added enormously to our current economic prosperity and I think the criticism made of him on other issues doesn';t sufficiently put into the balance the contribution he made on things like that.
GLOVER:
If the negative issue is one about not telling the truth is that precisely the wrong person to be on the public broadcaster?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I';m not getting into a debate about who';s going to go on the board of the ABC.
GLOVER:
Okay. The drought, is the money getting their fast enough?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
GLOVER:
There seems to be legitimate concerns that there';s not.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well whenever you have the state and federal government involved in the same process there always seems to be some glitches but those glitches are being removed and money is flowing and according to Peter Costello';s budget estimates yesterday you';re looking at about $375 million this year and next year on top of the $470 million worth of farm management deposits which have enabled farmers with a tax advantage to use money from the good years to help them in the bad years.
GLOVER:
Okay. You know no one in the bush actually wears those clothes that you wear when you go out there? They all wear a kind of nylon jacket and a hat that says Max Haulage. You';ve got to get up to date here. They don';t wear that bush hat any more, they don';t wear the cream pants.
PRIME MINISTER:
Don';t they. I';ll just have to wallow in the 1950s again or something. Look I don';t think they existed in the 1950s.
GLOVER:
Thanks for your time.
PRIME MINISTER:
Okay.
[Ends]