Subjects: Kokoda; Iraq; Kyoto Protocol; Zimbabwe; Tony Blair; tourism industry; family tax benefits; economic growth; interest rates; sugar cane industry; Alan Fels, September 11; civil liberties; St George rugby club.
E&OE...........
JOURNALIST:
Joining us live in the studio this morning now, the Prime Minister of Australia, Mr John Howard. Prime Minister, Good morning, welcome to Brisbane.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning. Nice to be back as always.
JOURNALIST:
Now you're here for the National RSL Congress and a few other functions as well, no doubt. So, lets get the ball rolling by saying what do you make of Simon Crean's suggestion that we have a special Kokoda Day holiday?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it's worth looking at. We tend, and I think all Governments in Australia tended to get the advice of the RSL about observances of battles and so forth and we'll obviously be guided by them. But it was an incredibly important series of battles along the track. They were decisive and of course result was at Milne Bay that the first land defeat was inflicted on the Japanese Imperial Army, so anything that enhances the recollection and observance of those particular deeds that were so important directly for Australia, I'd be supportive of.
JOURNALIST:
Of course there are some more serious matters on the agenda today and one of those is calling for caution before committing troops to a possible US-led offence against Iraq.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think everybody's cautious. I don't want to see Australia forces go overseas again. I would never want to see that happen and I'd have to be completely satisfied that it was in Australia's national interest before supporting it happening. Now, we haven't received any requests from the Americans. We haven't made any advanced commitment. But it is a difficult issue, not just for the Americans, for the whole world and it won't go away by not thinking about it. And Iraq's record in the past of failure to comply with UN resolutions is notorious. One of the things I've got to keep coming back to on this is that there would not be a problem if Iraq had complied in full with the resolutions of the Security Council. I mean, the starting point seems to be for some people, to ignore that. The starting point for me is to start with that. Now, if Iraq were to allow the inspectors in and to do exactly what they were told, what they were asked and if they were given unimpeded, uninterrupted access and then any requests about destruction of discovered material or weapons adhered to, then I believe the whole atmosphere of this thing would change overnight. I would hope that that might occur. I think everybody is and most people are pushing in that direction and I'm sure the Americans would be pleased to see that happen. This is a difficult issue, but I think if you're going to have a serious analysis of it, you've got to start with the problem. And the problem is the failure of Iraq to comply with the resolutions of the Security Council and to let those inspectors in and more than that, to give them unimpeded, uninterrupted access and if they're requested to so to comply fully with any other instructions. Now, over the years Iraq has refused time and time again to do that. And you can understand the sense of vulnerability that America feels after what happened last year. And America doesn't want to be in a position where that sort of thing happens again if they can possibly prevent it and the great fear of course is that there will be another attack.
JOURNALIST:
While we're on international issues and indeed global issues, word's through this morning that Russia and China have promised to ratify, what they call, the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. It's something that we've held back from, both ourselves and the United States. We are now the only two developed nations, I'm told, refusing to implement the deal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Will that situation change our stand on the matter?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that, what you've just said is strictly not true. We're not refusing to control our greenhouse gas emissions. We in fact have committed ourselves to meet the target set for Australia by Kyoto. We will meet the Kyoto target. What we have so far refused to do is to ratify the entire protocol.
JOURNALIST:
So, Australia remains in control, effectively?
PRIME MINISTER:
In control of the target?
JOURNALIST:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes. We are quite willing to do our bit in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We were given a target of 108 by Kyoto and we are now in 2002, in striking distance of meeting that and we will meet it. And we're doing a lot of things domestically to meet it. And our refusal to sign the protocol is based on our own independent assessment of our national interest. It's not because America has refused to sign, anybody who's suggesting that we're just staying out of the protocol because America is staying out of it is wrong. If we become convinced in the months ahead that it's in Australia's interest to sign the protocol, we'll sign it whether America has signed it or not, in the same way that we ratified the International Criminal Court, despite the fact that America didn't wish to do so. But our concern at the moment about ratifying Kyoto is that we don't know what the obligations in the next two assessment periods are. And unlike most developed countries, Australia is a net exporter of energy and that puts us in a very special position. And we don't want to take on burdens that will leave our energy industries, in particular, in an uncompetitive position with competitor countries in our part of the world that are not part of the International Protocol. I mean, Indonesia would be a country that comes to mind immediately.
JOURNALIST:
Whilst we are on the subject of World Summit, what do you make of Mr Robert Mugabe high-jacking the whole proceedings yesterday, having an out and out attack on Mr Blair and refusing to stop kicking white farmers off their land?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think he's behaving in quite appalling fashion. The attacks on Britain are ludicrous. I mean, Zimbabwe got her independence from Britain more than 20 years ago and he's fighting old battles. The appalling misery of the people of Zimbabwe is not the fault of Britain. If anything, it's the fault of the mismanagement of that country by the Mugabe Government. As far as kicking white farmers off are concerned, well any arbitrary appropriation of peoples property has got to be condemned. The people who are suffering most are the black employees of those white farmers, none of whom have savings, none of whom have anywhere to go. And you have this ridiculous situation, according to reports, that the Government of Zimbabwe is refusing to accept some offerings of grain because of their concerns about genetic modification. I have to say that it really does give a particular twist to the deprivation and the poverty of many countries in Africa. I mean, bad governance is one of the major reasons why people starve in Africa, bad governance, not the insensitivity of the wealthier countries. There is plenty of willingness on the part of wealthier countries to help. There is a marked unwillingness on the part of many people in government in many of those countries to adopt government practises and good administration that ensure that food gets around. Its political failure is as much, if not more, to blame for poverty in many parts of the world than the alleged heartlessness of the wealthier countries of the world.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, your Government finds itself in a fairly well, lets use the expression, mature situation. You've been in power for six and a half years…
PRIME MINISTER:
Energetic maturity.
JOURNALIST:
You've been in power, as I said, for six and a half years. Where do you go from here? What are the big issues that you now…?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, there's three or four huge issues. The whole question of the balance in our society between work and family responsibilities – I call this the barbecue stopper. It gets people of all ages in all situations going. I think that's very important. How we handle the ageing of the population, energetically. And also, the whole question of sustainable development, I mean, we've touched a little bit on that in relation to Kyoto. Now, they're three issues that I identified. There all medium-long term issues that I identified before the last election. And We've already done a lot to give people greater choice about balancing their work and family responsibilities and if we can afford it, I'd like to more - and that's one of the big things we have under study at the moment. The ageing of the population, we've got a few challenges on that front. I mean, one of the strange things about this country is if you take the age cohort of 55 to 64, we have one of the lowest participation rates of that age grouping in the workforce of comparable countries around the world, ours is something like 49, versus figures of 58, 59, 60 per cent in countries like the United States and New Zealand.
JOURNALIST:
Funny you should say that Prime Minister, I had a phone call yesterday from a chap who I';ve known for many years. He';s 54 years old, he';s recently sold this law franchise business because he was sick of working 16 hours a day, six days a week, and has immense experience in the tourism and travel industry, you would think that he would be able to walk back into the workforce, he said it';s almost (inaudible).
PRIME MINSTER:
Well I think there is a cultural resistance which has got to change and government';s have got change their attitude but private industry has got to change its attitude. And we have so many high quality people in that age group and indeed older, people are living longer, they';re healthier, they have a lot to contribute to the community and I think we developed a mindset 20 years ago that lead to professional firms of accountants and lawyers and soforth pushing partners out the door at the age of 60 instead of allowing them to wind down. I mean I';m not saying you keep going full bore and drawing your same share of the profits. But instead of going from sort of six days a week to zap overnight you ought to go from six down to five to four and so-forth through your 60';s. We have got to change our mindset on these things in a very big way because we';re losing quality people, there are fewer people coming in at the bottom end because the population is ageing and it';s something that the whole community has got to come to grips with and do something about and at a government level we';ve got to give a lead.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, let';s move onto another tin of worms if you like, we take a lot of calls on this programme on the family tax benefit, people who haven';t been able to manage it, we';ve now got a situation where lots and lots of Australian people have to pay money back. Is there a way that this can be simplified.
PRIME MINSTER:
Well there';s a way in which you can make it more flexible and we';re looking at that and I would expect before very long that Senator Vanstone will make some announcements on behalf of the Government regarding that. But you will never get a situation, because this is a family tax benefit, you will never get situation where everybody at the end of the year gets a nil assessment, I mean how many people listening to this programme at the end of the year when they get their tax assessment it shows exactly nil?
JOURNALIST:
You can only dream.
PRIME MINSTER:
Yeah but see actually some people get a refund and then a lot of people have to pay a bit. Now this is a tax benefit and because people';s incomes fluctuate in a way that they might be able to predict you do get quite a lot of people having to pay back a bit. But you also get a lot of people getting top up at the end of the year. I think there are more people pay back than are people who received a top up. But there';s quite a lot on both sides. Now we';d like to minimise the number and give greater flexibility but I don';t think you can ever get a situation where there';s no adjustment for anybody. I mean what we';re talking about here is if people are underpaid they should get the extra amount at the end of the year, if they';re overpaid they should pay something back. The one way you could avoid it is of course to take it all as a lump sum at the end of the year.
JOURNALIST:
Yes.
PRIME MINSTER:
Now you can do that, not many people do though.
JOURNALIST:
It';s an option I took because I got into strife. That';s a personal experience.
PRIME MINSTER:
A lot of people can';t afford that, they need the money each fortnight as the year goes on but there';s a range of options. I mean one option, that I urge on some people that they can take a bit less than what they';re entitled to and then you end up with a top up at the end of the year, but there are a number of options that we';re looking at to make it even more flexible but it is, to be quite frank about it, if you have a system which is based on your taxable income then it is damn near impossible to predict everybody';s taxable income precisely as the year goes on and therefore there';s going to be some kind of adjustment.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) if you're running your own business, you';re in retail or something, you just don';t know what your cash flow…?
PRIME MINSTER:
Well,of course you don';t or if you';re somebody whose child has perhaps reached the age - school age and you';re going back into the workforce, you';re looking around for part time work, this applies particularly for women who get the benefit of that family tax b which is for single income families and then they go from being a single income family to a double income family during the year but they have no idea at the beginning of the year, or even half way through it exactly how much work they';re going to get, a lot of people, a school teacher might be on a casual basis and only know from week to week how much work he or she is going to get. Now these are the sort of things you have, now you can avoid that by saying well I won';t take any of it until the end of the year and then it';s a nice chunky cheque. Now people who can afford to do that I would urge them very strongly to do so.
JOURNALIST:
Let';s look at economic growth, figures out yesterday showing a slowing down…
PRIME MINSTER:
Still very solid though.
JOURNALIST:
Admittedly still very solid. Would you then be of a view that the Reserve Bank should stay away from interest rates for a bit?
PRIME MINSTER:
Well I don';t normally speculate about interest rates but normally if there';s any change in interest rates the bank says something at 9.30 the day after the board meeting.
JOURNALIST:
Alright, okay we';ll leave it there.
PRIME MINSTER:
Well you know it';s a matter for the bank.
JOURNALIST:
Okay. Now tourism, matters that are of very great concern to Queensland is because two of the fundamental drivers of the Queensland economy, sugar and tourism, are both in a bit of strife at the moment. What can the Federal Government do to help?
PRIME MINSTER:
Well are a looking at the sugar industry, it';s difficult, we';d like to help, and we will be providing some initiatives. This is also something where the State Government has got to play a part and I';m happy to work with the State Government, it';s not something where I think either of us should try and score political points if we';re interested in the industry. The Federal Government gave a very generous package several years ago, about $60 million, and there wasn';t a lot of restructuring as a result of that. And I';ve said this time that whilst we are willing to consider help and we';re still working out what is the best way to help, we do want in return for that sum restructuring of the industry, significant restructuring, there are some units that are too small and will have to be absorbed, I am willing to look at things like a levy, the mandating of ethanol, there are arguments for and against both of those things, I';m not saying we';ve decided on either of them but I want everything on the table, the other thing that';s got to be on the table are the provisions of the Queensland Sugar Act which provide some fairly restrictive monopoly trading conditions for the mills and for some growers. I think everything has got to be on the table, I don';t think anything should be regarded as sacrosanct and when any industry comes to the Government and says we want taxpayers help the Government as the guardian of the taxpayer is entitled to say well we will only give you help if you do certain things that make that help worthwhile. Now that really is the attitude I bring to this. The sugar industry is very important to Queensland, it';s very important to all of those coastal towns, it';s also important to communities in northern New South Wales and I don';t want to see the industry and those communities go to the wall, I don';t. but we have to all of us work together, and that includes the Queensland Government as well.
JOURNALIST:
Very nice profile on Monday night done by Australian Story on Professor Alan Fels, are you sad to see him go?
PRIME MINSTER:
Well I saw it, I was quite touched by the profile, I feel for any parents whose child has schizophrenia. I thought it portrayed the man in a very sensitive light. He';s done a very good job, like anybody holding a high profile position he';s had his critics but by and large he';s certainly served the consumer well. Very well. And he certainly was very helpful in the role that he played at the time of the introduction of the new tax system because one of the concerns we had that some people, and a small minority of people might try and exploit the change over to the new tax system to the detriment of the public and also to the detriment of the Government';s attempts to modernise our tax system. That they were not able to do so was due in no small measure to Alan Fels'; work.
JOURNALIST:
Let';s just quickly move on now because time';s getting away from us. 12 months ago you were in the United States, you were there when those horrific attacks occurred on September the 11th, in fact you were in Washington. Does that whole time still sit in the back of your mind, particularly when you';re thinking about Australia';s place in the world stage and the battle against terrorism?
PRIME MINSTER:
Oh yes you can never forget that kind of experience and I was in Washington on the morning of the attack, I had seen the President the day before, I saw him on the 10th and I was due to address Congress on the 12th. And in fact still went to Congress, I didn';t give an address because obviously they were preoccupied with coming to terms with what had occurred the day before, but I did attend public siting of the Congress and the Members of the House of Representatives were very touched that the leader of one of their closest allies was there on the spot to express the feelings of the Australian people. That event, I know it';s a clich to say so, but that event has changed the world, the most remarkable thing about it is that audaciously and successfully terrorists were able to attack the economic and military citadels of the most powerful country mankind has seen and it has left the American';s feeling vulnerable and exposed. And so would we, if that attack had been on Sydney or Brisbane can you imagine how vulnerable we would feel, I mean we feel vulnerable and exposed enough because it was an attack upon a country with which we identify. I mean many Australians have visited Washington and New York, we see the images those two cities almost nightly on our television screens so can you imagine how we';d have felt here if it had occurred…if two Australian cities had been hit and therefore how determined we would be to leave no stone unturned to prevent another attack happening. And this is the sort of some of the thinking we have to acknowledge which is in American minds as they look at other issues.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, an issue that is very very current, we seem to have polarised our audience earlier this morning on this issue. The naming of the man who is on the run in the Northern Territory. Should it have happened, should he have been named realising of course it';s a state responsibility?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes all right…
JOURNALIST:
But on the overall principle….
PRIME MINISTER:
I won';t sort of avoid the question by saying that. State premiers are not normally reluctant [inaudible]. Look in think on balance the police are justified in doing what (inaudible).It';s very hard. If they didn';t do what they';ve done and something horrible additional,you know, a dreadful thing were to occur then the public would be down on them like a tonne of bricks. It's a very hard job the police have. I feel for the man';s family . I was very touched by the appeal from his father and his brother. It must be terrible for the poor people. I feel for them very much. But you';ve also got to feel for the victims of whoever may have carried out this crime. I don';t make any judgement. He has a presumption of innocence and I understand what the Civil Liberties Council Terry O';Gorman and others are saying is that well he';s been denied that. I understand on the other hand what about the safety of other people who might be at risk. That';s the dilemma the police have and my, I hope commonsense,reaction is that on balance the police are justified in doing what they';ve done.
JOURNALIST:
Yes. Well we argued about this between ourselves this morning about….
PRIME MINISTER:
I';m half right and half wrong am I?
JOURNALIST:
It really has polarised the audience. A very very heated argument in both directions. You would agree though that the presumption of innocence is one of the cornerstones of justice?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it is the cornerstone of justice and the fact that he';s been named as a suspect doesn';t, if this person were charged it doesn';t remove the presumption of innocence, it doesn';t remove the burden on the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he';s committed a crime. You';ve got to remember that. What it does of course is because he';s identified it might show, people argue, and I understand this argument, colour the view that any future jury would have about him. I understand all of that but against that you';ve got the worry of what….you know, you warn the public. How do you warn the public. You can';t warn the public about somebody who';s anonymous.
JOURNALIST:
Finally Mr Howard, something light to finish up on. You';re a St George fan. Can they beat Newcastle and make the final 8?
PRIME MINISTER:
It';s going to be very hard. It';s going to be very very hard indeed. I mean I wish them well but it';s a tough call. It really is a tough call and I hope they make it. But Newcastle';s in pretty good shape.
JOURNALIST:
They sure are.
PRIME MINISTER:
Aren';t they.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister Mr Howard thank you very very much for being with us this morning. Look forward to seeing you next time you';re in town and enjoy the RSL National Congress.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thanks a lot.
[ends]