PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
05/12/2002
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
12714
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP PRESS CONFERENCE, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA

Subjects: National Research Priorities; asylum seekers; South East Asian relations; UN Charter.

E&OE...........

Well ladies and gentlemen, I have called this news conference, and I';m accompanied at it by ministerial colleagues Dr Nelson and Peter McGauran, and also Dr Robin Batterham, the Chief Scientist, to announce research priorities that have been established by the Government.

But before I move to that can I take the opportunity to express my very deep concern and sympathy regarding the very bad bushfires that are ringing Sydney. It has all the hallmarks of a challenge as great if not greater than the bushfires that affected many areas of New South Wales around Christmas last year. There are more than 3000 firefighters and there are 66 blazes, and again I express on behalf of the nation our thanks and our admiration for their professionalism, their heroism, their dedication to duty, and their exemplification of the great volunteer spirit of the Australian people.

There has in the lead up to this latest bushfire challenge there has been very close cooperation between the Commonwealth and the New South Wales Government and indeed the Commonwealth Government and other state governments. You';ll be aware that the Commonwealth agreed to contribute half the cost of the purchase of three helitankers - three Elvises - and fortunately and I think we can all be very grateful they arrived some time ago and as a result we';ve been able to augment the firefighting capacity of our volunteers and obviously the Commonwealth Government stands ready to cooperate in any other way that is needed and to provide any other appropriate assistance to the New South Wales Government.

15 homes have been destroyed as well as a number of businesses and other property. The bushfires have also damaged the Army barracks and equipment at Holsworthy which of course is in the electorate of the Assistant Minister for Defence and Mrs Vale has gone to Holsworthy this morning and on behalf of the Government will of course be visiting other areas because her electorate is one of those which has been touched very badly. The weather conditions remain adverse and that continues to be a matter of real concern. But can I say that our thoughts and prayers are very much with everybody so challenged and affected and once again can I thank the magnificent firefighters. They do exemplify the Australian spirit in a quite outstanding fashion.

Ladies and gentlemen I have pleasure in announcing that following consultation, very wide consultation, presided over, and I thank him, by the Chief Scientist, and also Mr Jim Peacock…Dr Jim Peacock, the President of the Academy of Science. The Government has decided to establish four national research priorities. And this is the first time that the Commonwealth has set national research priorities. It';s an exercise that will build on our national research strengths while seeking new opportunities in emerging areas. The four priorities we have established are an environmentally sustainable Australia; promoting and maintaining good health; frontier technologies for building and transforming Australian industries; and importantly also, safeguarding Australia.

The momentum for establishing the research priorities really came out of the work of the Prime Minister's Science Engineering and Innovation Council and I'm delighted, in many ways, to have the cream of Australia's scientific community here in the courtyard this morning, this afternoon, to witness this very important announcement. The establishment of these priorities was foreshadowed in the Backing Australia's Ability program that I outlined at the beginning of last year. And self evidently, the four areas that we have chosen are very important to Australia's future. Part of the Backing Australia's Ability commitment, of course, was a very significant increase in Australian research grants, following the very significant increase that occurred several years earlier in relation to research for medical science. And I should say that the selection of these followed a public consultation with about 800 researchers, industry groups and community representatives. They were followed by an examination of more than 180 public submissions, and as I say, an expert committee chaired by Dr Jim Peacock and including the chief scientist, submitted a short list to the Government. And although the priorities required particularly strong input from science, engineering and technology based research, the social sciences and the humanities will also play an important collaborative role in their implementation. It is another indication of the supreme importance that this Government places on science, the place of science in our national life and the determination that the achievements of our scientists will attract. The same level of regard and respect as the achievement of our sportsmen and women and the achievements of our entrepreneurs. Are there any questions?

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister, do you envisage that funding better techniques of fighting bushfires could come out [inaudible].

PRIME MINISTER:

Safe guarding Australia? Well, I think it might come under that and it might in fact come under the first one relating to the environment.

JOURNALIST:

Is there any specific about the fires…?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I mean, you know, you indicate the areas and then you leave it to the scientists. And if I put a dud scientific interpretation on any of this, I've got plenty of people to sort of assist me, but my understanding of these things, you establish the areas and then you leave it to the researchers.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister, the areas are quite broad [inaudible] as you've pointed out, but something like safeguarding Australia. I mean, can you give any sort of broad examples of what kind of…?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well obviously, one of the things that will come under that will be contributions that science can make towards the fight against terrorism. And indeed, one of the presentations that we had at the council this morning highlighted the very significant contribution that CrimTrac - an initiative initially coming from this council back in 1999 - the contribution that that has made because we established a nationally coherent database, the contribution that has made to the relatively speedy resolution of the identification of victims following the Bali outrage and then there were other aspects of that presentation, which I won't go into at this stage, which highlighted the enormous capacity of science and technology to make a contribution.

JOURNALIST:

Does this mean… the full priorities, does that mean that all research grants over X number of years will have to fit into those…?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, they're the priorities, but the chief scientist may want to say something about that.

BATTERHAM:

We're not expecting these priorities to cover all science in Australia, there's a lot of excellence science that is part of our base that has to go on and will go on. But these priorities give us an opportunity to go across the whole of Government so that the different agencies, the different establishments can in fact get collaborative acts together to focus on these priorities. This will be encouraging the collaboration, which is often proved very difficult to get organised in the past because of the way we tend to look at things in [inaudible].

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister, can I ask whether this will be the set of priorities from now for the next, you know, year? Four years, ten years? Will we have enough…?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, we don't extend… I mean, we don't sort of have a sunset clause in them. We regard them as the sort of priorities that… for a significant period of time until evidence emerges that some other broad areas should replace one of the four broad areas we've identified and I think they ought to be priorities for many years into the future. You do need a lot of stability and constancy in areas like this and one of these things that we have endeavoured to do is to bring as much predictability and constancy and stability as you can to this area. So I would see them, self evidently, continuing for a long time into the future. I don't put any time limit on. They're not related to a term of government or any particular period of years.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, on the [inaudible] stem cell legislation in the Senate, are you happy with the amendments? Do they undermine the ability of the federal and the…?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I understand the final vote is being taken at quarter to one, perhaps the divisions are under way now and I hope that it passes without amendments that in any way undermine the legislation that passed through the House of Representatives. As you know it';s a conscience vote, I supported the legislation, my understanding to date is that the amendments are of a relatively minor kind and won';t disturb the essence of the bill which reflects the agreement negotiated at the Premiers'; conference in April.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, is there any danger that by identifying these particularly science priorities that Australia';s science community could drop the ball in other areas, if they';re chasing Government funding in these priority areas?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well there will always be some who will argue that you shouldn';t have any priority areas and we took all that into account. But as the Chief Scientist said it doesn';t mean that you can';t have research in other areas, it just simply sends a signal. I think it represents a balance between the watering every plant approach yet also the recognition that a nation like Australia should try and establish some broad priorities and should have some idea of the things that it regards as very important. I mean all research is important and all research should be encouraged but there has to be a point at which the community, as expressed through the Government, says well let us identify these areas.

JOURNALIST:

… completed its report into the $46 million in research that was granted for stem cells, do you express some concern?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well that process is still underway and when that process is completed I';ll have something to say about it.

JOURNALIST:

Who will oversee the implementation of these priorities in terms of making sure that scientists aren';t…

PRIME MINISTER:

Well generally I think the Australian Research Council. Do you want to say something about that?

BATTERHAM:

The implementation is something which will evolve, this is a new step for Australia to have whole of government priorities and it would be foolish I think to be too, to dictate too many terms here. So there has to be a certain amount of learning by doing going on in this area. but we would expect after some months of consultation with the individual agencies, the Australian Research Council, CSIRO, DSTO, and so on, to see what the plans are for implementation and then to consider whether they need a bit more encouragement or whether indeed their plans are appropriate. I';d point out that CSIRO, amongst others, has made quite a point of saying that they want to be able to collaborate and they want to be able to do this more easily and this provides the mechanism for that to happen.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, Mr Crean has suggested that you should personally apologise to regional leaders, including Dr Mahathir, for your comments about pre-emption. Do you have any intention of making a personal apology?

PRIME MINISTER:

Let me say this that I find that a rather extraordinary suggestion and I won';t be picking it up. You only apologise when you have something to apologise for. I would invite those who criticise that statement to have a look at it and to have a look particularly at the observation I made that you would use a capacity if there were no alternative, I made that very clear. I';ve re-read my remarks and I would simply offer this observation to my critics that if you look at all of it is a totally unexceptionable statement of the obvious and an annunciation of a basic responsibility of office that any Prime Minister of this country would have. It was not, as I indicated in the House a few days ago, directed at any of our friends in the region and the suggestion that it was, is, wrong and I';m surprised that the Opposition Leader should invite an apology when clearly none is there. It seems to underwrite the view that many have that whenever there is a criticism made of this country or this Government from aboard the response of the Opposition is that we must be wrong and our critics must be right.

JOURNALIST:

Given the fuss that it caused, do you regret saying it, do you wish you hadn';t of said it?

PRIME MINISTER:

No look, I said what I said very carefully and well, I think I have been invited to resile from it and I have declined that invitation. I don';t offer any views on the comments that have been made, I think there are comments that come from certain quarters in the region that are best handled by Adam Gilchrist rather than by John Howard or Alexander Downer. He';s very good and he';s very effective and I think it';s better sometimes in those situations just not to react and that';s advice I would give to the Australian Labor Party, you see one of the things I find quite fascinating I said exactly the same thing in this very courtyard on the 20th of June and nobody said anything, didn';t get boo out of anybody on that. And in fact I said that in the circumstances of which I spoke I would do certain things and I would expect the Opposition to support me and by their silence on that occasion they did. I don';t remember anything being said by Mr Rudd or by Mr Crean on that occasion.

Now I just again say to those who have been critical, including some of the ladies and gentlemen present in this courtyard, you should have a look at what I said, you should have a look at the conditions and precisely what I said. And I';ve read it a couple of times and it';s been reprinted on a few occasions in various columns, and I think it';s a wholly unexceptionable statement of one of the fundamental responsibilities that somebody has. It';s not belligerent. I want to record my gratitude to particularly the Indonesian authorities for the way in which the investigation into the Bali bombing has been carried out. I think the Indonesians have done extremely well. I';ve sent a personal letter of thanks to President Megawati for the work of the Indonesian police. We have excellent intelligence cooperation with countries such as Malaysia and Singapore, and we';re talking about furthering the relationship with the Philippines. I expect all of those associations and relationships to continue. It is clearly in their interests and in our interests. But what I said was said carefully. I meant what I said. I don';t further qualify it but I do invite people to have a look at exactly what I said and to reflect upon their reflections.

JOURNALIST:

If there wasn';t a problem Mr Howard though, why did Mr Downer yesterday have to call in all the regional Ambassadors?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh it';s a normal part of the diplomatic process that if you think a point of view should be put, then you should do so. I mean self-evidently things have been said, but that doesn';t mean that the basis of those claims is correct. But look I';m not going to get into any kind of exchange with the spokesmen, and in one case the leader, of a regional country over this issue. I merely repeat what I have said. I said those words very carefully, very deliberately. I represent the view of the Government. I believe they represent the view of most of the people of Australia.

JOURNALIST:

[inaudible] Prime Minister, why do you think they caused that reaction?

PRIME MINISTER:

Look I don';t… countries are entitled to express views and one of the mistakes we tend to make is we sort of overanalyse everything that is said without understanding that different countries and different people have reasons for expressing particular views on certain issues, and I think what happens between countries is sometimes more important than what is said. I mean if we had overreacted to the reaction from Indonesia regarding the ASIO raids, we';d have perhaps compromised some of the cooperation. I mean you remember them? It';s only a few weeks ago. There were all sorts of stories, and yet now you look back on it and it was just barely a blip on the radar screen. The important thing is that Indonesia and Australia have cooperated extremely closely and I';m very grateful for that, and that reflects great credit on the Indonesian authorities and it indicates the strength underneath of the relationship. This is the very last one because I';ve got to go and have lunch and get ready for even more ferocious questioning.

JOURNALIST:

The Foreign Minister is reported to have told Ambassadors that your remarks were for domestic consumption and that…

PRIME MINISTER:

I don';t know what the…

JOURNALIST:

And there has been change of view on the need to amend the UN charter. Is that accurate?

PRIME MINISTER:

I don';t know what the Foreign Minister said. I haven';t talked to the Foreign Minister since. I have enormous confidence in the Foreign Minister and as always he will handle the matter with great aplomb. But I was asked a question and I answered it. I answered it very deliberately. I don';t seek in any way to qualify the answer that I have given. I invite people to look at the entire answer.

JOURNALIST:

[inaudible] change of view on the UN charter?

PRIME MINISTER:

Change of view?

JOURNALIST:

From your proposition that it needed broadening.

PRIME MINISTER:

Senator Hill and I were making a contribution to a debate that has been going on for some time and will continue. Thank you.

[ends]

12714