E&OE……………………………
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning, Neil.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, this protest by the asylum seekers is pretty sick stuff, digging their own graves, what's your reaction to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we won't be moved by that kind of behaviour. I don't want to react provocatively. We'll continue to process people as speedily as we can but our policy remains in place. And I heard retired Air Marshal, Ray Fennell, on radio this morning and he's the Deputy Chairman of that negotiating group that Philip Ruddock set up and he said that in a country like Australia that kind of behaviour wouldn't attract public support. Whoever is telling them that it might I think is probably advising them poorly.
MITCHELL:
Well, who's driving it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think a whole range of people. There are many people in the Australian community who don't agree with the Government's policy and they are perfectly happy to lend their support to these kind of protests. I understand that living in a detention centre in Woomera is not as comfortable an existence as living in the community in Australia, I accept that but it also has to be said, again, that these people have come to Australia illegally and if we don't have a detention system, which was introduced by the Labor Party when in Government 10 years ago and still more or less supported by the Labor Party when it suits them, when they think that might be the weight of public opinion, then unless we have a detention system our immigration control processes are going to break down.
MITCHELL:
Is it correct that 140 of them are on hunger strike?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I've only heard those reports. I've not directly spoken to anybody, I've not had any written advice to that effect.
MITCHELL:
I guess, is it possible to speed it up any further than we have?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm advised, well the most recent advice I have from Philip Ruddock is that it is being done as speedily as possible but it's not easy because they have to be checked in accordance with internationally accepted principles and sometimes that can take quite a long time.
MITCHELL:
I guess the bottom line is that this latest outburst or protest will not move the Government.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it won't. We're not going to change our policy, we are not going to change our policy. I wish there were an effective alternative but there is not. I mean, it's very easy for people to criticise this policy but nobody is really coming forward with an effective alternative. Some people are coming forward with the alternative of just abandoning mandatory detention. Well, we're not in favour of that, nor do I understand is the Labor Party, although I never quite know where they sit on this. They bob from one expediency to the next.
MITCHELL:
Another issue, Prime Minister, has the Governor-General survived the storm?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you're asking me to make a judgement in relation to the sort of public opinion and I'm trying to make a judgement on the merits. I never believed that grounds existed for me to recommend his removal. I believe that there was an unjustified campaign of vilification against him by some sections, including sections of the media. I think the Opposition took the cheap political shot without long-term thought.
MITCHELL:
But why would anybody be going after the Governor-General?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it was very evident, Neil, from the way the issue was being handled a couple of weeks ago that people were.
MITCHELL:
Why?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't know. I mean, a…look, I don't want to say something in answer to that question which is then misconstrued. I think the Governor-General, at worst, was guilty of some errors of judgement when he was Archbishop of Brisbane, at worst. But who of us have never been guilty of errors of judgement. I'm sure you have, I certainly have, we all have in various ways been guilty of errors of judgement in the discharge of our duties but he'd done nothing morally wrong, he'd done nothing against the criminal law, he'd not failed in his duties as Governor-General. And in those circumstances, no matter how strong the pressure was then and for all I know may still be, I did not believe grounds existed for his removal.
MITCHELL:
Do you believe it's been a bit demeaning, we're getting almost daily replies to criticisms and answers to questions from the Governor-General?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, see, he's damned if he does and he's damned if he doesn't because the criticism made of him when the allegations regarding the Toowoomba school came out before Christmas were that he was too slow. And they were the criticisms and I remember discussing this with him. I mean, he was, initially he obviously hadn't encountered this sort of thing before and I said whenever allegations are made they do need to be replied to and he certainly has that view. Now, some people may think it's a bit demeaning. On the other hand, if he doesn't reply then people are going to say, ah, he's covering something up, here's the evidence we've been waiting for.
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, you hosted the Head of ATSIC, Geoff Clark, at the Lodge last night. Now, given the man's under investigation for a series of sexual assaults or a series of rapes, was that the right thing to do?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I operate on two principles. The first principle is that he is entitled to a presumption of innocence. He still continues to hold the confidence of the body who chose him and he is, by virtue of that office, the leading, the most prominent elected Aboriginal official in Australia.
MITCHELL:
But here we have a man under serious investigation being hosted at the most important place in the country, arguably, hosted to dinner at the Prime Minister's residence.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there have been allegations made against him.
MITCHELL:
Which are under investigation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but he still holds that position and don't we operate on the principle of the presumption of innocence in this country.
MITCHELL:
Is it time he stepped down?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that is a matter for the people who chose him.
MITCHELL:
But you didn't feel compromised by having him there.
PRIME MINISTER:
I didn't feel myself compromised because people know the principle on which I'm operating. I'm not making a judgement about those matters. I don't have any knowledge of them. I am extending to him the presumption of innocence - and it's a principle that's always been upheld in this country - and I would hope…
MITCHELL:
… find that people under investigation stepping down pending the hearing or the decision…
PRIME MINISTER:
The normal thing, as I understand it and correct me if I'm wrong, the history in relation to him was that there were certain charges laid and those charges were dismissed.
MITCHELL:
Yes. There are certain charges now under investigation following a number of women made the Stat Decs saying they were raped.
PRIME MINISTER:
There were some further allegations. And, look, I'm not entering into a judgement on the merits, Neil. I don't know but I am not aware that he's been charged again.
MITCHELL:
I don't believe he has.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that being the case the normal thing is that you hold a position unless and until you are charged.
MITCHELL:
How do you believe that Geoff Clark has avoided the level of scrutiny the Governor-General's getting? I mean, the Governor-General, at worst, is accused of sins of omission. Geoff Clark is accused of rape.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, can I just correct that. The worst the Governor-General is accused of are errors of judgement. You said sins of omission…
MITCHELL:
I don't mean that…[inaudible]…
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, no, I know you don't but in fairness to the man you have to…
MITCHELL:
Okay, alright. Well, Geoff Clark's accused of rape, how does he escape the scrutiny?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I mean, that is an issue that should be debated by others.
MITCHELL:
Is it a double standard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that is an issue that others should debate because I am in an atypical position in relation to the issue and you know that.
MITCHELL:
Well, you put them both in the same boat, both innocent until proven otherwise.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the accusations made are of an entirely different character and that, in a sense, if I can put it this way, just talking of the Governor-General in one context and then talking of Mr Clark in another, in relation to the Governor-General there's been no allegation of personal immorality, there's been no allegation of illegality. There are allegations which are at this stage on the information available to me, no worse than errors of judgement yet the level of vitriol directed against him by some, fuelled I'm sorry to say by the Opposition on this occasion and by most Labor State Premiers, most particularly the Premier of Queensland, I think has been quite outrageous. And one of the reasons why…
MITCHELL:
Surely there's no consistency. When we're talking about Geoff Clark, I mean, where's the Opposition on Geoff Clark?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's something you should ask, if you feel they have something to explain themselves on you ought to ask Simon Crean.
MITCHELL:
Do you see the inconsistency?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, let me put it this way, I'm in an atypical position.
MITCHELL:
We'll take a break in a moment and have calls for the Prime Minister. Just quickly, I'm sure you're aware of the pap smear issue here.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, I am.
MITCHELL:
Will the Federal Government argue to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to make public, to lift the suppression order?
PRIME MINISTER:
My understanding is that we are. I haven't spoken to the Health Minister this morning but I will argue…I will speak to her this morning and suggest if we are not that we should. Can I say, Michael Woolridge, when he was Health Minister, suspended this firm's accreditation and the fact that there’s been some delay about publication is due entirely to the company in question obtaining a suppression order from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. I mean, we do have extraordinarily elaborate procedural fairness provisions in this country which are very good on most occasions but on other occasions they can cause the sort of frustration and worry and anxiety that they're clearly causing in this situation. I mean, can I say, I feel very, very much for those women. I think the anxiety of thinking that you may have been given a pap smear clearance which was wrong would be awful.
MITCHELL:
It would be horrible.
PRIME MINISTER:
It would be absolutely horrible and I…
MITCHELL:
You would agree that the name should be published.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think everything should be done to relieve those women as quickly as possible of the anxiety that they may now be feeling. I don’t think anything is more important than those several thousand women in Victoria knowing exactly where they stand and whatever is needed to bring that about I would support it.
MITCHELL:
If that includes making the name…
PRIME MINISTER:
If that includes making the name of the company available, if it does include that the answer is emphatically, yes.
MITCHELL:
Well, I would suggest Parliament, Federal Parliament's sitting on Monday. If it's not made public by then will it be named in the Federal Parliament, could you arrange for it to be named?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have to get a bit of legal advice on that…
MITCHELL:
I think you’d be above the suppression order within the Parliament.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well could I get some advice on that, I probably would be, but let me say that I think the anxiety that those women are suffering is quite unacceptable and I have every sympathy with them.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, if I may, just thinking during that ad break, did I get it clear that you will take legal advice and examine the possibility of naming this company in the Parliament if necessary?
PRIME MINISTER:
I’ll not only take legal advice in relation to that, I’ll take legal advice generally as to what we can do to accelerate a situation where these women have been given a way of their anxiety being relieved as soon as possible.
MITCHELL:
It’s not hard to relate to is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No it’s very, very easy…I mean, I really do feel for them. I think it’s an awful situation. I don’t want to be unfair to the company but bear in mind that their accreditation was suspended by the former Health Minister and that would have now been what four months ago, so we are not dealing here…this is one of the dilemmas in an open, democratic community, on the one hand we have elaborate rules to provide procedural fairness to people whose rights are interrupted by government decisions and they can sometimes lead to another section of society, in this case far more people being in a state of prolonged anxiety about their health.
MITCHELL:
This is urgent, isn’t it? I mean, we still don't have reasons for the suppression order and there’s no hearing entered.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I understand the urgency of it and I’ll be talking to Kay Pattersonthis morning.
MITCHELL:
Thank you. We’ll take a quick call, Lachlan go ahead.
CALLER:
Well I’m absolutely appalled at hearing a few minutes ago that the Prime Minister had Geoff Clark over at the Lodge. I was involved in some of the investigations into Clark and if the Prime Minister had taken…
MITCHELL:
What are you a police officer?
CALLER:
I’m an ex member. If the Prime Minister had taken a few minutes to read some of the allegations and the Stat Decs made by these victims he would not have had that man in the Lodge.
PRIME MINISTER:
Sir, I understand the strength of your feeling. I did read the allegations in the newspapers, I am aware of them. I’m also aware that we have a legal system in this country that is based on a presumption of innocence. There were charges of sexual misconduct and sexual assault made against him and those charges were dropped, were dismissed by the court. Now, they were a separate set of charges.
CALLER:
That's correct and the new ones are more detailed and are much more detailed than was allowed to be printed in the press.
PRIME MINISTER:
Sir, I understand that but what am I do to, am I to set myself above the courts?
CALLER:
Oh no, I just don’t think you should entertain a person of that character.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, but I mean that means…but if we have that principle applied then in future once allegations are made against somebody no matter what position they hold then I have to behave as if those allegations have been established.
MITCHELL:
But if you or I were accused of rape Prime Minister, we wouldn’t be here.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think that’s probably right…well I don’t think there’s much doubt about that.
MITCHELL:
Why is he different?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have to live, I can only operate in accordance…I mean I can talk of myself and you can talk of yourself. I as Prime Minister have to make a judgement, if I make a judgement that in the face of allegations of this kind that I am going to treat a person differently from what his position would entitle him to be treated, I am, in effect, saying that I accept the truth of those allegations. And you know as well as I do that if I did that I would be criticised for not upholding the principle of the presumption of innocence, and I would be accused of doing it in relation to the most senior elected Aboriginal person in this country. I don’t know the circumstances of this. I’ve read the allegations, I’ve read his denial, I know that I am Prime Minister of a country where the presumption of innocence operates and I have to respect that. If I don’t respect that then I will be creating an awful precedent and I think you know that.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, the 1.1 billion cost of involvement in the war on terrorism, can we continue to absorb it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well like any other additional cost it’ll have to be paid for. When you absorb…you mean absorbed within the…
MITCHELL:
Yeah, within the budget. I mean, when this…the original suggestion was
(inaudible) and you said that it will be absorbed, we'll be able to afford it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we’ll be able to afford it, I can say that.
MITCHELL:
But will it lead to cuts?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it could create a situation where there are some restraints in other areas, it’s too early to say yet, we’re going into that process now.
MITCHELL:
Any need for a war tax?
PRIME MINISTER:
I wouldn’t have thought there’s any need for that at present no.
MITCHELL:
What areas will be under the examination for possible cuts?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it’s not so much areas under examination for possible cuts, it’s making sure that we don’t incur any additional expenditures that aren’t absolutely essential.
MITCHELL:
Is it correct there’s a review of disability pensions and pharmaceutical benefits?
PRIME MINISTER:
Those two areas are being looked at but we won’t be punishing anybody in those areas. But obviously with something as generous as the pharmaceutical benefits scheme we have to make sure that there are proper constraints and proper disciplines because the cost of prescribing these drugs on the so-called free list can grow exponentially if we’re not careful and it’s quite reasonable, as I’ve explained in another situation on this programme, it’s quite reasonable to put some kind of disciplines on their use. We don’t want a situation where a drug is prescribed as something of first resort. And I think that’s a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
MITCHELL:
A couple of quick issues which are running around the world at the moment. A number of Australian protestors been taken into custody in China. Does the government know where they are or what is happening with them?
PRIME MINISTER:
The latest information I have is no but I hope to get some more information about that. This is about the Falun Gong…
MITCHELL:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
I’m familiar with the issue, I have a number of people in my electorate in Sydney who are sympathetic to that movement and I am familiar with the dispute that’s going on. We’ll certainly try and find out what’s happened to the Australians.
MITCHELL:
Do you know whether they have been taken legally or not?
PRIME MINISTER:
I just don’t know that yet, we’re waiting advice from our embassy.
MITCHELL:
A number of Australians are thought now, three I think, to have been fighting with the Taliban, with Al-Qaeda perhaps. Has there been a recruiting network in this country?
PRIME MINISTER:
The information I have wouldn't suggest that there’s been a recruiting network in a sense that we would normally understand it.
MITCHELL:
The Northern Territory Minister, Mr Ah Kit, has described his own people, Aboriginal people as drunks, beggars, living off the cargo cult mentality and refusing to take control of their own lives. He says it’s been a great lie that we’re avoiding this issue. What’s your reaction to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think, he’s an aboriginal person himself and I’m sensitive enough to the difficulties of talking about some of these issues to recognise that and there’s obviously things that he can say in a way that others can’t and shouldn’t. But I do believe that the key to aboriginal progress and the key to individual dignity within the aboriginal community is a greater sense of personal responsibility and personal empowerment. He’s putting in a different way some of the things that Noel Pearson has been saying and when we talk about practical reconciliation what we talk about is helping people in the indigenous community to become part of the broader community.
MITCHELL:
But he’s really saying we’re throwing money at them and it’s not working.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have argued for a long time that money alone is not the solution to this problem. There are a lot of other things involved and can I say I do think the debate, I’m not necessarily talking about his comments, but comments more recently by others such as Pearson I think we are now getting a more intelligent sensible debate and many of the things that John Herron said when he was Aboriginal Affairs Minister have an increasing ring of relevance and truth.
MITCHELL:
Richard, a quick question from Richard, go ahead please Richard.
CALLER:
Thank you. Morning Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Morning.
CALLER:
Mr Prime Minister I am concerned about the state of affairs whereby Mitsubishi are requesting $140 million to, as they say, prevent some retrenchments for their staff. Are they going to get this money?
MITCHELL:
Are they going to get the money? Mr Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we’re looking at their request, we haven’t agreed to anything additional at present.
MITCHELL:
The economy’s pretty healthy at the moment.
PRIME MINISTER:
The economy is great and it’s in fact, it’s a year ago today and I’ve got some of the headlines in front me of when the Melbourne Age said Recession Looms and the Sydney Morning Herald said Australia Hits the Wall. We are going gangbusters at the moment.
MITCHELL:
Gangbusters, that’s a Paul Keating term.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well no, I thought it was a Neville Wranism actually.
MITCHELL:
It might be too.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it has it’s origins….it’s true, and we are certainly doing very well at the present time.
MITCHELL:
It obviously changes interest rate pressures doesn’t it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but can I say this, the Reserve Bank didn’t take interest rates down as far when they were going down as the American Fed did. So you might argue on first principles that there’s not an immediate pressure that they start going up again straight away.
MITCHELL:
Did you notice Qantas, their discount fares have gone up already. Do you think we’re going to see increased airfares after the demise of Ansett?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well let me put it this way, the pressure, the competitive pressures regrettably are less.
MITCHELL:
So you would be watching that?
PRIME MINISTER:
We’ll be watching it but I don’t want to hold out the prospect that we can be a heavy handed price controller. We will certainly be watching it. We would like to see, now that Ansett’s off the radar screen sadly, and I feel very sorry for the employees, we would like to see Virgin get as strong as possible. We really would.
MITCHELL:
Will you help them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not financially. We will apply the same principle to them as we applied to Ansett.
MITCHELL:
Mr Howard, International Women’s Day, now you’re rightly very protective of your family but Mrs Howard has been angry with the media and has become something of a target, I saw her described as Hyacinth the other day in one of the papers, the social climbing TV character. What’s your reaction?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I’m like any other bloke who’s wife is unfairly attacked, I’ll defend her. And she’s got a perfect right if she thinks somebody has said something in an article about her which is diabolically untrue, I can tell you, the suggestion that she in some way prevailed upon me to recommend Peter Hollingworth as Governor General because of some inaccurately alleged common religious prejudice…prejudice is the wrong word, common religious affiliation.
MITCHELL:
What about the Hyacinth stuff, is that (inaudible).?
PRIME MINISTER:
I try to let things go over the shoulder but I’m just like anybody else, if somebody attacks my wife unfairly, and in this case, she doesn’t normally say anything but she’s not going to cop nonsense like that indefinitely and why should she?
MITCHELL:
Thank you very much for your time.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
[ends]