Subject:
national water plan meeting; David Hicks; workplace relations; Qantas
E&OE...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well ladies and gentlemen, since I released the Commonwealth Government's National Action Plan for Water Security, both Mr Bracks, the Victorian Premier, and Mr Beattie, the Queensland Premier, have asked me to convene a meeting of the relevant state and territory leaders. And given the importance to the whole country of this plan, and the need to proceed with its implementation as quickly as possible, I am more than happy to respond to the requests made by those two Premiers. I am, therefore, proposing that there be a meeting in Canberra next Thursday morning of the relevant states, that's Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and the ACT, and I am also, given the national significance of this issue, inviting the Premiers of the other states and the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory to attend, if that is their wish. If that time is not suitable to some of them, then I am very happy to have the meeting the following day on Friday or indeed the following Monday. But I am giving a range of dates because it is important that we maintain the momentum of this national plan, it's been very warmly received throughout the country.
It is seen by the Australian public as that long sought-after solution to the long-term problems in the Murray-Darling Basin and I do hope that we can sit down at this meeting, we can deal with the issue, reach agreement. The Commonwealth is providing the $10 billion, we do need a referral of the powers because it is impractical to bump along with the existing governance arrangement and I do hope that we can get this matter dealt with expeditiously because it is very much in Australia's interest, and there is no issue that is concerning the Australian public on a national basis at the present time and more important in their regard, than that of water. It is the number one issue in people's concerns and on people's minds and it is important that the Commonwealth and the states work together. That's why in response to Mr Bracks and Mr Beattie both asking me, I am more than happy to accommodate their desires and to have this meeting.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, Mr Beattie says he has legal advice that the Commonwealth can't take over management of the Murray-Darling without the states' cooperation, is that your understanding?
PRIME MINISTER:
My understanding is that the way to fix this problem is for the states to refer their powers to the Commonwealth in return for the Commonwealth providing $10 billion of much needed investment. I do not intend at this point to get into a debate about what constitutional powers there may be. What I am saying to the states is here is a solution that will fix the Murray-Darling Basin, and the whole proposal is a very generous compromise by the Commonwealth. We are providing $10 billion, and we are offering to fix this problem, but it cannot be fixed unless we fix the governance arrangements and you can only fix the governance arrangements by a referral of power. There is no point at the moment in debating what the Constitution may or may not permit. I am optimistic in believing that the states will agree to the Commonwealth proposal. I asked them to consider the national interest - the national interest requires a big investment. The Commonwealth is standing ready to make that investment, but it won't work unless we fix the governance, and that is why we are asking the states to refer their powers.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) legal issue to come up at next Thursday's meeting, would you be, in the event that that advice is correct, seeking to ask the states to sort of...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I am calling a meeting in order to discuss the Commonwealth's proposal and ask the states to agree to it, I am not going to hypothesise about alternative approaches.
JOURNALIST:
Just on David Hicks, given that America has had to pass retrospective laws to allow him to be charged now, why can't Australia pass retrospective laws to try and (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we do not believe that the passage of retrospective criminal laws in this country is appropriate.
JOURNALIST:
But do you accept it in America?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well what the Americans do is a matter for the Americans and you have to understand that we believe that the arrangements for the Military Commission meet the reasonable requirements of Australian law and I think everybody wants the charges heard as soon as possible.
JOURNALIST:
It's not just a matter for the Americans, we are dealing with an Australian citizen here.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes but I've said before that once somebody goes overseas they lose the protection of Australian law. Australian law does not follow people overseas and I might point out to you that one of the other three people who has been charged along with David Hicks is a Canadian citizen and governments of both political persuasion in Canada have not seen fit to do anything different from what the Australian Government is doing.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard if you don't think the use of retrospective laws is appropriate do you feel that the US actions is therefore inappropriate?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't accept the interpretation that has been placed on what the US is doing and I don't equate what the US is doing with the passage of a retrospective criminal law in Australia, making offences that were not criminal offences at the time David Hicks did the things he's alleged to have done, crimes when they weren't at the time, so I don't accept the analogy.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think the whole process by which David Hicks is now being charged has damaged the reputation of America within Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
There are some people who would object to what America is doing, no matter what the merits of the issue are. I don't think it has been helpful that it has taken so long, I would not have liked it to have taken as long as it has. But bear in mind, 22 months of the five years that have gone by since Hicks was taken into custody, it was due entirely to attempts by Hicks, lawyers and others to prevent him being taken before a a Military Commission.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard the Greens have said how they don't trust Labor on WorkChoices, do you believe Labor has softened their stance on WorkChoices?
PRIME MINISTER:
No I don't believe Labor is softening on WorkChoices, I think Labor is opposed to it but what Mr Rudd was trying to do last Thursday was to kid the business community into believing that in some way he wouldn't rip up WorkChoices because the business community supports WorkChoices and he was caught out the very next morning by his own deputy who said