Subject:
Interest rates; workplace reform; National Plan for Water Security
E&OE...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well ladies and gentlemen, I am quite sure that the homebuyers of Australia will be pleased at the decision of the Reserve Bank this morning not to lift official interest rates. This, of course, remains a matter in the hands of the Bank. The Bank sets interest rates not the Government, but in order to produce the best possible climate to keep interest rates down you need experienced, balanced policies, you need strong budget surpluses, you need to pay off debt and you need a run a strong and rapidly, but not too rapidly, expanding economy. In other words it's a very delicate balancing act that requires experience and judgement and skill at managing a one trillion dollar economy. Can I just say one other thing, that the figures released yesterday about trade union membership in Australia repudiate two central arguments that have been used by the union movement and the Labor Party about WorkChoices. The first of those arguments was that WorkChoices had resulted in thousands of people rejoining the trade union movement; that WorkChoices had reinvigorated the trade union movement. The figures suggest otherwise. And the second falsehood that's been exposed is the claim that there has been a massive casualisation of the workforce under this Government. The truth is that the level of casualisation in the workforce has virtually remained unchanged over the last 10 years. It rather does give the lie to the argument put forward by Jenny Macklin and by Mr Rudd and many others that what the Government's aim is, is to make the Australian workforce entirely casual. That's not the case. I think those figures demonstrate very clearly that both of those claims made by Labor and by the unions are falsehoods. I think the figures are very revealing. They showed that 15 per cent only of the private sector workforce belongs to a union and that really trade union membership in this country has now virtually become the preserve of the public sector at 43 per cent. Now it does illustrate how unrepresentative of the Australian community, a Labor Party frontbench with 70 per cent of its members being former trade union officials. And if you look at the pedigrees of many of the people who are aspiring to come into Parliament at the next election, you are going to continue that trend. It's a party that is no longer representative of the cross section of the Australian workforce.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, if that party is no longer representative of the Australian workforce, why is it that its performing so strongly at the moment in terms of opinion polls and having all of the governments other than the Federal Government in ALP hands at the moment?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I judge things on what happens at elections. I mean opinion polls are...
JOURNALIST:
But some of those are state elections.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I am speaking of the national scene. There are other reasons for the state outcome of which I have spoken on numerous occasions, but the fact that a party is unrepresentative of the cross section of the Australian workforce sometimes doesn't mean that it doesn't win elections, but it doesn't destroy the validity of the criticism. I think it's very important that political parties represent a cross section of the community. My criticism is not that the Labor Party has some trade union officials, my criticism is that in having 70 per cent on its frontbench, it's unrepresentative. And that remains a valid criticism of the Labor Party irrespective of how it fares in opinion polls or fares in elections.
JOURNALIST:
Unions claim that the surge to Labor in the last few months is due to their campaign against WorkChoices. What's your response to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think we really have to wait and see what happens at the election. I mean I think we'll spend an enormous amount of time unproductively at news conferences if we keep analysing every opinion poll.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, the Reserve Bank's decision to delay increasing rates; are you concerned about more pressure being placed on you in the lead up to the election if rates go up in say two or three months time?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't think it's right to say the Bank delayed an increase. It decided to leave rates unchanged this month. I don't know whether they're going to go up in the future or not. I'm not giving any guarantees about the future, I am merely drawing attention to the fact that in order for the Government, whatever its political colour, to keep minimum pressure on interest rates, it's important that it have experience and it have skill and it make mature and balanced judgements because running the modern economy is not a piece of cake. It's not something that happens automatically. You need people of experience and skill in order to do it. But so far as the future is concerned, well, the future will tell us whether there are any movements. But I am not giving guarantees, I can't do that, but I think you should look at each decision made by the Bank in the context of the economic conditions at the time and you shouldn't see it as delaying or suggesting anything in either direction for the future.
JOURNALIST:
The unions are saying the opening of the technical college this morning is simply a vote-getting stunt in a marginal seat during an election year, and right across the road there is a TAFE college that desperately needs money. Why not incorporate the two? Why build a separate institution?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the TAFE colleges are funded by the state government. If the TAFE college does not have enough money that is the fault of Mr Rann's Labor Government in South Australia. The Australian Technical Colleges are a worthwhile investment, a four to five hundred million dollar worthwhile investment which is not a political stunt. If you had met and talked to the parents of those young men and women whose lives have been transformed by the opportunity of the type of education they're receiving at the Australian Technical Colleges, neither you or the trade union official to whom you spoke, would regard this as an election stunt. If people are cranky about the money being spent on TAFEs, take their complaints to Mr Rann. They're not our responsibility and we have a funding agreement with the states about training but if they want more money they ought to go and talk to Mr Rann.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, were you surprised by your Treasury Secretary Ken Henry's criticisms of your government's climate change and water policies?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well let me say the greatest initiative that this country has seen in water security was the plan I announced on the 27th of January and I think it's a very good plan and it's a plan that's been very widely applauded. I didn't quite understand what he was getting at, but in any event the important thing is that the Treasurer and I discussed that plan at some length and it's very strongly supported in the community. In the end you have to understand that government's make decisions on these things. The bureaucracy is very important. I have a lot of respect for the Treasury but in the end the government is elected to make decisions and the investment of $10 billion, which is the biggest single infrastructure investment we've had since the Snowy Mountains Scheme is very important to the long term water security of this nation and I also understand Mr Henry's put out some statement. I haven't read it in full but you ought to have a look at it.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, what do you see as the most significant issues in the Kingston electorate in the lead up to the federal election?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think low unemployment, living standards, educational opportunities for young people, the contribution that the Federal Government can make to fighting crime, even though crime is overwhelmingly a state issue. They are many of the important local issues in Kingston and, of course, the quality of the local representation. Kym's such an energetic man, I think that will be very important in a tight election and clearly Kingston is a tight seat, we all know that and it's changed hands a few times over the last 10 years and I don't think the character of the seat is going to alter dramatically. I think he knows that, I know that, the Labor Party knows that and it's good to have a hard working, energetic local member; that is always a plus.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, why wasn't Ken Henry consulted? Is there, was he bypassed, was there a particular reason?
PRIME MINISTER:
No he wasn't, the Treasury was not bypassed.
JOURNALIST:
Are his comments a shot across the bow, similar to some of the comments we've seen from the Reserve Bank as well about possible future initiatives the Government might look to fund in the lead up to the election?
PRIME MINISTER:
You'd have to ask him that. All I can say is that the Treasury is a professional outfit. We seek the Treasury's advice on things, we sometimes follow it and we sometimes don't and that is how governments should operate. You don't want a government that is run by the bureaucracy, you want a government that listens to the bureaucracy's advice and then makes decisions that it believes are in the best interests of the country. I've dealt with bureaucracies over a long period of time, there are a lot of very talented people in the federal bureaucracy including, in particular, in the Treasury. They're often right, but they're not always right and I will not be leading a government that always takes the advice of the bureaucracy. Thank you.
[ends]