LAWS:
Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning John.
LAWS:
You certainly turned on them yesterday again.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they went too far.
LAWS:
They did. They did.
PRIME MINISTER:
It was quite wrong, quite wrong. I don't mind being criticised by them, strongly criticised. They have a right to do that in relation to the judgement I made regarding Peter Hollingworth. I wear that. It was my judgement, although I did consult other colleagues, I accept responsibility for the appointment. I always have. But to go the step further and to allege that in some way when asked about child abuse matters I resorted to technical legalisms, when if you read the full transcript of that press conference, was recorded my total repugnance or distaste of and all the other descriptions you want to use, along with 99.99 per cent of the community. I'm obviously not alone in having that strong feeling. But I mean that was just wrong. It was counterproductive. It destroyed what would have been otherwise a very valuable debate on an important issue. Now I accept that I'm accountable for the decision I made and people will criticise me for it and that is their right.
LAWS:
Do you regret the decision?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well regret is one of those hindsight things, isn't it? All I can say to you John is that at the time, notwithstanding the fact that some people had reservations about appointing a clergyman, and I respected those reservations...
LAWS:
I think a lot of Australia did and they voiced those concerns, and apparently so did Robert Hill but you chose to ignore that.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I thought about it. Robert did raise that, although he also said to me then and he repeated it yesterday, that he thought Hollingworth was nonetheless a good choice because of the wonderful record of work for the poor and the underprivileged and the fact that he had been very much a voice for the less fortunate in our community. So I took that into account and I made a judgement. Now, things didn't work out. I accept that, but all I can say is that at the time I followed the same procedure as I understand that Paul Keating followed when he chose Peter Hollingworth's predecessor, the same procedure that Malcolm Fraser followed when he chose Ninian Stephen. There was no formal vetting, as I understand it, in relation to either of those men. They had been active in public life in different ways, both of them on the High Court of Australia. They were well known, perhaps not as well known in a way as Peter Hollingworth.
LAWS:
But Peter Hollingworth was known for... I mean he was a staunch republican. He had made some fairly outlandish statements in relation to political issues. He was well known because of controversy in the main. I think that all the good work - and he certainly did good work in the early times - I think all that went into the past as soon as he went to Brisbane as Archbishop.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not sure that he is a staunch republican. He actually abstained in the final vote.
LAWS:
Well that tells you something.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well people can... I mean look, nobody is perfect and I don't deny that he made a big error of judgement in relation to the handling of that issue that became the subject of a lot of controversy. And I can remember being interviewed by you in February of last year, and I think your words were that your listeners caught their breath when they heard my response to the original suggestion that he should be sacked. And I understand that a lot of people at the time thought I should have done that. I took the view then, and I maintain the view, that there weren't constitutional grounds for me to recommend to the Queen that his commission be revoked. I think he did the right thing in resigning.
LAWS:
I think what you said to me was that he had done nothing while he had been in office that would allow you to take the steps...
PRIME MINISTER:
To justify.
LAWS:
To justify that. But he had certainly been dishonest while in office.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think that's a bit harsh. People argue in relation to his recollections. Well even the Brisbane findings said they didn't dispute that that was the view he now had and that he had acted in good faith. I think you can argue that out. But I don't really think a lot now is going to be achieved by going over all of the bones of this. He has resigned. He resigned because he formed the judgement himself that he no longer commanded the support of the Australian public to continue in the position, and to try and do so would run the risk of damaging the office. Now that in my view is a correct judgement.
LAWS:
Yes, well I agree with that. But you see, a lot of people are very concerned that what we had was the man who was the Governor General of the people who live in this country, the country that they believe to be the greatest country in the world and I know you share their belief...
PRIME MINISTER:
And they're right.
LAWS:
And they're right. But we had this man, who was Governor General, claiming in a vice-regal press statement that his action in relation to the paedophile priest was not contrary to the psychiatrist's advice. Having said in the letter to Elliott at the time of the decision that it differed from that advice. So he said in his own words that it differed. He said what he was doing was against the advice of Dr Slaughter who told him not to reemploy the man. So Peter Hollingworth has been dishonest.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean I'd have to go back and check all of his...
LAWS:
No, I'm not making it up Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no I'm not suggesting that you're making it up John. I'd never suggest that. I mean I disagree with you on occasion, but I've never suggested that you make things up. But in order to properly respond to what you have said, I'd have to go back over it. I'm not suggesting you're making it up. But you know we are sort of now going over the bones, and that's fair enough. I mean you're perfectly entitled to do that. That's your job and I'm accountable to your listeners for my actions, or my inactions. I accept all of that. But the fact nonetheless is that he has resigned. He made the right judgement. He did make mistakes. He made a big error of judgement and he has paid a very high price for that error of judgement in relation to the handling of the Elliott case. And there is I believe in the community now a feeling that we've had the right outcome, and the system has worked. I think one of the interesting things to come out of this is that people have said, oh this has been a constitutional crisis. It has been nothing of the kind.
LAWS:
No it hasn't.
PRIME MINISTER:
The system has worked. We've had a seamless transfer from the Governor General to the administrator, and in time - not too much time I hope - from the administrator to a new Governor General.
LAWS:
Yes. You've talked again there about the price paid by Peter Hollingworth. But in Parliament yesterday you didn't give too much mention of the price paid by the victims.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I did. I talked quite a lot about that. But John, they are two separate issues. I'm not suggesting that... I wasn't saying that Peter Hollingworth paid a higher price than the victims. I didn't say that. What I said was that for a person in public office, he paid a higher price than what I had recalled for anybody in recent times. I wasn't suggesting... I wasn't comparing.
LAWS:
No, I know you weren't.
PRIME MINISTER:
And so therefore, you know, the suggestion, the implication... there was an implication in the question, but Simon Crean yesterday said oh well - he compared the price paid by Hollingworth to the price paid by the victims. I wasn't endeavouring to do that because I acknowledge that in relation to child sex abuse, that the real price is paid obviously by the victims of it. I'm not gainsaying that. I was comparing what had happened to him, having occupied a high public office, having made a major error of judgement - the price he paid for that compared to the price paid by other people in high public office who make errors of judgement.
LAWS:
There are those that say, and you've got a legal background, that because Peter Hollingworth in fact secreted the information that he had in relation to the Bishop who is now in jail, that he perverted the course of justice.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I've... nobody has... I'm not saying that people haven't said that, and I'm not going to give a legal opinion without having properly briefed myself on all of the conversations that took place at the time and what attempts were made to discuss the matter with the police and all that kind of thing. For me, to pass a judgement on that in my position would be wrong because I'm not possessed of all of the facts. Some people may say that. I haven't had that alleged in any of the public debate to date. I don't think it has been alleged by Dr Hollingworth's fiercest critics in the public arena to date.
LAWS:
Well it has been suggested.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not denying it has been suggested John. I'm merely making the comment I'm not aware... I can't recall it having been raised publicly. It certainly hasn't been raised by the fierce political critics of the Governor General such as the Premier of the Queensland or the Leader of the Opposition.
LAWS:
But when you read, and you know for a fact that he defied the advice of Dr Slaughter who said that this fellow was going to reoffend, that he didn't talk to anybody, he didn't make any moves towards the police to discuss this, and he allowed the man to continue to be employed, and the man continued to offend in the worst possible way. Do you agree?
PRIME MINISTER:
Is that right? Did he reoffend after he was allowed to stay?
LAWS:
He did, yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
My understanding was that his other offence had occurred earlier.
LAWS:
Be that as it may.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think that is the case John. That has been what I have been told.
LAWS:
Okay, well I accept what you have been told.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you know, I mean we can always be... we can sometimes be confused on these things but I think that is the situation.
LAWS:
Okay, but the point is he was aware that this man committed a heinous crime and yet he didn't report it to the police.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well once again, I mean clearly what he did is known. The question of whether the person who would have been the complainant to the police had wanted to take it to the police or had taken it to the police is really a matter that I'd have to go back and check on again. I mean although I'm obviously pretty familiar with the detail of this you can over time get a little confused about the detail if you don't keep checking it. But my response to that would be is, I don't know whether the man in question himself had decided to take it to the police or not. I don't know. My recollection is that it really arose out of a conversation between the person in question and his parents, and that his parents then raised the matter with the local Bishop who because of some personal association, then said oh look, I can't handle it, I want it referred to the Archbishop. That was the chain of events. Now as to whether the man himself or his parents decided not to take it to the police - and after all, he would have been the person who would have complained of it - I just don't know that.
LAWS:
Did you breathe a sigh of relief when he resigned?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it was the right outcome, John I really do.
LAWS:
Did you have to talk him into it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it was his decision. We've talked about the matter, obviously, you'd expect me to. But it was his decision.
LAWS:
Did you talk to him before he appeared on that Australian Story programme, which was really the trigger for this whole wretched thing?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that appearance was a mistake.
LAWS:
Did he talk to you about it before he did it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't really want to go into that, if you don't... that was a mistake. If you... well, I don't think it's fair. I mean, a Prime Minister and a Governor General have a lot of conversations.
LAWS:
Sure.
PRIME MINISTER:
And the convention is to respect the confidentiality of those conversations and I don't feel, despite the circumstances of this, I still respect the confidentiality of those conversations. And all I can say is that we talked about a lot of things over a period of time. I thought that interview was a mistake and he knows that and he knows it himself.
LAWS:
You must of thought, because you are a very perceptive man, you must have thought some time ago that things weren't going as they should be going in the Governor General department?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, John, once again I don't know, it's [inaudible] to say I'm perceptive.
LAWS:
I know.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it's important just to say again - the issue has been resolved and we do need to move on.
LAWS:
Okay. Have you considered who might be next?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have thought about a number of people. I've had some discussions with my senior colleagues already and I'll continue to think about it and have discussions with them over the next little while.
LAWS:
You're going to have more discussions this time than you did last time?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I may. Although, it just depends, it depends a bit on who you finally settle on.
LAWS:
Yeah, I suppose it does. It's been a tough time for you. You've been, as usual, very loyal and as usual a bit stubborn. I think you rather like that badge.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't see being stubborn as some kind of end in itself, I've never seen that. But I try, in difficult situations like this, not always to take the easiest course.
LAWS:
Sure, I've noticed.
PRIME MINISTER:
And to try and take a course that will stand the test of retrospective historical scrutiny.
LAWS:
Yeah, nobody can argue that you haven't done that in this instance, particularly in the beginning.
PRIME MINISTER:
The easy thing, he lost quite a lot of support early on and I do think that Australian Story interview was, to say the least, very unfortunate.
LAWS:
Yeah. I've had a great deal of correspondence about the money and I know, in the overall scheme of things, the money does seem to be petty and I know it's within the guidelines. Do you feel a bit uncomfortable with the pension he'll receive after just doing two years of the job. I mean, he'll get $160,000 - you'd know better than I - but he gets domestic travel, he gets an office, he gets an assistant.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the travel and all of things are entitlements that all Governors General have and once you start dividing it and pro rata-ing it according to the number of years they've served, I think you are sort of arguing over a pinhead, in a way, or just you know getting terribly petty and technical. This an usual situation. The law prescribes the pension and it's not as if he has large income streams from other sources, I mean that's not the reason he took the job, obviously, but he would have taken the job irrespective of what the pension arrangements were, I'm sure. But I don't... I'm sorry that his term has ended in the circumstances it has, that's obvious. But I would rather that he not... that we not have an argument about his entitlements because he did after all occupy the position, he's had it for almost two years - that is what the law says and he's entitled to get what the law says.
LAWS:
Out of interest, had he been sacked, would his entitlements have varied?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'd have to check, John. I don't think so.
LAWS:
Okay. Prime Minister, thank you very much for you time. I know you've been going hard at it these past couple of days and I'll suspect you're going to get it again today, but I...
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't mind that.
LAWS:
I know.
PRIME MINISTER:
Providing it's on the merits.
LAWS:
Yeah, I think they ought to stay away from that idea, suggestion that you're soft on child abuse.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, they should.
LAWS:
I mean, they're not doing themselves any good.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, well, I don't make... I'm not making those... I don't make those sort of allegations within similar circumstances because I don't believe it to be true and I just think people should keep a sense of proportion and dignity when they're dealing with these sort of issues.
LAWS:
Yeah, because it's a very very delicate issue.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, it's an awful issue and it makes everybody sick and you can understand the reaction of people if people start making unfair connections.
LAWS:
Okay, Prime Minister. Thank you very much for your time. I hope it's an exciting day for you and I'll talk to you soon again, I trust.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you. Bye.
[ends]