PRIME MINISTER:
Ladies and gentlemen, I want to welcome the presentation to the Security Council of the resolution from the United States, the United Kingdom and Spain. I welcome it because this issue is now fairly and squarely back where it ought to be, and that is before the Security Council of the United Nations. I had always taken the view that it is only through a united expression of opinion by the Security Council of the United Nations that a real prospect, faint though it may seem, of a peaceful resolution of this issue can be achieved.
Having read the resolution, I find it hard to believe that logically any party or nation that voted for Resolution 1441 fifteen weeks ago, would not now vote for this resolution. Fifteen weeks have now passed since Resolution 1441 was adopted and in that period of time it has been made clear on a number of occasions that Iraq is unwilling, stubbornly unwilling, to cooperate and stubbornly unwilling to take advantage of the final opportunity that that resolution presented to Iraq. I think the resolution has had the effect of once again putting the issue back fairly and squarely where it must always be, because this is an acid test for the Security Council of the United Nations. The Security Council must understand that if it does not give genuine effect to what it said so solemnly through Resolution 1441, then it does risk doing long-term damage to its own credibility.
JOURNALIST:
Why then are, in your words, the French and the Germans being illogical in opposing a second resolution as recently as this morning our time?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the resolution has not been voted on and the British Foreign Secretary has indicated that he believes it will be two weeks, perhaps a little longer, before a final vote is taken. It's too early to make final judgements about how people are going to vote. I can only react to the words and express a view, and the words are simple and direct, they recall all the earlier resolutions, they recall 1441, and they record the self-evident fact that nobody denies - I mean even the non-aligned meeting in Kuala Lumpur is reported to be ready to convey a request to Iraq to fully disarm.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, the new resolution does not mention the term 'all available means'. Is it possible that countries could vote for the resolution but then argue that that is not a vote authorising military force?
PRIME MINISTER:
There's enough legal authority for the use of military force in resolutions that have already been carried. As to how people will argue and react if the resolution is adopted, I'll come to that issue when it arises.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, if the Security Council opposes this resolution, do you believe that that voids 1441?
PRIME MINISTER:
It would be inconsistent, in my view, for a country having voted for 1441, to then not vote for this. As to whether it voids it, look I'm not going to offer a view on that. I don't think that beyond saying that... I don't think it automatically follows, but I haven't given any special thought to that. I can't think you'd void 1441 without specifically reversing it.
JOURNALIST:
But it would weaken 1441, wouldn't it, if the Council opposed it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not necessarily.
JOURNALIST:
Generally Mr Howard, where does it leave the international community if this resolution is lost?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well more importantly, if the resolution is not carried, that will weaken the credibility of the Security Council.
JOURNALIST:
If it's not carried, are you saying there is justification... would you expect the US to launch an attack anyway?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we will deal with what happens if it is not carried or if it is carried, when one of those events arrives.
JOURNALIST:
How long do you think the Security Council should take before it votes on this resolution? What sort of time frame? Do you agree with Jack Straw on the two weeks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I would expect around two weeks, but Australia is not a member of the Security Council. We have no direct input into that except our discussions with Governments that are. But I would imagine it will be around a couple of weeks.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, will you be involved in any assistance with lobbying for the nine votes needed?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if it were appropriate, yes.
JOURNALIST:
Like China perhaps, or...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I'm not going to get country specific. We did offer a view to one or two countries before the passage of 1441, although one of the countries I offered a view to then is no longer on the Security Council, but look we are open to doing that. I haven't committed myself at this stage to do it, but I've got no objection. If it's appropriate, if the need arises, if I think something can be contributed, then I'll do so.
JOURNALIST:
There have been disturbing reports coming through from Korea that the North Koreans have just launched a rocket into the Sea of Japan, which has put the South Korean military on higher alert. It comes just as the new Prime Minister... President has been sworn in, and when Alexander Downer, Colin Powell, the Japanese Prime Minister, are all gathering to talk about the North Korea crisis. What is your reaction to this development?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have not been briefed on that development. I've been in a Cabinet presentation talking about things such as the work and family balance, but I haven't been briefed on that development so I won't offer a view. I'll get some advice on it. Generally on North Korea, it's obviously a very difficult situation. I have the strongest possible view that if the Security Council displays weakness and too much indecision on Iraq, it will make it next to impossible to do any thing effective in relation to North Korea through the Security Council, through the United Nations mechanism, because if you can't discipline Iraq, what hope have you got of disciplining North Korea?
JOURNALIST:
Are you surprised though that the United States is so resistant to the idea that is being pressed by, not just Australia, by other nations, to engage in bilateral talks with North Korea?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Alexander Downer is going to be talking to Colin Powell about this issue, I suspect in a few hours, so we'll see what comes out of that.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, there has been outrage on radio this morning about the comments Mahathir made. What is your reaction?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I won't dignify those comments with a response.
JOURNALIST:
Do you have any words of comfort though for the families of the victims who had to sit at home last night and watch those on television?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well sometimes you can convey your feelings more powerfully and more effectively by saying what I have just said, and that is I won't dignify those comments with a response. I think my feelings towards the victims of the Bali outrage are well-known and I have communicated those feelings on numerous occasions.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, you're going to New Zealand the 8th to the 10th , which is more or less the time the Security Council will [inaudible] vote. Are you concerned you could be out of a country at a critical moment and how might that effect [inaudible]?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't know that I'll be out of communication, especially not in New Zealand, it's very close and I never feel that going to New Zealand is travelling to a foreign country.
JOURNALIST:
Given that you say that there is already legal authority in 1441 for a military strike, shouldn't this new resolution really have spelt out exactly what serious consequences we're talking about, so we can be certain...?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, on the contrary, I think what the new resolution does is record reality and that is what the Security Council must do. My support for a second resolution, a new resolution has always been based on the belief that if you get a new resolution you would involve more countries. That's been my argument in any action that might be taken and that's the point I made in the statement to Parliament. It's not a question of international law that you need another resolution.
JOURNALIST:
If it's not a matter of international law and given a decision's now perhaps only weeks away, I mean we're really...
PRIME MINISTER:
What was the second thing you said?
JOURNALIST:
A decision may only be weeks away now, given the Jack Straw timeframe. There's no reason, is there, for - in your terms - for Australia to not be a part of any military action whether it's UN sanctioned or not now, is there?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look Fran, there's no way until I have every card on the table and I know all of the realities, I'm not going to make and my Government is not going to make a final decision on this. Clearly, we are in a position to make a military contribution if we decide to do so, we have taken all steps to put ourselves in that position, all steps. But I'm not going to make that final decision and I would be foolish if I made that final decision and the Australian people do not expect me to make that final decision until I know all of the facts and all the cards are on the table.
JOURNALIST:
Did the presentation on work and family include any discussions of a home carers allowance?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I don't go into the detail, Dennis, of the presentation - which was a very good presentation - on the issue. But let me say this that it's very clear from the work that we have done over the last few months that the reforms that the Government has introduced have achieved the goals that we set out to achieve. We set out to give more choice to parents, particularly women; we set out to redress the imbalance against single income families; and we set out to recognise that there are a variety of arrangements that people with young children enter into regarding their working lives and their caring roles. And the job of a government in our kind of society is not to mandate behaviour or choice but to give people the optimum circumstances in which they can make their own choices. And I'm certainly very satisfied from what I've seen of the analysis of our policies that we have achieved those goals and I'll be saying something in more detail about that, that issue quite soon because it is one of the, as we come to the seventh anniversary of our election as a government, it is one of the very significant achievements of this Government.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible] the dollar has gone up to 60 cents...
PRIME MINISTER:
Mmm.
JOURNALIST:
Which is good news, but is it, are you concerned by the possible impacts on exporters at this time?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't talk about the level of the dollar.
JOURNALIST:
Did you take any comfort from the RBA Governor's address to Cabinet yesterday about how the economy can withstand the times ahead?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the context of his address was not the impact of any possible military action. I read that interpretation and that contextual point, that wasn't the context of it. The context is that we decided ages ago, decided after the last election that every six months we would have a two-day strategic Cabinet session in which one sought to look at the longer term, the bigger picture, whatever expression you might employ to, and I decided as part of that that we would have a scene-setter on the economy and a longer term perspective from the Government of Reserve Bank and a scene-setter on the security issue from Kim Jones, the director general of ONA. And both of those presentations to the whole Cabinet were very very useful. It is true that the Governor presented a very positive view about the strength of the Australian economy. He did remind us of the need to continue, and we needed no reminding of it, but it's useful from such a source to be reminded of the need to continue to pursue flexibility. He made the point that the flexibility of the Australian economy over the past few years has been one of its great guarantors of success. He also, and the Treasurer's done it again this morning, underlined the demographic challenge that his country faces. Although we're not as poorly off in this area as other countries, such as Europe and Japan that face even more severe ageing problems, we still nonetheless face such a problem and that means amongst other things that if the Labor Party and the Democrats and the Greens are interested in the longer-term stability and maintenance of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and the disability support pension arrangements they will stop blocking the very modest, necessary reforms that were brought down in the last Budget. I mean, we are properly exhorted, both we and the Government and the Opposition to think of the longer-term. As you look at Australia's longer term, we do have to do something about this demographic challenge and one of the things we have to do is to recognise that as we grow older, and more people live longer and more healthy lives there'll be a greater strain placed on things like the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and modest reforms as contained in the last Budget were necessary for that. But just on the Governor point, it wasn't in the context of the affordability of any military operation. Although, self evidently, if you have a strong economy you are better able to deal with things like that than if you have a weak economy.
JOURNALIST:
...in spotlight, are you concerned that it has taken so long to deal with allegations against some Australian troops in Timor? One has already been dealt with, but there are still some outstanding and can you explain why it has taken so long?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the answer to both questions is no. Look, I regard these things as a matter of the military justice system, the civilian justice system takes a long time, Michelle. The civilian justice system takes a long time and people who are being investigated in the military are entitled to the same due process as are civilians.
JOURNALIST:
Is the exchange rate no longer as highly competitive as it once was?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I think I actually said... I used the expression