JONES:
The Prime Minister is on the line. Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning, Alan.
JONES:
Thank you for your time. Simon Crean said yesterday this - if the Prime Minister thought that the allegations of rape was an appropriate basis for the Governor General to stand aside today, then why did he not demand this in December last year when he was first told of the allegation by Dr Hollingworth, or in March this year when the application was made to the Victorian Supreme Court.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there's a very different set of circumstances. Back in December when I was told about it, it was a bare allegation. On the face of it, it seemed extraordinary, an allegation of that kind emphatically and totally denied. It, in December, was merely an allegation contained in a letter from a solicitor. I, in fact, at that time gave consideration to how the matter might be handled if ultimately it turned into a full-blown court case. Now, at the time, it was made public and bear in mind that a lot of confidential information comes in to a Prime Minister's hands, a lot of allegations are made against people and if you get to a situation in this country where the mere making of an allegation can bring about a person standing aside no matter who that person is, then I think you run the risk of making the place ungovernable. Now, what occurred was that the letter was written by a lawyer, it was shown to me by the Governor General, he said this is absurd; he then subsequently gave me his full story. I took some advice, I don't think it's appropriate to go into that at this stage. Then we watched the matter proceed. The question of the suppression order, well in the end that was a decision taken by the Governor General having sought his own counsel. We did discuss the pros and cons of that and in the end I said to him that he had rights as a citizen, like anybody else, and he had to take his own counsel. He now had injected into… the court case has been injected into the other controversy and plainly, it created a situation that was quite different from the situation in December.
JONES:
Do you have some concern though that in the presentation of all of this, sometimes the facts aren't presented which seems to be designed to be disadvantageous to the Governor General? I mean, the suppression order, for example, was first taken out by this poor unfortunate woman, wasn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's my understanding, yes.
JONES:
And, indeed, you would be aware of the allegations now, or the confirmation of the Brotherhood of St Laurence that the affidavit alleging this act by Peter Hollingworth was confirmed or supported by a picture of Peter Hollingworth in the Brotherhood of St Laurence News in June of 1964, that's contained in the affidavit by the unfortunate lady and yet, in the June 1964 newsletter of the Brotherhood of St Laurence there is no picture of Peter Hollingworth.
PRIME MINISTER:
I've been told that, yes.
JONES:
So, what does this say for public office in this country? I mean, for example, you've now got a federal frontbencher indicating, which has caused this to erupt, that he would place questions on notice about the rumoured suppression orders involving the Governor General when Parliament resumes this week. So in other words, the Member of Parliament seeking to subvert the processes of the court for whatever reason. Is that an acceptable way that the public would view the performance of Members of Parliament?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't think it is. I mean, once a suppression order was made, everybody is obliged to obey it and it seems highly improbable, to say the least, that Mr Tanner wouldn't put those questions on notice or talked about putting them on notice if he hadn't been told of this by somebody. Now, that somebody has clearly breached the terms of the suppression order. Now, Mr Tanner knows who it is but Mr Tanner will have to answer to that. I mean, you talk about questions on notice, there are a few questions that ought to be put on notice for Tanner.
JONES:
Just hang on, I'm just wondering… you seemed to have faded there…
PRIME MINISTER:
I felt the…
JONES:
Here we are, we're right then.
PRIME MINISTER:
Am I back now? I don't want to fade on you, Alan.
JONES:
No, not at all. We're back to again now. You made the point that there should be some questions put on notice about [inaudible], such as?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I mean, I would like to know who informed Mr Tanner? What was he told? Did he discuss this with Mr Crean? Why didn't he, if he was genuinely concerned about the issue, generally concerned about the interests of the parties, he could have made a private inquiry of my office. And, you know, it is possible in our system of Government when information of his kind comes into your possession and you have some appreciation of its sensitivity, it is possible to make private inquiries, even of your dreaded political enemies, to establish what the real situation is. And, of course, it's further compounded tragically by the poor lady's death.
JONES:
Prime Minister, on that question of the lady's death, it's obvious that she sought the suppression order for a variety of reasons, which most probably not germane to the question I'm going to ask you. But nonetheless she did commit suicide when it appears to have become apparent to her that the secrecy she sought had been breached or was about to be breached, which would spiral her into publicity that she obviously feared. Surely at the end of the day, someone's got to answer a few questions about this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm not aware of whether that description is accurate, I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just not aware of that. And unless and until I am aware of it, I don't want to answer that question.
JONES:
Well, the Greens leader, Bob Brown, I mean we're talking about an individual Australian here, and you constantly said, and we'd all believe that the presumption of innocence is certainly valid and equally, in all of these things you have to try to be fair and consistent. Bob Brown, the Greens leader, seems to have an opinion on most things, says the decision taken yesterday didn't address the wider issue that of - quote, "Mr Hollingworth protecting a paedophile priest". Is that a fair thing to say about the Governor General?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don’t think that is accurate. I think the decision of the Governor General when he was the Archbishop of Brisbane to allow somebody to continue to perform as a priest despite an admission by that person of an act of sexual molestation years earlier and before he became a priest, in all of the circumstances that was a serious error of judgement. To say that he was protecting him, well some people argue that, I think in all of the circumstances it's certainly a very serious error of judgement. The implication, of course, in a comment like that is in some way the Governor General, in his former capacity or even now, condones sexual molestation of minors. Now that is outrageous he doesn't, he's as opposed to that as anybody else. He made a judgement, a pastoral judgement at the time, he acknowledges that it was an error - a serious error of judgement - he's been condemned for that. Although, it has to be pointed out in fairness to him, that he's obtained separate legal advice from a senior counsel to the effect that he was denied natural justice by the Board of Inquiry of the Anglican Church. Now, that Board of Inquiry was not a judicial inquiry, it was a purely private one. And inevitably, there will be debate about whether or not he was given natural justice. In the end, everybody in this country is entitled to a presumption of innocence and a fair go.
JONES:
Prime Minister, this is a major constitutional issue and one potential problem is that any stand aside period I suppose should be brief but then its brevity is subject to all the legal proceedings over this rape allegation, will you be asking whether it's within the Commonwealth's power to intervene to speed up these proceedings?
PRIME MINISTER:
Alan, I've sought advice on that and if it is then we very likely will, but I've got to get advice first, I wasn't able to get all of that advice yesterday and we need to assess that. The matter will, I am told by the lawyers, come on for hearing quite shortly in relation to the question of whether the estate of the deceased woman can bring the action beyond the period set by the statute of limitations, as your listeners no doubt know, under our civil law you can't normally bring an action more than a certain number of years after the cause of that action arose. Now plainly, according to the allegations, the cause of action arose 37 years ago, and unless this lady's estate gets the permission of the Supreme Court of Victoria, as I understand the law, she can't even commence the proceedings for damages.
JONES:
Correct, that being the case, Prime Minister and if the matter then is thrown out on a technicality…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's not a technicality entirely because one of the factors the court takes into account into determining whether or not to grant an extension of time, is the strength of the case.
JONES:
Right… but I'm just saying if it were thrown out, it would still give the Governor General no opportunity to defend himself about what have been persistent headlines and given that the public often only read the headlines, there are people out there who most probably think that this man, a citizen amongst us, is a rapist.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I understand that… you know, some people were told a view that he's not been given sufficient opportunity. I think what we have to do is deal with each episode in this difficult issue as it unfolds and what I've done, I think, is to establish a way to handle the rape allegations which protects the office of Governor General and is fair to Dr Hollingworth. I mean, it has to be said again, in his interests that he emphatically, comprehensively, totally and to me quite compellingly, has denied them and I think that, you know, can't be said enough because you are dealing here with a horrendous allegation which has been given enormous publicity because of the way in which this matter has been handled by certain people.
JONES:
Finally Prime Minister, wrapping all this up into one - we've had the inquiry by the Anglican Church, whether or not of course there is legal advice as to whether or not he has been denied justice, this now appalling allegation in relation to rape, the office has been damaged and the capacity of the Governor General to perform in that office is totally compromised. Is there some point surely down the track where you will be seeking a resignation from the Governor General in order to repair the damage that's already been done?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Alan, I'm doing what I said I was doing in the statement I made yesterday and let us see that situation work its way through. I don't think offices get damaged as much as people sometimes think by controversy that surrounds the office. I'm quite sure the office of Governor General will survive, although it's obviously very desirable that no controversy surround the office…
JONES:
… got to be a capacity of the person within the office to perform…?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well quite plainly, that is the case Alan. What the Governor General told me yesterday, and I repeated it in the statement, was that in considering his longer-term tenure of the office he would give the greatest weight of all to the protection and the dignity of that office.
JONES:
Thank you for you time, Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.