DOOGUE:
Well Prime Minister, welcome.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you, good to be with you.
DOOGUE:
Its been a very interesting week in politics, I think you'll agree. Partly because the media seems to be so fascinated, whatever you think with Mark Latham, that he's changing the ground rules. Now how are you planning to handle this change?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I've been following it, he's had a good few days and that was to be expected, he's had a national conference and I observed that, he's had good press out of it. But politics is a marathon race and I've looked at what's actually come out of the conference with his policies; I know that he has a weaker border protection policy than either Kim Beazley or Simon Crean; I know that he's got a very pro-union, industrial relations policy. He's going to abolish Australian workplace agreements and he's going to give power back to the Industrial Relations Commission and that really will take us back to where we were a long time ago and undermine a lot of the productivity gains which have underpinned our employment growth. He talks a lot about opportunity for all. I would have thought the greatest opportunity you can give any Australian is the chance of a job and when I became Prime Minister unemployment in this country was 8.5 per cent, it's now about 40 per cent lower at 5.6 and a lot of that has been due to the freer industrial relations climate, particularly for small business. So I think that industrial relations policy is very regressive. And the takeout of the policy announcements is that he'll be a fairly big spender, that's the impression, there's just a whiff of the cradle to grave state paternalism about some of the things he talks of. Now they're my reactions, but look, he's had a good few days, he's had good press, he'll get a bounce in the polls as a result of this, I understand all of that, but as I said politics is a...
DOOGUE:
A long game.
PRIME MINISTER:
It's a long game, it's a marathon and it's too early to say anybody's changed any ground rules, I've heard a lot of that before and in the end these things will be resolved by the electorate sometime later this year.
DOOGUE:
There are, when?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't know except to repeat what I've been saying for ages and that is that the normal time to hold the election would be in the second half of this year. The third anniversary of my re-election, the Government's re-election, is the 10th of November 2004 so you would expect the election to be some time around then, give or take a month, a few weeks or whatever, or a couple of months, I don't know.
DOOGUE:
So you could go into next year, couldn't you?
PRIME MINISTER:
You can constitutionally, yes, you could. I don't think it's something that would be likely but I'm not going to rule it out because it's constitutionally possible. You can earlier than the middle of the year but I've certainly never been inclined to do that because it might throw the two houses out of synchronisation in the future, and I don't think the Australian public wants that. In any event, I think the public generally says look you've got your three years, unless you've got a very good reason don't bother us earlier, and I think they are right. People who call elections too early without good justification in the public interest generally suffer and they probably should too.
DOOGUE:
But the symbolism is interesting, I mean I quote from the respected commentator Paul Kelly who wrote yesterday "Mark Latham's turning into the sort of leader that almost nobody in politics expected just two months ago. His strength is media image, communications position and a type of new generation chemistry". Now is his judgment wrong?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Geraldine, he's the commentator, I'm the participant. I'll leave other people to run all those commentary rulers over Mr Latham. He's like all of the opponents I've had, and he's the fifth Labor leader that I have faced as leader of the Liberal Party and they were all different, but I have always treated them with great care. I don't take anything for granted, the next election will be very hard for me to win, I accept that and, when it's the fourth time around. On the other hand we have a good story to tell, we have the golden double as I keep describing it, inflation below three per cent, unemployment below six per cent, the first time we've had those two things in alignment for 35 years in this country. Now that's something that will work in the Government's favour, what will work against the Government is the fact that it's the fourth time. So I accept that, I've always accepted that but the judgements that people make about leaders, I mean there have been myriad judgments made about me over the years, some of them have proved right, some of them have proved wrong, and they've changed and the people who are making them have made different judgements.
DOOGUE:
Kelly says that "Howard's now facing an ALP leader who can contest the culture wars with him".
PRIME MINISTER:
Well once again that's a piece of commentary. As far as issues are concerned, well people know where I stand and they'll continue to know where I stand on all issues in the lead up to the election.
DOOGUE:
Even Miranda Devine, I mean the media itself is something to watch. Miranda Devine, who's normally I think pretty pro-you said that in fact she thought...
PRIME MINISTER:
I never want to, you know give people the headache of ever agreeing with anybody, you know it's quite a, quite a... you know, an unfair label.
DOOGUE:
But she suggests that both you and the Treasurer had an underlining meanness and pettiness in your response to Labor last week.
PRIME MINISTER:
Look Geraldine, Mark Latham has had a good press and he will get a big political dividend out of that in opinion poll ratings and so forth. But as I said a few moments ago this is a marathon race and I've been at every point on the polling barometer in my political career, both individually and as leader of the party, and I have never expected that winning the next election would be easy and I will be working very hard to ensure that we do and all my waking energies and hours...., and I think a Labor Government led by Mr Latham would represent a risk, I think...
DOOGUE:
Why?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think the economic policies that have come out of this conference are certainly not as pro-growth as you might have expected given some of the things he said before he became leader. I mean the industrial relations policy is really a very serious regression, the mandating of an entitlement to part time work sounds great in theory in the context of a work family balance policy, but very hard for a small business, which employs, small business employ most people. But if you've got only a couple of employees you need them full time, most of the time, and if you're told by the law well you can only have one of them part time and you must make provision for part time, well that's easy for a Westpac, it's easy for the Commonwealth public service, it's easy for the ABC, but for a person running a small business with two or three employees that becomes a nightmare and the great lifeline, the great salvation of small business is absolute flexibility to suit the circumstances of the firm. And I mean these things sound great but they are the product of people who don't really understand how small businesses work and I would have though the modern Labor Party is even less in touch with small business now than it would have been 20 years ago because so many of its frontbenchers have never really had jobs outside of politics or the trade union movement.
DOOGUE:
So that counteracts does it that quite ringing endorsement I suppose, or the ringing bit of rhetoric that he was about hope, you were about fear, he was about the future, you were about the past. That rhetoric won't matter you don't think?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well in the end Geraldine that's a matter for the public, but they're his words.
DOOGUE:
But the symbolism's powerful isn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Geraldine, we'll see, we'll see about that. The Australian public will make that kind of judgement but we don't go to the next election empty handed when it comes to achievement and hope, we have after all presided over the strongest growth period that the Australian economy has had since the 1960's and in circumstances where that growth is more meritorious because it's not protected by high tariffs and a rigid fixed economy. The Australian economy is probably enjoying its best years since World War II and it's doing so in circumstances that I think have surprised many people.
DOOGUE:
Is one of the difficulties though for a government that's been there for as long as you have that people actually take it for granted? Whether or not that's fair or not they just....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well some will do that, others will say why risk it? This bloke's done a good job, why risk it? Now we'll see, I don't take it for granted, I mean the one thing you will not find me doing is arrogantly assuming for a moment that I deserve to be re-elected.
DOOGUE:
Indeed, dare I say you looked a bit a shrill last week from time to time, which people were surprised about.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's your comment, I don't accept that. But look in the end judgements are made over a period of time.
DOOGUE:
So, look, in terms of the symbolism that will dominate this year...
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not, I'm not, I mean...
DOOGUE:
You don't think...
PRIME MINISTER:
No I'm not sure that, I think symbols are important, but in the end it's results and policies and alternatives that matter.
DOOGUE:
Well do you believe that education will become a symbol of quite a lot of things, I mean you entered the debate around education, the values, you chose to make a very significant contribution. Was that...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it turned out, a very, it was really the politics of answering a question. I was asked why I thought people in increasing numbers sent their children to independent schools and the starting point of this issue Geraldine is that over the last six or seven years, don't hold me to the precise period, there has been a 13 per cent, 13.3 per cent increase in the number of people going to independent schools, and only 1.6 per cent increase in the number going to government schools and almost all of that increase has occurred in the low fee, low to medium fee independent schools, in fact for a period between I think 1996 and 2000 there was actually a contraction in the number of students attending the so-called elite schools. So this is about average Australians on modest incomes choosing to send their children in increasing numbers to independent schools. Now...
DOOGUE:
Is that about values?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I ask parents, some of them say values, they talk about discipline, they talk about values, they talk about a consonance between what is taught in the home and what is taught in the schools. I mean these are not necessarily my views, as you know I was educated at a government school.
DOOGUE:
You and your wife in fact sent your children to state primary, but not high school.
PRIME MINISTER:
That's right.
DOOGUE:
Were you seeking some different values going...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I'll tell you basically what we did, we had the opportunity, our children could have gone to North Sydney High and we sat down each of our children, we quite literally talked about their choices and in the end they decided on balance that they preferred to go to independent schools and we sent them there and we don't regret that, they had good education, but can I also say that they had very good educations at the primary schools we sent them to and one of the things...
DOOGUE:
... specific values, I've heard you comment and I do wonder (inaudible) what specific values you think...
PRIME MINISTER:
Different people express it differently, I mean, as some of them say that in some state schools people are told that any kind of family formation is acceptable or any kind of attitude to a particular issue is the norm, whereas others have a more conventional approach. Some people accept the format, they think it's okay, others don't. I mean I've had parents say this to me, I've had parents say to me that whatever residue there is of the Judeo-Christian ethic in our society is not taught enough in some government schools. Now I'm not saying everybody wants that for their children but you're asking me what values...
DOOGUE:
Well I'm wondering what you do to change things.
PRIME MINISTER:
Look perhaps the question is isn't it, well let me put it this way, not a question but make an assertion, that maybe facilitating choice is the answer and that really is our policy. I mean our policy is built on choice and the thing that has underpinned I think more than anything the growth of the number of people going to independent schools over the last few years has been the new schools policy that the Government introduced.
DOOGUE:
So you'd like to see more parents taking that private option?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I want more people to have the choice. I don't have a preference, as far as I'm concerned providing people have choice then they should be free to do so, there shouldn't be a presumption, there shouldn't be a bias in favour of either, I think people should have the choice.
DOOGUE:
But if you've got 60 per cent of our kids going to public schools, I'd be surprised that you as the Prime Minister didn't have...
PRIME MINISTER:
68, 68.
DOOGUE:
68?
PRIME MINISTER:
68 to 32 but at a secondary level it is 61...
DOOGUE:
1 to 3 basically...
PRIME MINISTER:
...it's 39, well it's a bit more in secondary level.
DOOGUE:
But what I'm saying is that I'd be surprised if you didn't want public schools to represent the widest values, that's why I'm teasing you out on this values question.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think one of the problems is that the agenda of the teacher unions in this country is seen by many parents as having a bias, I mean for example at the time...
DOOGUE:
To what?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well having on certain issues a left wing bias. For example...
DOOGUE:
... political partisan thing, it's not about Christian values?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well can I just deal with them episodically, and can I just say again different people have different views, different people give me different reasons.
DOOGUE:
But isn't that partly the answer for making it a sort of non-sectarian issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well no but that's an argument in favour of choice, yet all of my critics on this debate when it's all boiled down is basically saying they don't really want the Government to support independent schools very much, they really don't. I mean the official policy of the teacher unions in this country is that you shouldn't have any government money going to independent schools, despite the fact that every parent who sends a child to an independent school relieves the state of between $8-10,000 a year for educating that child and that of course is the ultimate argument in favour of every parent who sends a child to an independent school getting some help from the government.
DOOGUE:
But you're proud of the fact that there's more money as I understand going now to independent schools than there is to universities, government money.
PRIME MINISTER:
I haven't said I'm proud of that, it's just a statement of fact...
DOOGUE:
Well it follows doesn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
But I don't think it should be changed. I mean why should it be changed? Because more people go to school, I mean it's only about what 30-35 per cent of people who leave secondary school end up going to university, so axiomatically there's nothing particularly, I mean, I find that an odd argument.
DOOGUE:
I suppose you're you happier that your legacy, in your part of the assessment of you as a Prime Minister will be that you...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not into legacies at present.
DOOGUE:
Aren't you?
PRIME MINISTER:
No.
DOOGUE:
You're quite happy to be judged as you go!
PRIME MINISTER:
...ongoing.
DOOGUE:
But you rather like the idea of yourself as a person of history don't you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Geraldine, I haven't really got around to thinking too much about that.
DOOGUE:
The Prime Minister, Mr Howard, is my guest on Sunday Profile. Now just moving on, will all these issues matter, you have said for a while that national security has moved to the forefront of politics in Australia in a way that it hasn't done since the 50's, well you said this to Paul Kelly in a discussion last year, that it will swamp domestic issues. Do you think that's still the case?
PRIME MINISTER:
No what I said at various times, and more recently, is that we seek to govern the country with three broad goals. One of them is national security, the other is economic strength and the other is social stability and I identify all of our policies under those headings. Now national security is very important, and there's no doubt that the public properly sees us as stronger and more competent on that issue, and there's an ambiguity about the Labor Party's position on border protection, the debate was not about whether it should be weakened but whether it should be further weakened.
DOOGUE:
I notice even the Australian though in its editorial I think on Friday said that this issue, now that there's a compromise position from Labor, will gradually move down the agenda.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I mean that's the Australian and they're entitled to have their view but I can only say that...
DOOGUE:
(inaudible) you think it will still be....
PRIME MINISTER:
It remains an important issue but it won't be the only issue and nobody should imagine that we will only be campaigning on national security, we'll also be campaigning on the economy. Somebody once famously said "it's the economy stupid". And we'll also be campaigning on issues related to social stability and one of the first things that I hope that Parliament does when we sit in 10 days time is to pass our safety net legislation.
DOOGUE:
What do you mean by social stability?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean a society that has a proper balance between the obligations of individuals and the role of government and I said a moment ago that I thought there was a whiff of cradle to grave paternalism...
DOOGUE:
Orwellian you called it.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, the Orwellian reference I thought I made was to the idea that you would write down the rights and responsibilities about citizenship. I think you have to be careful here, I think there is an issue, a very genuine issue in relation to families at risk, most Australian parents do the right thing, most of them, in fact the overwhelming bulk of Australian parents care more for their children than anything else and the idea that you need to run the ruler of some kind of social worker ruler over all Australian parents is absurd, there are...
DOOGUE:
Which is not what he...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there are, you know there are suggestions in some of the things that that is the case.
DOOGUE:
After people have sort of been chronically truant and things like that, I mean...
PRIME MINISTER:
I think what you have to try and do there Geraldine is that you have to have policies that intervene very early to help the families that are clearly at risk, I think that is, I think the idea of any government telling parents who are doing the right thing how they should be raising their children is quite anathema and social stability, I mean I thought is a recognition that the primary nurturing role, in fact exclusive nurturing role for most is that of parents and their rights and their authority should be fully respected.
DOOGUE:
Are you confident of this, I notice that a couple of these commentators, including Miranda Devine, said these are important issues that worry people.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think they are, they have. I mean you talk about something like male role models, the politician who's talked about most about that issue is John Anderson. John Anderson's been talking about that issue for several years. And I was largely responsible for commissioning a parliamentary inquiry into the notion of joint custody when parents separated, largely because I worry that there are too many boys growing up without male role models. I think that is quite an issue and to the extent that the Leader of the Opposition and I agree on things like that, well I am very happy to work with him if there can be agreement on these things. I mean, anything such as that where he has views that are similar to mine.
DOOGUE:
Well, he's not afraid to go into those contentious social issues, is he?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think we should see them as contentious. This is part of the problem with the political dialogue in Australia. Something like that ought not be of contention, it ought to be second nature for people to talk about those things and sometimes in the past when people on the centre right of politics have talked about them, they've been accused of trying to take Australia back to old restricted notions of family and rights and roles, but perhaps it becomes a little different when people on the centre left ...
DOOGUE:
Well, this is the irony...
PRIME MINISTER:
That makes... more about the attitude of the commentators, rather than the quality of the exposition.
DOOGUE:
Well, I suppose we will see whether in fact the public's palate for it is quite high.
PRIME MINISTER:
But on that issue, I think there is a challenge for members of society, we do not want a society where boys are growing without male role models and there's a chronic imbalance as far as teachers are concerned, I mean, it's no fault let me say, immediately.
DOOGUE:
So what do you do about it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's quite hard. I notice that the Catholic Church is struggling at the moment to get the permission of Human Rights Commission to discriminate in favour of employing male teachers. I think that's odd, I think...the Sex Discrimination Act in my mind was never intended to stop that happening. I mean, it's about preventing women being discriminated against, which we're all in favour of laws that do that. But I think that perhaps that underlines a flaw in the legislation, but anyway we'll see what comes out of it.
DOOGUE:
So we can expect to hear more about this - can we?
PRIME MINISTER:
What?
DOOGUE:
The issues of male role models and other issues like this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you heard quite a bit about it in the past, but it's an issue that a lot of people have talked about and to the extent that we can have a dialogue across the political divide which is constructive, then that is a very good thing.
DOOGUE:
Well, to another matter, the war in Iraq - you said yourself going to war is perhaps the most serious thing a nation can do?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it is.
DOOGUE:
Given what the former American weapons inspector, David Kay, has been saying just this past week, it does seem we went to war on a false premise - are you comfortable with that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there is no doubt that the evidence, the intelligence that existed at the time justified the decision we took and I think the result of the Hutton Inquiry is very instructive on this. I mean, it's one thing to accuse a Government of going to war when mistakenly, as our critics have done, and I accept there's a debate about that, and I don't suggest that people who said that we shouldn't have gone to war are unpatriotic or anything like. But it's another thing to say we went to war on the basis of a lie, I mean that implies...
DOOGUE:
But that is not what I'm saying...
PRIME MINISTER:
.. that there was no intelligence.....
DOOGUE:
But he is saying that there was a fundamental mistake in the analysis.
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think we finally know the outcome of that. But it is nonetheless the case that the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein and so is Iraq.
DOOGUE:
Yes, but does it bother you at all that a democracy like ours went in maybe for a good reason, but on faulty intelligence - wouldn't that give a Prime Minister legitimate cause for pause?
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean, I think, like everybody else I'll be interested to know and want to know the final outcome of the continuing weapons inspections. But everybody thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction a year ago. I thought it, Mr Crean thought it, Mr Rudd thought it, even the American's critics - the French and the Germans conceded. The argument was what you did about it, some people said you should go through more United Nations' processes, others said your should do something about it. There was never really a debate about the existence. Now, of course that raises, obviously it raises issues but I think it is still too early to make pejorative judgements about the intelligence agency. All I can say in relation to the Australian ones, and I've dealt with them very closely, is - I think they did a professional job. Most of the intelligence that they distilled and assessed was, of course, American and British intelligence because in the nature of the intelligence sharing arrangements...
DOOGUE:
(inaudible) quite a lot of independent collecting though.
PRIME MINISTER:
(inaudible) but the great bulk of the assessments were made by the Americans and the British.
DOOGUE:
See...
PRIME MINISTER:
And I'm not trying to shift blame on to them because I personally had discussions with leaders of the American and British intelligence communities in the lead up to the war and so I was talking very directly to them, but it is an issue that will continue to be debated. But I have to make the point, that the evidence I had certainly justified the decision that the Government took and in any event the world is...
DOOGUE:
But that's what I'm saying, it would be surprise you, it would be disturbing to think that it is was so definite when we're now seeing such different things, wouldn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we'll just see how it all finally works it way out. But in any event the world is a better place and those who argued against what we did if their advice had been followed, Saddam Hussein would still be in power in Baghdad.
DOOGUE:
So was it about regime change? Which is what (inaudible) the state department necessarily, where do you stand on that? Was it essentially about that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm not changing what I said a year ago, I mean, I argued that the WMD threat was the principle reason. I did also argue that the American alliance was important. I didn't give it the same level of importance as the WMD threat. I did touch on the humanitarian side of it, but I'm not going to now pretend that that was the major argument I advanced because it wasn't. But I'm making nonetheless the practical observation that the consequences being to remove a dictator who's responsible clearly for the deaths for hundreds of thousands, perhaps more.
DOOGUE:
So the end justified the means?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, what I'm saying it the world is a better place without him.
DOOGUE:
See the judgement about what the Australian people think about the alliance is interesting too. I notice that one of the things Mr Latham said, "I'd never say Australia would be anyone's deputy sheriff"
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I never did either.
DOOGUE:
Well, you acceded to someone else.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, just because I didn't immediately ....
DOOGUE:
So you regret it, do you?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I didn't say that. I'm just simply saying I didn't say it. How can I regret something I didn't say?
DOOGUE:
Well, do you predict that, you clearly wouldn't say it then if you had your ...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, this is, sort of, a funny kind of interview, funny kind of question, the interview's very pleasant, but I just didn't say it.
DOOGUE:
All right, well how do you judge in this last year, do you think that Australians generally have shifted at all their attitude to the American alliance? He seems to be implying that they might have? PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think Australians have ever wanted us to be subservient to America. I don't either, but Australians are also very mindful of the fact that in World War II America saved us. And that is very deep in the Australian psyche, very deep - of all generations - and it's an important element. We are a country that from a security point of view does need the American alliance, but it's not an open-ended relationship. We disagree on all matter of things, for example, the international criminal court, after a lot of debate we've decided to join it, the Americans won't. There are a number of areas where we disagree, but I'm not the least bit apologetic about the fact that I've worked very hard to bring Australia and America even closer together because I believe it's in the long term interests of this country, both from a security point of view and from an economic point of view. And I've been able to do it without damaging our relations with Asia. I mean, my critics said you couldn't do that. The people who followed the mantra of my immediate predecessor said - oh, you can't do that. Nobody will talk to him in Asia. Well, it was after all under my prime ministership that President Bush and President Hu Jintao spoke in the parliament in successive days and talk about symbolism - that was a pretty dramatic piece of symbolism of the fact that you can be ever closer to America but build a very close relationship with the most populist country in the world.
DOOGUE:
Actually, speaking of the President, your mate George W. seems to be in a little more, well he's having a good fight on his hands, isn't he, in the election?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we all do. I mean I think Mr Blair has a fight on his hands.
DOOGUE:
Do you think they'll both survive as a matter of interest?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think George Bush will win. I think Blair will be very hard to beat. Tony Blair is of a different political persuasion of mine and I like his opponent who's of the same name, Michael Howard. When you've been through something like Iraq, you develop something of a bond with somebody. And I like Tony Blair, I think he was very courageous. I think it's fascinating that in Britain, he has stared down a revolt in his own party to introduce university reforms that his fraternal colleagues here in Australia, in the Australian Labor Party are bitterly opposed to. It's quite extraordinary.
DOOGUE:
I thought that might amuse you.
PRIME MINISTER:
It does, it continues to.
DOOGUE:
Finally, on the Free Trade deal, Mr Howard.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yep.
DOOGUE:
Look, from what I read, Trade Minister Vaile has barely slept in the last ...
PRIME MINISTER:
I can testify to that. He's working very hard for Australia.
DOOGUE:
Trying to put Australia's case. What are Australia's options at the moment? What are our options?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the options are to, well there's only really one option, we'll only sign an agreement if it delivers benefits to Australia.
DOOGUE:
We've come to the death knock, haven't we almost?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we've come to the end game, I don't know about death knock. But we're getting very close to it.
DOOGUE:
Is it going to happen?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't know. I really don't. It's still very much in the balance. The Americans are very tough negotiators and we're not going to sign anything unless there are real improvements for Australia we won't sign it. Agriculture's very important. I can assure people who are naturally interested in it that we're not going to give away Australia's cultural identity.
DOOGUE:
The PBS is the other...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we're not going to agree with anything that risks price increases.
DOOGUE:
You can guarantee that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Absolutely. Look, the PBS is a very important part...
DOOGUE:
Not something over twenty years...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, no, no nothing that will in anyway affect price, I mean, you might have something on transparency and process, and things like that. But when it comes to the structure of the PBS and the price and everything we're not going to agree to anything that affects that because it's a very important part of the social security safety net of this country. I mean, my view about the respective roles of government and the individual, I see very much government in the role of a safety net and as a protector of the vulnerable. But not a busy body partner in everything you do. And I think that....
DOOGUE:
...But we're going to able to scrutinise the way we do now in the PBS, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme? No changes there?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, Geraldine there won't be any changes that in any way undermine the pricing structure or any way undermine the essential structure of it.
DOOGUE:
Prime Minister, thank you very much for joining us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Pleasure.
[ends]