MURRAY:
Good morning Prime Minister. How are you? I'll let you get set up and I'll just get on the line Prime Minister one of our callers to find out what issues are on people's minds today. Good morning Michelle. Are you there Michelle?
CALLER:
Hello.
MURRAY:
Hi there.
CALLER:
Hi.
MURRAY:
What would you like to talk to the Prime Minister about today?
CALLER:
Yes, when he's ready.
MURRAY:
Yes, he is.
PRIME MINISTER:
He is Michelle, I apologise for being a little late.
CALLER:
Hi. I wanted to discuss one of the issues at the moment that's sort of running the election is education. I have a son who's currently going into year 11 and as a parent I'm concerned that he is going to find it difficult to get into university in the future and I wanted to know how the Liberal Party is actually going to address that because you know with the unemployment figures as they are, although stagnant, I'm concerned that you know he might not be able to get into university, he might not have as many options as what I had when I went to university. So I'm wondering what you might be able to do with that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Michelle can I just say one thing about unemployment, unemployment in this country is at a 22 year low, we entered 2004 for the first time in 35 years that we've simultaneously had unemployment below six per cent and inflation below three per cent. So any suggestion that it's much much harder now to get a job than it was a few years ago couldn't be further from the truth. And I'm not saying you know that's what you're alleging but I can't leave that observation about you know the unemployment situation being stagnant, the fact is when I became Prime Minister unemployment was 8.5 per cent, it's now 5.6 per cent and that's about a 40 per cent drop so I have to defend the Government's performance on that.
Now moving to the availability of education places, you asked what is the Liberal Party doing, well we've just put through Parliament with the help of the independents and no help from anybody else some changes which will get more money into universities, provide for funded places and in the allocation of places there has been a 17 per cent increase in the places available for students from Western Australia. The state asked for more, I mean states always ask for more, I understand that, some of the other states complained that Western Australia got too many, the Victorian Labor Government for example said Western Australia should only get a six per cent increase and it's very important and I refer in particular to a story on the frontpage of the West Australian this morning, it's very important that the initial figures about people who are missing out be understood for what they are and they are an incomplete picture because those initial figures, and I think there's a figure of 6,000 or something quoted on the frontpage of the WA this morning, they include double applications, they include ineligible applications and it won't be until April of this year that you get a true measure of the number of students who have in fact missed out and I'm told for example last year when it all settled down the total number of people who failed to get a place in Western Australia, these are the figures I've been given by the Federal Education Department, was between 1300 and 1600 and just as a matter of comparison the number of people who won places and who dropped out in the course of doing their courses exceeded the number of people who ultimately had missed out.
So look the answer is I can't, and no prime minister, can guarantee that every person who wants to go to university will go to university. What I can guarantee is that we have put a lot more public resources into education, tertiary education, we are also making it easier for people to pay their way at university if they want to and that won't just help the wealthy, because we have student loans that will help other people. I cannot understand how the Labor Party and the university unions can argue that it's okay for foreigners to buy their places in Australian universities but it's not all right for Australians to do so. I have never supported that discrimination against Australians. So I hope that your child, who's in year 11, is it daughter or son?
CALLER:
Son.
PRIME MINISTER:
Son, I wish him well, I hope that he achieves his ambitions, I feel confident if he's a hardworking boy he will do so. I think our education package is a good mix between getting more money from the taxpayer but also more money from people who go to university and get the benefit of an education, I mean under the HECS arrangement when you leave university you don't start paying back the HECS debt under the new arrangements until you're earning more than $35,000 a year. Now people who go to university end up on the whole making more money than people who don't and it's only reasonable they ultimately make a contribution to an education that has enhanced their income earning capacity. I think that's a fair balance.
MURRAY:
Okay, Michelle, thanks for your call. Prime Minister you're here for four days, one of your longer visits, you're going to two of Labor's most sensitive marginals today, Stirling and Swan, is the election campaign in full flight already is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I planned to come here before Christmas, as you probably know Paul...
MURRAY:
... campaign.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean you campaign all the time I suppose. I have always tried when I come to Western Australia to spend a few days rather than go in and out, I don't think you get the feel of what's on people's mind unless you spend a bit of time. But I guess in a way you campaign all the time, but in the course of being here I'm making a policy announcement as I did yesterday with the dedicated regional police group and today I've got a Tough on Drugs announcement, some more support for groups that are joining as part of our Tough on Drugs campaign to fight that issue on behalf of Australian families.
MURRAY:
How far off are the polls do you think?
PRIME MINISTER:
My position hasn't changed on that, it's the normal thing to have the election about three years from the previous election.
MURRAY:
Give or take six months or so.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well unless there's some special event I won't be having the election until the second half of the year.
MURRAY:
What role do you think your decision to join the war in Iraq will play in a full fledged election campaign?
PRIME MINISTER:
It will be debated and I don't mind if it is and I'll defend it right up until polling day. But I don't think it will be a dominant issue.
MURRAY:
Well America's former chief weapons inspector, David Kay, now says Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction at the time of the invasion. You made weapons of mass destruction one of the rationales for us engaging. I'm sure we'd all appreciate a simple, unequivocal answer just to one question, was your intelligence advice on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capability right or wrong?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think we can give the answer to that yet until you know the full results of all of the investigations. If you're asking me the question did we have intelligence supporting our decision, the unequivocal answer is yes we did, as did Tony Blair and as did George Bush. Whether that intelligence was wrong, the jury is still out on that.
MURRAY:
Well Mr Kay says that when they walked into Iraq after the hostilities were over...
PRIME MINISTER:
Can I just interrupt if you don't mind, everybody thought there were weapons of mass destruction a year ago, my critics thought there were, the then Leader of the Opposition Simon Crean said there were weapons of mass destruction, even the Russians and the Germans who opposed what the Americans and the British and we did, they thought there were weapons of mass destruction. The argument wasn't as to whether or not the weapons of mass destruction existed, the argument was how you dealt with the issue, whether you persevered with the inspection process or whether you...
MURRAY:
Well with respect, blind Freddy can now see there are no weapons of mass destruction are there? There are none. I mean we've been there looking for them for a long time now...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the work of the Iraq survey group is still going on. Look I know what Kay has said, I know what everybody else has said, but you asked me a question and I gave you the answer to it.
MURRAY:
Is there a really serious matter that you took the nation to war on the basis of bogus intelligence claims?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well when you say bogus, bogus implies that people made it up, they didn't make it up.
MURRAY:
They just got it wrong.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, history may, in the fullness of time it might be demonstrated that the advice was inaccurate but saying it was bogus is an unfair observation on the integrity of the intelligence agencies.
MURRAY:
So it was just wrong?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we can't be absolutely certain of that. Obviously the evidence is not pointing strongly in the other direction, I acknowledge what Kay and others have said, but to say it was bogus was...
MURRAY:
Well okay, well how seriously would you take it that you made this decision on the basis of wrong advice from your best security experts?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the great bulk, not all, but the great bulk of the intelligence that we relied upon, we made our own assessment of it, was of course from British and American sources. Now I'm not saying that in any way to wriggle away from what our agencies may or may not have done...
MURRAY:
Well it makes it worse actually.
PRIME MINISTER:
But the nature of the intelligence agencies relationships between Australia and Britain and America is that we share intelligence and they have areas of expertise as we do and they rely on a lot of our intelligence from our part of the world, obviously we rely very heavily on British and American intelligence from other parts of the world. So the source of much of the material on which the assessments were ultimately made was American and British. Now clearly, the hunt so far has turned up evidence of programmes. It has not turned up as yet evidence of the possession of actual weapons. It's certainly turned up evidence of weapons programmes and there is still further work to be conducted by the Iraq Survey Group. Obviously, if at the end of the day it's conclusively and absolutely the case that there were no weapons, then questions might be asked.
MURRAY:
Well, they are being. I mean, George Bush is having an independent inquiry. Tony Blair's about to announce an independent inquiry. Would you do so? I mean, how serious is this failure by your intelligence...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the question of whether Blair is going to announce an inquiry, I'm not...
MURRAY:
Downing Street, the latest story that has just come through on the wires, Downing Street say that he will do so today.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, well, that's very interesting. I haven't heard that report.
MURRAY:
Well, are you prepared to...
PRIME MINISTER:
...I will, we will take our own decision. We don't just automatically announce we're going to do something and the parliamentary inquiry that was established in Australia a few months ago will be reporting, I think, to Parliament on the 20th of February or thereabouts and the sensible thing for us to do will be to take our own counsel and to take our own decision.
MURRAY:
When the Hutton report came out in the UK last week, you said your critics in Australia owed you an apology. Are you serious?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, I am.
MURRAY:
Why?
PRIME MINISTER:
Because the allegation was that we lied about the intelligence - that was the allegation...
MURRAY:
Well...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, I'm very pleased you raised this issue. The allegation that was made was that we took the country to war based on a lie. Now, what that says is that we knew the intelligence was bogus, or that there was no intelligence to support the decision and we just lied to the Australian public...
MURRAY:
Do you think it's established in the minds of Australians that you didn't lie?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, some people will not believe me, no matter what I say about anything. I mean, that's the nature of Australian politics, Paul.
MURRAY:
Alright, I've taken up too much of this. Let's get to some callers.
PRIME MINISTER:
Okay then.
MURRAY:
922 11 233 if you want to talk to the Prime Minister today. Don in [inaudible]. Good morning, Don.
CALLER:
Morning, Paul. Morning, Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello.
CALLER:
Mr Howard, keeping in mind that you've had several terms in office now and that you're Government encourages retirees to be self-funded...
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
CALLER:
Could you please tell me with your hand over your heart why there is no legislation in place to protect the income earning assets of retirees from corporate crooks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I wouldn't agree that there's no legislation. There's certainly no legislation that can guarantee that an investment won't go bad and no Government can devise such a legislation. If you want a Prime Minister who can guarantee that an investment will not go bad, I think you'd be very hard pressed to find him. I can't do that and I'm not going to try and pretend. We have laws dealing with corporate fraud, and I'm very sorry if you have been a victim of that, they may not be perfect laws but I guess no Government can devise laws that are perfect. And, as far as the general treatment of retirees are concerned, I have to put up my hand for a lot of the policies that we have brought in, including the very generous changes we made to the taxation liability of self-funded retirees in the 2001 budget, which effectively means that most self-funded retirees, single ones, have a tax free threshold of up to $20,000 a year and couples up to 31 or 32. Now that does represent very generous taxation treatment.
MURRAY:
Going to attend to the superannuation surcharge in the next budget?
PRIME MINISTER:
We have already begun that process of reducing it - opposed by the Labor Party - it was only as a result of a deal made between the Democrats and us that we were able to get that through. The Labor Party has been very interesting on the superannuation surcharge. They opposed its introduction and they're also opposing its abolition. I mean, how you work that out is beyond me, but any way.
MURRAY:
John in Daglish, the Prime Minister's listening. G'day.
CALLER:
Oh, good morning Prime Minister and Paul. Prime Minister, despite your critics, you're doing a good job on the war against terrorism. I just wonder why your arguments haven't convinced your children, Melanie, Tim and Richard to join the Australian Defence Forces and get on the front line and fight this fight against terrorism. You're willing to send your fellow Australian sons, daughters, mothers, fathers and siblings to fight and they suffer post traumatic stress in addition to the physical stress that they get when they're in the war. It can affect three generations. My daughter's a psychologist, most of her patients or clients are families of Vietnam Vet's which finished years ago. So, why aren't your children and those of Mr Blair and Mr Bush joining the fight against terrorism?
MURRAY:
Okay, John, we'll let the Prime Minister...
PRIME MINISTER:
In defence of Mr Blair, I think his children are below military age. But mine aren't and I'll answer the question. We have a volunteer army at present. I've been asked this question before. And, obviously, if we'd had any form of compulsory military training I would have expected my children to be subject to exactly the same rules as anybody else. But the question of whether they join the military forces of this country is a matter for them. They are young adults and they have as much right as anybody else and just because I occupy the position, doesn't mean I have to compel my children to join the military.
MURRAY:
I have enough trouble getting my son to come around for dinner, let alone getting him to join the army. Geoff in Munston. Good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning, Paul and good morning Prime Minister. My question to the Prime Minister is - is the Australian Constitution Act 1900 still a valid Act and law in this country?
PRIME MINISTER:
Last time I checked, answer yes.
CALLER:
Okay. So, there's only been about eight changes to that Act.
PRIME MINISTER:
Very few, I think it's eight, something like that.
CALLER:
About eight. Okay. So then all provisions of that Act are law and they restrict the powers and tell government how will they act, is that correct?
MURRAY:
Yeah, get to your point, Geoff, we're not going to have a big discussion on the Constitution.
PRIME MINISTER:
This is not the High Court of Australia. I can't help you with all the details.
CALLER:
Okay, well, just quickly Prime Minister. Section 53 and 55 of the Constitution say that we cannot be charged a tax law, we can't have a tax law that contains provisions in it that levies fines and interest charges on taxpayers. So, what I'm getting to is...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I have to say that over the years the courts have ruled valid the imposition of interest on unpaid tax and that's the authority that is charged under the very Constitution you're referring to and interpreting that law. I don't interpret the Constitution, I'm governed by it, the High Court interprets the Constitution.
MURRAY:
Geoff in Fremantle. Good morning.
CALLER:
Yeah, good morning Paul and Prime Minister. $400 a week, two children over 12 months. Do you think you could live on something like that?
PRIME MINISTER:
It'd be very very hard. Very very very hard.
CALLER:
That's fine. There is going to be a press for $26 a week rise. Would you be the sort of person that would back that rather than go against it?
PRIME MINISTER:
You're talking about the minimum wage case?
CALLER:
Basically, yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, what we have done is to support, since we've been in office, I think I'm correct in saying this, that on every occasion we have supported, well most occasions we have supported an increase in the minimum wage, we haven't always supported the amount that's sought by the ACTU but we have never adopted the attitude that there should be no increase in the minimum wage.
CALLER:
So this particular one then?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that'll be something that we'll consider when we have to put in our submission.
MURRAY:
Alright, Geoff, thanks. Kara in Bentley, the Prime Minister's listening. G'day.
CALLER:
Hi Kara...
MURRAY:
No, you're Kara, yeah.
CALLER:
Yep. Hi John.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hi Kara. Paul with me.
CALLER:
I've got the same birthday as you, 26th of July.
PRIME MINISTER:
Aren't you lucky - and Mick Jagger!
CALLER:
Now, I'm a young student that's actually downstairs from the radio station.
PRIME MINISTER:
Were you one of those who welcomed me so warmly as I walked in?
CALLER:
I'm wondering if you'll come down...
PRIME MINISTER:
You sound so very friendly.
CALLER:
I've got a question for you, John.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, well, I'm listening.
CALLER:
Okay. Will you come down and speak to us.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, why don't you give all the listeners the benefit of your question?
CALLER:
Okay, my question to you is, John, in terms of the increase of federally funded places that you have in Western Australia, why does that growth not match the natural youth growth within Western Australia? And are you actually forcing West Australian students to take up full fee paying places?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, we're not forcing them to. What we've tried to do is bring about a balanced increase in resources going into universities, sure. There's going to be a greater likelihood of a contribution by some students from their own resources, but there's also going to be a very significant increase in federal funding, a very significant increase. And we are quite upfront about this and can I remind you that the HECS system, which we have for funding of our universities now, well covering the student contribution, was actually introduced by a Labor Government with our support. And what I find very ironic about this whole debate is that Mr Blair who's just been fighting tooth and nail, a Labor Prime Minister of Britain, to get through his Parliament changes which are very similar to the changes that we have put through our Parliament, I don't pretend to the Australian public that you can have completely free university education, you can't. The days of dreaming that we could have completely free university education are gone - that was tried by the Whitlam Government, didn't work, didn't improve the opportunities for people from lower socioeconomic groups to go to university. I think it is only reasonable that students make some contribution and I don't think any government can guarantee that every person who wants to go to university will be able to do so.
MURRAY:
Thanks Kara. Lionel in Gosnells. G'day to you.
CALLER:
Good morning Prime Minister and good morning Paul. Thanks for listening to me. I'm just talking about volunteers who work for religious, charity and welfare organisations that are unemployed and are pension volunteers who don't get paid a cent. Whereas the CEOs and executives of these organisations are on between $42000 and $50000 a year. These days volunteers should get at least $25 a day to cover their petrol and expenses.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's a question of what the market can afford and stand, but the whole concept of volunteers is that you do something for nothing. It's just not real life for a great welfare institution such as Anglicare or St Vincent de Paul or the Wesley Mission these days to have no paid employees at all. It's just not realistic. You'll always have a mix and by and large the salaries they are paid are not high, they don't get anywhere near the salaries some of them might command in private enterprise and I think some people will provide the cost of petrol, I suppose, and if they can that's good. I welcome that. But I don't think you can pass a law requiring it to occur and I think a lot of people who are volunteers would resent being in effect given something they've never asked for in the first place.
MURRAY:
On chief executive officers pays, Mark Latham this morning has said that the pay out to Frank Cicutto which as the papers say is somewhere between seven and fourteen million dollars. Mark Latham says it's an obscenity and it's rewarding failure. What's your view on that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I share the view that people who are seen to have not been successful shouldn't get high payouts, I've said that repeatedly. I don't object to people being paid what the market requires they be paid, otherwise you're not going to get high quality people to run companies. And this idea that you legislate to restrict what companies pay their chief executive by way of ordinary salary and remuneration. I think that is ridiculous and shortsighted. But I can understand the irritation of the public when it looks as though somebody who hasn't done a good job, and I've got to be careful what I say, who looks as though he may not have done a good job, nonetheless walks away with a very big pay out. I think the public has a totally different attitude towards that.
MURRAY:
We're almost out of time. I just want to ask you about Mr Latham. He appears to have re-energised federal Labor. He's selling his message directly to Australians with young families. He's a father of two young boys and he's talking about is concern for their future. Is this emerging as a political problem for you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I think he's had a good conference, he's had a good few days, he's had good media. But politics is a long game.
MURRAY:
But is there a generational issue here? He's talking, he's able to tap into younger group of Australians who might be very receptive to his message.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, whether he is able to reach a particular group or whether I am is something that will ultimately be decided by the Australian public and I don't think we should jump to any conclusions. In the end, people will elect somebody is competent and reliable and experienced and somebody who they think can do the job. Whatever that person's age may be will be immaterial.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister, it's great to talk to you. Thanks very much for your time today. We need an hour of your time when you come over here.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm happy to stay a bit longer if you'd like.
MURRAY:
Time's gone like that.
[ends]