JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, now that this is open does that mean there can';t be a situation where the facts from France, for example, would sit for a weekend waiting for someone to attend to it? PRIME MINISTER:
Well certainly that situation';s been properly dealt with before in relation to the standard procedures of people being told that faxes of that kind have been sent. But certainly this is just a further addition to the capacity of our intelligence agencies to act in a timely way.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, is this intelligence community feeling a bit bruised? You seemed to refer to that in your speech upstairs.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there';s a lot of focus on them, and I wanted to say a couple of things, I wanted to express my continuing support for them, and I believe in doing that I';m expressing the views of the Australian community. The Australian community understands how important timely intelligence gathering is in the fight against terrorism, I understand that very well. Inevitably when you have a heightened focus on something like terrorism there';s enormous pressure on the intelligence agencies, they';re not perfect, they';re like the rest of us, they make their share of mistakes. There ought to be internal contestability, there';s no desire on the part of the Government to have a monotonously uniform stream of intelligence advice, there has of course been some focus on aspects of that issue and people will draw their own conclusions and reach their own views on that. But we don';t seek at any time to get intelligence that sounds comfortable and reassuring if the circumstances don';t warrant that.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, is the decision to create this centre and bring the agencies together reflect that perhaps they haven';t been working well together in the past?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, they';ve been working well in the past, they';ve had 24 hour activity in the past but this is just a further refinement, something that makes sense and we';re not bringing all the agencies together, we';re just bringing together the 24 hour surveillance part of it.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, you describe terrorism as the fight of our lives.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
JOURNALIST:
When will you know that the war';s over?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don';t know. I wish I had that prescience. But this is a struggle that will go on for a long time and regrettable though it is to say it we have to settle down for a very long struggle. I hope it doesn';t last as long as the Cold War, I certainly hope it doesn';t, but it';s not something that';s going to be easily dealt with. We face over the next few years in our own region a terrorist threat, a continuing terrorist threat. We';ve already been touched by it in a very brutal and tragic way in Bali.
JOURNALIST:
Do you believe the domestic debate Prime Minister over withdrawing Australian troops from Iraq has increased the potential threat to Australian interests here or overseas?
PRIME MINISTER:
That';s very hard to assess, Mark, I find that very difficult to assess. Domestic debate in a democracy is inevitable, and in a way there';s no point in wringing your hands about it. People are entitled to express their views and they will. I believe very strongly that we have to stay in Iraq and finish the job and I';ll continue to argue that proposition irrespective of what opinion polls may say now or in the future because I believe it is right that we complete our task. We face in Iraq a very critical couple of months. If the coalition is successful militarily and politically over the next two months, and that includes the continuation of the progress towards a handover on the 30th of June, then that will be very good for the Middle East, it will be very good for the Iraqi people and it will be very good for the fight against terrorism. See I can';t understand this proposition that Iraq has got nothing to do with the fight against terrorism because the terrorists are investing an enormous amount in trying to derail the coalition in Iraq.
JOURNALIST:
#8230; level of oversight of these rapidly growing agencies.
PRIME MINISTER:
I beg your pardon.
JOURNALIST:
#8230; the level of oversight, independent oversight, of these rapidly growing intelligence agencies.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, that doesn';t mean to say that from time to time you don';t look at that and ask questions about whether there ought to be changes but as things stand and as I am currently advised Ian, yes.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, do you have confidence in the US investigation into the alleged abuses of Iraqi prisoners?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I haven';t directly spoken to the Defence Secretary in the United States about it, I don';t know a great deal more about it than what you would know. I believe very strongly that such activity is completely out of character with the behaviour of American Army and military personnel. I believe very strongly that President Bush and the Secretary Rumsfeld would be as appalled by it as I am. It';s important the people responsible be pursued and prosecuted in accordance with the law. The point has to be made that when much worse happened under Saddam Hussein there were rewards rather than punishment.
JOURNALIST:
But given that it';s an internal defence inquiry over there and given what Amnesty has brought up in the past about it, do you think an independent inquiry might#8230;?
PRIME MINISTER:
Catherine, really it';s one thing to question me about independent inquiries in Australia, but to question me about independent inquiries in the United States, I don';t#8230; I';m not the President of the United States.
JOURNALIST:
But do you think, I mean, this issue could have potential to derail#8230;
PRIME MINISTER:
I know that some people will try and paint is as badly as possible#8230;
JOURNALIST:
Well do you think it could derail the#8230;
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it';s very regrettable, I';ve already said that on your sister programme this morning that I think it is regrettable. It';s worse than that. I condemn it unconditionally, as I did this morning, and that is no part as far as I';m concerned of the behaviour that I know to the norm of American military personnel.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, in making reference earlier to the Cold War, does that indicate that the struggle in Iraq could indeed last for years?
PRIME MINISTER:
I was talking more, Dennis, about the international struggle against terrorism. I wasn';t comparing Iraq with the Cold War, no, no. What I was saying is that I hoped the fight against international terrorism did not last as long as the Cold War. I think we';ve exhausted#8230;
JOURNALIST:
#8230; the next couple of months are critical in Iraq.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes they are because they encompass the projected hand over. If they don';t go well that will be a setback for the Iraqi people and this is my point. People who say this has got nothing to do with terrorism ought to look at the investment that international terrorism is making in destabilising the Coalition. The opportunistic identification with Iraq of each and every development involving terrorism around the world.
JOURNALIST:
#8230; handover will take place on July#8230;?
PRIME MINISTER:
I beg your pardon?
JOURNALIST:
Are you still confident the handover#8230;?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, I am. That is certainly the target, that was certainly the impression that was#8230; well not the impression, the statement that was made to me when I was in Baghdad by Mr Bremmer and that is certainly the goal of the Iraqi Governing Council, it is certainly the goal of the United Nations Secretary-General, it';s the goal of Brahimi, the United Nations Special Representative in Iraq.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, in putting together next week';s Budget, is the Government conscious at all that the fact the Reserve Bank still has a mild tightening bias and that any big tax cuts could put a little bit too much stimulus in the economy at a difficult time?
PRIME MINISTER:
I note that the Reserve Bank left interest rates unchanged this morning and I tend to leave it at that when it comes to interest rates.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, a double bunger, if I may#8230;
PRIME MINISTER:
Then we might conclude.
JOURNALIST:
You mentioned the Cold War, is there any chance that this war on terror will have a similar effect on international relations as the Cold War did? And could you comment at all on the reported quotes from Mr Lewincamp who said that Alexander Downer was so unhappy with DIO at the time of those leaks back in 1999-2000 and that Cabinet was on their backs and the Government wanted to shut them down.
PRIME MINISTER:
As far as the Cold War is concerned, the origins of the Cold War are utterly different. As you know, the Cold War developed out of the military alignment that was left in Europe at the end of World War II, and I won';t get into the history of it, I';ll spend a lot of time doing that, but the history of it is utterly and completely different. And, indeed, one of the great problems of terrorism is that it';s not conventional. I mean, you don';t think of armies rolling across borders, that';s an entirely#8230;
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don';t see that occurring in anywhere near the same way. The comparison I sought to draw was in the context of expressing a hope that it didn';t last as long as the Cold War. I wasn';t seeking thereby to say there were systemic comparisons that ought to be made between the two things. Look, I';m currently analysing the Bulletin article, I';ve had a few other things to do this morning and until I';ve completed that analysis I don';t have anything further to say.
Thank you.
[ends]