BYNER:
Welcome Prime Minister, John Howard. It's nice to see you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Very nice to be with you again.
BYNER:
And I'm glad that you've taken some time to come in and talk to the people of South Australia.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I've been here for three days now and I come to South Australia very regularly and I'll be back again soon and it's good to be in your studio.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, we have fixed term parliaments in South Australia so the constituents know when there is going to be an election, and of course governments of the day federally go to the polls when they deem it appropriate. Why can't we have, to stop all the speculation and a degree of uncertainty, why can't we have a fixed term federal parliament? Are you in favour of that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm in favour of longer parliaments. I'd be in favour of four years rather than three. The reason we can't have a fixed term parliament is that the Constitution doesn't provide for it.
BYNER:
So we would have to change the Constitution?
PRIME MINISTER:
You'd have to change the Constitution, that's my understanding, to provide for it. The national parliament, the national government, is the product of a fixed Constitution. My personal preference would be in favour of having a four year parliament with a stipulation that you couldn't dissolve the parliament in less than three years, but within the fourth year the Prime Minister of the day could choose the time. I think that is a reasonable compromise. But we don't have four year parliaments. They're only three years. And as in Queensland, where there is only three years, it's up to the Prime Minister or the Premier of the day to decide when the election is going to be held.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, there are some questions here which have been put to me by the public of South Australia, and we will take some calls and I'm glad that you're quite happy to be interactive on 8224 0000. This one's on child protection and comes from Mark, who says - given that most child abuse occurs in single parent homes and there are no published research figures recording that there is any child abuse in joint physical custody homes, although (inaudible) joint custody homes is about twice the size of single family homes, were there data, what is your Government's policy to protect children after separation and divorce?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know that the figures quite prove that assertion. There are child abuse cases in single parent homes, I'm sorry to say, and there are some in two parent homes and there are some in homes where either of the parent having custody, has a number of friendships or partnerships, whatever you want to call them, and sometimes the level there is... my understanding is that the evidence around suggests that casual male partners are often a greater source of abuse than others. But what is our policy? Well there are a whole range of things that all governments do. Child protection laws are a state responsibility. That doesn't mean that we're disinterested. It's just that we don't have the authority. We are examining the House of Representatives Committee report on what we might do in relation to issues of custody and handling of family law matters, and the tribunal proposal that was put up by that body the Government is looking at, and we're looking at some variation of that. But I think when you have a marriage breakdown, there is always an unbelievable amount of mistrust and tension sadly, and often the children become the meat in the sandwich. Although let's be positive about it. The great majority of family breakdowns are followed by a fairly sensible approach by parents in relation to the care and custody of their children.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, another one, this is from a lady who's been in jail, she says could you ask Mr Howard a question of the Government's campaign to build a low level nuclear waste dump in South Australia, please thank Mr Howard for his undertaking not to build the dump, the Government's attempted confiscating of private land to construct the dump was totally illegal and the question is why, and what are the arguments, for putting nuclear waste in South Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we haven't undertaken not to do it, I have to point that out, what we've undertaken to do is have a look at it at Cabinet following the decision of the full Federal Court and to do that in a sensible, measured, reasonable way. What are the reasons? Well we have low level nuclear waste and it's got to be stored somewhere, somewhere in Australia and we had an investigation and the experts and the scientific assessment produced a site in South Australia. Now wherever you propose to put it there will be opposition, if I were to say tomorrow we're going to shift it from South Australia and put it in Queensland the people of South Australia would cheer and the people of Queensland would roar their disapproval, well most of them would. That is the difficulty. This is one of these no win situations for the Government and it's easy for state premiers to stand there and say well not in my state, and it's easy for them to pass laws to try and block it. But in the end we've got to find a location for this, this is Australia's responsibility and bear in mind that the future of the new reactor depends on this and that that reactor in Lucas Heights produces isotopes which is very important for the treatment of cancer, not just in New South Wales but all over Australia.
BYNER:
Talking with Prime Minister John Howard, it's 13 after nine at 1395, Adelaide's 5AA, we're going to take some calls shortly on 8224 0000. This is from Gary Hawke Prime Minister, he says there are two things - why did the Government try to bully us into accepting a low level nuclear waste dump, I think you've already answered that. Second question, what method does your Government use to come up with 3.3 per cent of the total budget for roads and road management in South Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we accept a whole series of criteria, South Australia has not been short changed.
BYNER:
We haven't?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, that's a false assertion that in some way South Australia has been short changed, you know we provide South Australia with, in relation to the Roads to Recovery a few months ago when I was here I announced that we would be adding about another $20 million to South Australia's entitlements in relation to road funding, we have funded a number of roads projects in South Australia which are not strictly in accordance with population criteria. You don't just, you do it on a whole variety of factors and this proposition that South Australia has been short changed is the equivalent of say Victoria complaining that South Australia got special advantages because we decided to support the Darwin to Alice Springs railway which is so important to South Australia and the Northern Territory, but is of absolutely no relevance to Queensland and New South Wales. You can't run a federation on the basis that every time you spend a dollar in one state you've got to have an exact replication of that dollar being spent in another state. If that had been the case for example we would never have been ahead of the funding of the Murray/Darling Basin restoration, I had an argument with Dr Gallop, Premier of Western Australia, at that meeting, he refused to sign. And the reason he refused to sign, he said well you gave South Australia effectively $200 million in fixing up the Murray Darling, what about my share? And I said well South Australia had in that situation a special need and it deserved to get it. So when you go around the country, when you're in my position you've got to look at the particular needs of particular parts of the country and if you look at the reasonable funding requirements in all of these things the idea that South Australia's been short changed is quite wrong.
BYNER:
The Auslink project though is, extensively from our point of view, it's perceived as an eastern seaboard if like area of interest which might be very good and great for the country as a whole...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I know some people feel that, but I have to point out that some people thought, particularly the Premier of Western Australia, at that meeting of Premiers that it was South Australian benefit gathering. Now I pointed out to Dr Gallop that there was a national interest in fixing the Murray Darling and there's a national interest in all of the balanced decisions I think we've taken in relation to Auslink. Of course, due to certain concentrations of population, of course you're going to have a heavy investment in roads such as the Pacific Highway.
BYNER:
Let's go to Banksia Park and get a question from Harry. Harry, good morning.
CALLER:
Oh good morning, morning Prime Minister. I was watching the television the other night and this financial body was talking about, or making comments regarding the $300 children and the $3,000 for newborns and they made the comment that this will make quite a hole in Australia and you'd have to put up taxes, is this true?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, completely affordable, completely affordable. We have run a very balanced budget, we've paid off $70 billion of the debt we inherited in 1996 and our debt level is one of the lowest in the world, there's absolutely no substance in the claim that we're going to go into deficit.
BYNER:
Thanks Harry. Let's got to Mt Barker and Cindy. Cindy, good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning, how are you?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm well.
CALLER:
I'm a married mother of three children and I'm ringing today because we're at absolute breaking point. We have two children with asthma and our middle child has autism, schizophrenia and ADHD, amongst a few other things. The Medicare safety net is helping us a lot with our two asthmatic children but we're not getting any help at all for the autistic child. She requires approximately $300 of medication a month, none of this is covered by PBS. Sorry, I get a bit upset about this. Medical expenses and ongoing treatments are not covered by Medicare either, the carers' allowance we get has just been paying for her school fees, but she desperately needs tuition, there's no government assistance once again. The Autism Association has had a funding cut in recent years and there's a very long waiting list and they're just unable to help us at the moment. If we don't get help for her now she'll become an expensive burden on society. I've actually needed to go out and obtain a part time job to help pay for some of the medical expenses, but I need to be home. Can you help us?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well could I just go through that with you?
CALLER:
Certainly.
PRIME MINISTER:
You mentioned the pharmaceutical needs, there is a Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme safety net and it may, and I'm sure whether that has been reached or not, but there is...
CALLER:
It's only medication requires that, the medication that she needs to be on is not covered by the PBS, it's a non-PBS prescription.
PRIME MINISTER:
Many of them are non that would be PBS prescriptions be, you're saying they're not great enough to reach the PBS safety net?
CALLER:
... required by the PBS safety net, we can't place the medications on the PBS safety net because they are not PBS drugs.
PRIME MINISTER:
I see. Now you say that the Medicare safety net which has come in recently that has been of help?
CALLER:
It's been of help, we reached the limit a month ago with our other two children with asthma.
PRIME MINISTER:
Which means that any extra expenses, out of hospital expenses, you'll get 80 per cent of them back.
CALLER:
Unfortunately some of the care that our daughter needs is not a Medicare issue, like she needs a lot of physical therapy, mental therapy, a lot of the ongoing...
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand, I understand some of those would not be included in the safety net, I do understand that. I wonder if you would mind leaving your telephone number and name with the studio and I will get somebody on my office staff to ring you and talk to you and get some more information, it's hard, you know you raised, quite properly, a number of issues and I certainly feel for your position. There may be some things that are available at a Commonwealth level that could be of help.
BYNER:
Cindy, could you hold the line.
PRIME MINISTER:
If you do that, I'd very much like to follow this up because I feel for you and if there's something that can additionally be done that's available under a program then it should be.
BYNER:
Cindy, hold the line and my producer Tammy will take your details. Prime Minister, if you can help Cindy I'd like to be able to get back and explain what we've done...
PRIME MINISTER:
Sure, I mean I don't, I'm not saying there is but this may be things and obviously her family deserves a lot of help and sympathy.
BYNER:
21 past nine, let's talk to John now. John, good morning, you're talking to Prime Minister John Howard.
CALLER:
Good morning Prime Minister. My question is about the proposed reforms to family law. I attended the committee's meeting here in Adelaide and I've read the report and one of the things that I found a bit disturbing was there seems to be nothing in it at all which addresses the issue of falst statements in that court and that seems to be a considerable matter relating to the costs of separation, it's the best interests of the children really a paramount concern, really isn't compatible with that. I was wondering if you could tell me what, if anything, your Government is going to be able to do about that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the question of dealing with people who make false statements to courts is a matter for the courts, there is a law against false statements now and that law is called perjury and if people mislead courts they are liable to be punished, for committing the crime of perjury. We can't tell the courts who to deal with, we have to respect their independence. But there's no, as I understand it, there's no let or hindrance on a court dealing with cases of perjury.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, I think what John is probably alluding to, and this comes up a lot when we discuss family law issues, is that it is very easy in the sort of climate we have today to make a lot of very serious allegations against often the male partner...
PRIME MINISTER:
I know that.
BYNER:
And it doesn't necessarily follow that if those accusations are made maliciously that it automatically means there's going to be a...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I do understand that. But I'm just wondering what, I mean there is a... I appreciate that point. I... from a practical point of view it certainly doesn't always follow. But the point I'm making is that there is a law and if you make a mistake... and if you can... if somebody can establish it's a false statement then you are liable to prosecuted for perjury, that's the point I'm making. But in the nature of divorce, when there is a relationship or a marriage break up people get angry with each other and they behave often in a vindictive irrational fashion and one of the things that struck me talking to the members of that committee that even the most reasonable people in other circumstances lose their reason when there's an emotional breakdown and a relationship breaks up and there is no simple answer for this. Certainly if the atmosphere can be made as non-adversarial as possible, certainly it could be less legalistic, I think we'd all benefit from that. And it is a very expensive procedure for people of modest means and they're three of the things that have certainly come to me and they're three of the things that are going to guide our reaction to this report.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, I want to move quickly to mental health. Our streets are awash with illegal drugs, particularly amphetamines, in fact recently one of our mental health spokespeople came out said there'd been a more than 60 per cent increase in admissions of violent and irrational and ill behaved people to many of our great hospitals already under enormous pressure. We've allowed over years to, if you like, take people out of institutions, put them into the community and it sometimes works.
PRIME MINISTER:
Sometimes it does work, in many cases it's an improvement, in many other cases it's been a regressive development.
BYNER:
Your view on the fact that we've got a whole group of people out there, walking time bombs in the community that probably need one of two things, either a lot of greater personal management or they shouldn't even be in the community because they're a threat to themselves and, indeed, all those around them.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, my view personally is that it is a state responsibility. I'm not saying that to avoid expressing an opinion because I will express an opinion. But I have to point out to you and your listeners that this policy change, which has been all over Australia, in fact around the world over the last 20 or 30 years, in this country has been devised at a state level and I think it started in New South Wales, I think they were the Richmond reforms in New South Wales which began the process of deinstitutionalising that went on all around the country. I think in some cases it has gone too far, it has been a mistake. A debate goes on, many of the professionals in the area are divided in their view, some support it and some are strongly opposed to it and some fall down in the middle. But I can't help but think on commonsense principles there have been mistakes made because people do violent irrational things when they don't take their medication and if they don't have some kind of care and support then they're more likely to drop their medication and behave in this sort of fashion. Could I just make one point - it's true that there are more amphetamines available but could I also say in relation to drugs there's been a significant fall in the availability of heroin and there's been a very big drop in the number of people who've died as a result of heroin overdoses and I'd like to think a lot of that that has been due to the Tough on Drugs policy the Government has run very strongly over the last five or six years.
BYNER:
A couple of things that are important to you, you've talked recently about your vision for Australia over the next electoral term should you be re-elected Prime Minister but the obvious question after that is people would want some sort of guarantee that you're going to be there for that term.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, my position on that is open and sensible, I'll remain leader of the party as long as it wants me to. I can't.. I mean, I find this extraordinary, I'm being very open about that, as long as the party wants me to I'll be its leader.
BYNER:
The other points I'd...
PRIME MINISTER:
And as long as, more importantly that, as long as the Australian people want me to be Prime Minister. I mean, I have no false illusions, it's going to be very hard for me to win the next election because going for a fourth term is always difficult and I don't take the Australian public for granted, they've been very generous to me over the past eight and a half years.
BYNER:
Why do you think you're going to find it harder?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's just much harder when... the longer you've been there. People start thinking oh well, the economy runs itself, it doesn't, defence and security don't look after themselves, they don't, and well we can experiment with this other bloke. Now I hope they don't make that mistake.
BYNER:
With regards to issues of defence and international interest, obviously Iraq is important to Australia. What signs would you be looking for that we could reduce our commitment to Iraq?
PRIME MINISTER:
You would need, in my view, a period of greater stability than we have at the moment. Our people have particular tasks. One of their tasks is to help train the new Iraqi army. They've still got a lot of work to do on that, although they're making progress but I think that's very good work. We're manning the Baghdad International Airport. I have had no indication of when that might be completed. I am very reluctant to commit myself to a particular time. But nobody wants to keep our forces there any longer than necessary but right at the moment setting withdrawal dates and target dates to wind down forces whether it's our forces or the American or the British is the wrong signal. I think what the new Iraqi government deserves is our support and our understanding and I admire very much the new Iraqi Prime Minister Dr Allawi. I think it's very good to have an Iraqi up there speaking on behalf of his country and it's much better than having an American or a foreigner to the Iraqis doing that.
BYNER:
Do you think that Mark Latham will provide you with a formidable opposition once the election is formally called?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I think it will be tough for me, I really do. I mean that. It's going to be quite a tough campaign because we'll be seeking a fourth term, we'll obviously be arguing that we've given this country economic stability and secured and defended it well and we've therefore been able to spend a lot more money on health and education and aged care and all the other things that we've provided for in the budget. But when you've been in office for a number of years there's always that feeling - oh maybe I'll give this other bloke a go but I'll be arguing very strongly that many of the things we now take for granted would be at risk if the other bloke did have a go.
BYNER:
The public made it clear that they want policies and straight answers on important questions rather than the kinds of smatterings that occur particularly in the media around Australia about the personal goings on of individuals...
PRIME MINISTER:
I didn't start that.
BYNER:
No, I'm not suggesting you...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, can I say to you and your listeners I am not interested in that stuff about anybody, I am interested in talking policy.
BYNER:
Look, I want to thank you for coming in today. We've covered a lot of ground. I wish we could take some more calls...
PRIME MINISTER:
So do I.
BYNER:
But we have to go. So you're going to the electorate of Makin this morning...
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, I am.
BYNER:
What do you think Trish Draper's chances are of holding the seat?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think Trish will hang on. Now I know she copped some flack over that issue and she dealt with it and she repaid the money and it was, of course, done within the rules at the time. Now people out there know that she's a hard working person, she does work very hard for that electorate, she does identify with a lot of the battlers of that electorate. I know from what I've seen and heard that she's done a wonderful job in a large period of time on her own bringing up three sons as a single mother and she deserves a lot of credit and a lot of people in that situation who will identify with her.
BYNER:
Prime Minister, thanks for your time and we look forward to seeing you again when you visit South Australia.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
[ends]