JOURNALIST:
What do you make of Mark Latham's commitment to greater accountability in Government?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, that's all old news. There's nothing in that he hasn't said before.
JOURNALIST:
Can he deliver on his promises?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he's got to get elected first and I guess it's hardly the most prominent or important of his commitments. But look, we've been through all of this before. There's absolutely nothing new in it and as far as the independence of the public service is concerned, I reject completely the implicit claim in the policy that the public service is not independent. The relationship between the political arm of Government and the public service has evolved and changed over a long period of time. Clearly ministerial staff have more influence now than they used to have, but that process started way back in the early 1970s and I would argue that there's justification for that. I think there was probably a need for some rebalancing of the various influences. It's a question of having the right levels of respect and trust and cooperation between ministerial staff and the bureaucracy. I know from my own experience the head of my office, my Chief of Staff, is a former Treasury officer who enjoys the confidence and the respect, I believe, of the bureaucracy and his public service background is an asset in his job, but equally his political perspectives and his skills and his policy abilities provide an additional input. And that's typical of so many of the people on my staff. I think these things have to be seen in perspective. You can't expect that the relationship between the political arm of Government and the public service in 2004 should be the same as it was in 1972 or 1974, and as I say, the process of less permanency and the process of change began years ago. And the suggestion that in some way there has been a dramatic politicisation of the public service under my Government, is a charge I totally reject.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) truly independent Speaker also attend the party room?
PRIME MINISTER:
Should a truly independent speaker...
JOURNALIST:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look in theory, no.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think the Liberal Party would see any merit in Mr Latham's proposal for an independent Speaker?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know. I mean it's not really top of my mind at the present moment.
JOURNALIST:
Is there room for greater community participation Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
I beg your pardon?
JOURNALIST:
Is there room for greater community participation in Government?
PRIME MINISTER:
That is really a matter that's at the discretion of the Government of the day. I mean I believe that I have involved the community. I believe the practice I adopted of spending a lot of time taking calls on talkback radio, which I know is criticised by some in the Federal Gallery, but I get a lot of spontaneous comments and I get a lot of criticism, I get some support. I actually believe in that. I'm not saying it's the only way I communicate, but involving the public is always a good thing and it's something that everybody has their different way of doing.
JOURNALIST:
Why won't you express an opinion on the potential terrorist threat during the election campaign?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I do not want to be accused of, in some way trying to use possible threats of a terrorist attack to my political advantage, because I know that it's a sensitive issue. What I promise the Australian people is two things. Firstly, if there is any hard information that they should have, I will make it available and I will communicate it also at the same time to the Leader of the Opposition, and if necessary I will talk to him in the caretaker period, so that he is as apprised of it as I am. That's the first commitment I make. The second commitment I make, is that we don't have any such evidence to justify any change. Now beyond that, I think if I get into the business of saying this, that or the other, I'll be accused of trying to take political advantage out of the potential of a terrorist threat. I noted what was said last night by Mr Clarke. I'm not going to make any further comment on it. You know what he said. But I really don't want to take it any further than that because I mean this is a... you know, this is about as sensitive and as difficult as it gets. I don't want to be accused of, in any way using that in the course of the election campaign and that's why I'm not going to say anything further.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what about Clarke's comments (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm very happy to comment on that. I reject that. I did regard that as insulting and I totally reject it.
JOURNALIST:
Have your own security arrangements been stepped up for the campaign?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not that I'm aware of, but you know, you never know. But I haven't been advised that there is a particular additional risk. I'm not conscious of having any more people. You know, we all hope nothing happens, and I just don't want to get into the business of saying that it's these degrees worse or etcetera, etcetera. Otherwise some people will suggest I'm trying to use that to my political advantage, and plainly I'm not.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) seems to suggest that you do think there is a...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, well it doesn't. I mean really, you know.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, is your code of ministerial responsibility and behaviour still appropriate and workable?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I do... yes it is.
JOURNALIST:
Is Mark Latham up to being chairman of the National Security...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I am campaigning to stop him becoming Prime Minister, and you can sort of ask me different ways of, or give me different opportunities to answer that question. I think for a whole range of reasons he shouldn't become Prime Minister of Australia, and obviously he has policies on security that I think are inadequate and inappropriate and represent the alternative government of this country in the wrong way. So it follows from that that I don't think he should get the job.
JOURNALIST:
Was it wrong of Trish Worth to liken your treatment of asylum seekers to the quarantining of cats and dogs?
PRIME MINISTER:
She didn't do that. She didn't. Look, Trish is the most compassionate person imaginable and Trish has argued long and strongly for the Temporary Protection Visas that were granted some weeks ago, and she's the last person in the world that would mean any offence in the way that that has been represented. And I just think it's one of those comments that... I understood the context of it. It was not meant in the way that it was represented by her opponent and I defend her to the hilt. She's a very decent, sensitive human being and I think that criticism of her has been quite wrong. Thank you.
[ends]