MITCHELL:
First though in our Canberra studio for the first time since his re-election the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Neil.
MITCHELL:
We'll take calls for the Prime Minister, 9696 1278 if you'd like to speak to him. Congratulations, is the party over yet?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes, thank you very much, the party is over, we had a bit of a celebration on election night but it is back to work. I'm very grateful of being given the opportunity of being Prime Minister again and the Party's very grateful, we did have a good win, bigger than I expected, but it's not going to go to our heads. We have a great opportunity to do some things for the public and that's what we'll set out to do. But I've warned my colleagues about getting carried away with the belief that it will take the Labor Party at least two elections to win back office. There have been swings of four or five per cent in elections in the past, there was one in 1996 which bought us to power, and Whitlam in 1969 got a very big swing. So this idea that the Labor Party can't possibly win the next election is a foolish one, it's certainly harder for them now than it was thought likely, but I just don't think we live in an environment where people can get that complacent and if any of my colleagues start getting complacent then it'll pretty quickly be knocked out of them.
MITCHELL:
Do you agree Labor seems to have be in a bit of self-destruct at the moment?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they are going through a difficult time but I've chosen not to say anything about it because whatever I say will inevitably be seen and sound as self-serving. I think I'll just leave it...
MITCHELL:
But what about...
PRIME MINISTER:
... deal with its own issues.
MITCHELL:
But about the issue of Simon Crean though, the former adversary, you must take some pleasure seeing him off?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't take any personal pleasure in seeing any embarrassment for him, I don't bear him any personal animosity. But that is a matter for the Labor Party, I have a bit of a rule in relation to these things of not making gratuitous comments when obviously the other side is going through a bit of travail, I don't think that's what the public appreciates and in the end the Labor Party will sort things out.
MITCHELL:
Okay, well what about your new ministry, why do we need to centralise welfare payments?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it's not just welfare payments, the idea is to get all of the major service delivery, payments, agencies of the Commonwealth under one roof. That includes Centrelink, it includes the Health Insurance Commission, in particular, we're not talking here about the policy, we're talking about the administrative processes that deliver it and I think we could do better in service delivery, I think if we had a centralised focus within the Federal Government on the efficiency of delivering payments and benefits to people we could do it better and that's why I've decided as one of the three major administrative changes inside the Government, this is the first of them, the other two relate to a big focus on technical and vocational education in fulfilment of the promise I made in the election campaign, and the third relates to a greater emphasis on workforce participation. The new department of, well it's not new in name but many of its structures will be new, of employment and workplace relations will, as well as the industrial relations focus, it'll have a very heavy focus on those working age programmes which get people off welfare and back into work and the junior minister in that portfolio will in fact be styled the Minister for Workforce Participation and the responsibility of that Minister will be very specifically to focus on those programmes that increase workforce participation and I'm taking a number of functions out of the Department of Family and Community Services and grouping them in that Department so there will once again be a focus on that particular goal. Although we have low unemployment we still have too many people on benefits, we're not going to take the benefits from them, we're going to try different ways of encouraging people on benefits to participate more fully in the workforce.
MITCHELL:
What about changes in personnel, any significant changes?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'll be making an announcement later this morning about that Neil. By and large the big changes that I wanted to make were made in the lead up to the election, you'll remember at the end of 2003 I had a big reshuffle and then I had another reshuffle not long before the election. So there is not a case for major change in personnel, there'll be some changes, but by and large the people who've occupied the major portfolio areas in the past year have done them very well and I don't see a case in those circumstances for major change.
MITCHELL:
Can I ask you a couple of questions, now the election is over the environment's a little different to discuss this, oil prices, petrol around Melbourne at $1.12 cents a litre today, do you agree with Peter Costello and the Reserve Bank, this is going to be a real thump on the economy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it depends on how long it lasts. If it goes on indefinitely of course it will have an effect on the economy but...
MITCHELL:
So what's the impact of that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it will mean that we have slower growth than might otherwise be the case. But I don't think we denied that if it went on for a long time it would have an effect...
MITCHELL:
What would that do to your election promises?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think it is going to make them unachievable, no, because...
MITCHELL:
Make them hard to (inaudible) though won't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, not necessarily because they were still within the forecast given to us by the Treasury, they were still quite modest and quite affordable.
MITCHELL:
So you're confident, I mean Peter Costello seemed to be saying it was going to be a bit of a battle to do it, you're confident that they will...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm confident that they will be implemented, I think what Peter was saying, and I share the same view, was that if the price of oil remains as it is indefinitely that's going to take a toll, but I don't think it will remain indefinitely. The forces of supply and demand around the world are going to mean that it will eventually come back to a more normal level.
MITCHELL:
Now the other thing in a post-election environment that might be different, any indication of how long you're going to stay around as Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
[cough] excuse me, that had absolutely nothing to do with, not a nervous cough, no. Not I'm not changing on anything. Neil, look I think the furthest thing from my mind at present is leaving politics, can I tell you that? I really am greatly energised by the result that we had, I'm looking forward to the opportunities that it presents, sensibly looking forward, I'm not going to get carried away. I can see great opportunities, and I've already taken some action, going to Indonesia to the inauguration of the new President, I can see great opportunities of further entrenching our role in the region without in any way slowing the pace of our, of the momentum in our relationship with the United States. So look I'm not really thinking about leaving, I'm thinking about staying and doing.
MITCHELL:
We'll take some calls for the Prime Minister, Christine go ahead please.
CALLER:
Yes hello Mr Howard, Neil Mitchell. In regards to the escalating fuel prices, when the GST was first introduced it was introduced to replace all the other taxes and introduced the GST as far a more simplified system and now they're saying that they can't (inaudible) GST on fuel because it's too complicated to remove.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it's true that the GST was introduced to replace some taxes. When the GST was introduced we made an adjustment in relation to fuel excise and we thought that was enough but we found out later on that there was a feeling in the public's mind that it should have been more so we further reduced the excise on petrol by about 1.5 cents a litre and we also abolished the automatic inflation adjustment of excise which used to occur every six months. It's not possible for there to be further adjustments in relation to the GST, of course unless the states agree because they get all the proceeds of the GST. As the price of petrol goes up the Commonwealth doesn't get any more money because the excise we charge is levied on the volume of the product, that's the amount of fuel, it's a certain number of cents per litre, irrespective of how expensive the fuel is at the bowser. It's not levied on the price. But I understand how painful these oil prices are, I wish I had a simple solution, I think every democratically elected leader around the world would be saying the same thing. We'll continue to follow it very closely and I'm acutely aware. But I have to say that it is not a result of the taxation policies or the economic policies...
MITCHELL:
Well it is, it's a tax on a tax.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no but the current price is not, I mean this was not an issue nine months ago.
MITCHELL:
Okay, we need to take a break, just quickly Prime Minister, we own Telstra, what do you think about Telstra developing mobile phones for three year olds?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it sounds a bit much, but I'm not somebody who says you can't do it if it's legal. But this is where parents come in isn't it?
MITCHELL:
Well that's right, and grandparents.
PRIME MINISTER:
And grandparents, and I certainly wouldn't be providing, I don't have any three year old children, mine are much older than that, and don't have any grandchildren. But the reality is that if you think it's a silly idea well don't buy it.
MITCHELL:
We'll take a break, come back with more from the Prime Minister and if you'd like to speak to him give us a call.
[commercial break]
MITCHELL:
14 to nine. The Prime Minister's in our Canberra studio. Mr Howard, when did the United Nations request for more troops in Iraq or troops in Iraq to guard UN forces' staff, when did that come through?
PRIME MINISTER:
It was raised with Mr Downer some months ago and he and I discussed it and we indicated, we decided then that we would not accede to the request.
MITCHELL:
Why not make it public?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we couldn't see any particular point in it because it didn't represent any alteration of our previously stated position.
MITCHELL:
But the whole debate was going on about Iraq, would that have been relevant.
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think so. I mean, I can... I know some people are saying we should have but we had said that we would maintain our existing troop level. We had said there may be tiny adjustments at the margin, that there would not be any substantial increase. What the UN was seeking was a substantial increase and we indicated that there was going to be no alteration in policy. Now in those circumstances, I didn't see any particular need to indicate because we weren't entering into any new commitment that we were keeping from the Australian public. If we'd be entering into a commitment and if for example they'd have approached us and we'd have said - yes, we'll do it but not just yet, I mean that's an entirely different matter, people would have been entitled to know about that because we're entering into a new commitment. But all we were doing was reaffirming existing policy which I repeated throughout the campaign.
MITCHELL:
Do you support Qantas preparing strike breakers for Christmas for industrial action?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I don't get into the ins and outs of every potential industrial dispute. I respect the right of a company to take action to ensure that it can continue to operate and do business and providing it acts within the law, it's entitled to do that. That's the key thing, but a company is entitled to take action to ensure that it can continue to meet the requirements of its customers and that's what Qantas is doing, if Qantas transgresses the law then I would have a different but until it does, I respect its right to take that action. But I see it as an issue that's got to be resolved between Qantas and its workforce.
MITCHELL:
Has it kept the Government informed at what it's doing?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it may have spoken to Mr Anderson, I've not had any discussion myself with either Margaret Jackson or Geoff Dixon.
MITCHELL:
Alright, Lorna, go ahead Lorna.
CALLER:
Mr Howard, there's one main question that I would like answered, probably is not going to be answered shortly. Health and education - I'd like, and I think a great number of people would like - it handled by the one Government.
MITCHELL:
All of it?
CALLER:
Federal.
MITCHELL:
What, health and education?
CALLER:
Yes.
MITCHELL:
Well, Mr Bob Carr, the New South Wales Premier, suggested a deal where he hands over to you health and you give him education. What did you think of that (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, can I start with education. I'm not in favour of handing over the Commonwealth's current responsibilities for education to the states, largely because I suspect that state governments would succumb to pressure from the teacher unions to reduce support for independent schools, that's one of the major reasons why. There's a secondary reason also, as I move around the country people aren't saying to me we don't want the Commonwealth to have any involvement in education. They actually... I don't find people asking for the Commonwealth to retreat further in the area of education, if anything they are saying we should get further involved. I think the current balance in education is about right.
MITCHELL:
And you really reckon the states, if they took it over, would cut back funding to...
PRIME MINISTER:
I think, I am very suspicious of the influence of teacher unions on state government ministries and bureaucracies. I am really quite suspicious of that and given what happened in the last election campaign was what I regarded as an envy driven federal Labor policy on schools education, I think you'd have it in spades at a state level. So could I say to Mr Carr very directly, and you're the first person who's actually asked me to comment on his attitude to education, that I am not in favour of a Commonwealth giving up its current role in relation to the funding of catholic and independent schools. In relation to our role in regard to universities, if anything there's an anomaly in the fact that the Government's arrangements for universities are in the hands of the states, although the funding of universities is in the hands of the Commonwealth. Now could I move onto health...
MITCHELL:
Health, yeah, hospitals.
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I think there are some areas where we could look at the elimination of the implication and overlap. I don't think the basic provision though of public hospitals would necessarily be better if it were run by a Commonwealth bureaucracy as opposed to a state bureaucracy.
MITCHELL:
But at least you wouldn't have two bureaucracies.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but the ordinary daily operation of public hospitals in Victoria for example does not involve really two bureaucracies, it only involves one, that's the state bureaucracy.
MITCHELL:
So I (inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
What is the point... well, I think there are some areas where there's an interface, the aged care, public hospital area, there is an interface there and there could be some room for discussion and I've said already and I'd repeat that if there are particular proposals the states have, I'd be willing to look at them. I don't want another inquiry. Look, I've been Prime Minister for eight and a half years, I've got a good idea where I think you could make some improvements and I would imagine people like Steve Bracks, if they're seriously applying their minds to this issue they don't need another inquiry, they can give me some ideas.
MITCHELL:
Well, let's make some improvements...
PRIME MINISTER:
Bear in mind that if there are to be further responsibilities assumed by the Commonwealth then they'd have to be an appropriate financial adjustment made...
MITCHELL:
What back to GST?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, obviously. If we take over more responsibilities from the states, they can't expect to have the same amount of revenue... can they? That's just a matter of commonsense... people have...
MITCHELL:
... debate, ask a government to give up money, you know what that...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, hang on, let's just apply orderly principles, if the Commonwealth assumes more responsibilities and they are responsibilities currently discharged by the states well obviously the states have to accept that the Commonwealth should take back the money that they were previously given to spend on those responsibilities they no longer have. I'm not asking for any unfair arrangement but I want people to understand that once you start talking about these things there's a give and take involved. But look, I'm prepared to be very pragmatic, I just want an outcome that is good for the Australian people, as you know I am not a passionate states' rightist. I am an Australian nationalist and I don't really care which level of government delivers it as long as it's delivered well. I do find as I move around the country people are less and less preoccupied with a state identity, they're more and more concerned about a good national outcome and also a good outcome for their local community, I think they're the two driving forces of a modern Australia, nationalism and localism.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, just an issue relating to health, Special Minister of State, Eric Abetz was quoted saying he would like to end Medicare funding for most abortions. Do you agree with that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he apparently answered a survey in the lead up to the election. There's no Government policy to do that. The Government policy, which I was asked about during the campaign remains. It's always open of course of an issue like this for an individual to express a personal view because we don't impose a party discipline on issues like this, if the issue ever came up before the Parliament again by way of a private members bill or motion then members, including ministers, would be free to express their view and to vote in any way they thought fit and what Senator Abetz was rightly doing was expressing his own personal view which he's entitled to hold.
MITCHELL:
There'd be no change.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, there's no government sponsored change coming, no. That doesn't mean that somebody mightn't put up a private member's bill, that's opened to anybody on any occasion to do that. But there is no government proposal to change it, no.
MITCHELL:
The young Melbourne man in Singapore facing execution for drug smuggling, are you personally opposed to his execution?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we will certainly make representations, yes. I will make... I do not support the reintroduction of the death penalty in Australia but I recognise the fact that if somebody breaks the law of another country, then that person will be punished in accordance with the law of that country. I will certainly support approaches to the Singaporean President for clemency and that process is already, I understand, underway.
MITCHELL:
But that seems a little contradictory, you support their right to impose the law but you don't want him executed.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't think that's contradictory. I mean, I when I say I support their right, I respect their right and every country has the right to impose its own law.
MITCHELL:
Do you believe the Bali bombers should be executed and this man should not.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think the Bali bombing attacks were of a particularly outrageous, cruel, indiscriminate, dreadful nature and they killed 88 people.
MITCHELL:
Sure, but that means you're supporting capital punishment in some cases.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I suppose, I'm influenced and I'll confess the human frailty of being influenced on that occasion by the particular horror and enormity of the crime and if you think you've isolated a logical inconsistency, perhaps you have but I'm, as like all human beings I'm influenced by the particular horror of certain events.
MITCHELL:
Are you concerned by the ban by the American department store chain Abercrombie Fitch on Australian merino wool as an animal rights issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I wouldn't want it extended and I don't think it's all that soundly based. Once again people have got a right to do that if they want to, I can't stop them. But I wouldn't want it extended, I do think that every attempt is made to maintain as humane conditions as one can in relation to the export of live sheep, it's a very valuable trade, I think we have to keep a measure of realism in these areas and after all, the consumption of human... of animals for human needs has been going on for ages. And I think we should keep a sense of proportion about what we're talking about.
MITCHELL:
Now, I know you're not a punter, Prime Minister, are you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not very regularly, you know, once a year usually the Melbourne Cup.
MITCHELL:
Steve Bracks is saying that it's up to the Federal Government to fix the problem with Betfair, this British internet betting agency that gets you to bet on, or allows you to bet on horses to lose. Are you on top of that or not?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, yes, I am...
MITCHELL:
(inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you know, we don't licence betting, why should we... I mean, how is it our right... I mean, is this something else... but is this something else... I mean, I wonder why, you know, I keep hearing Premiers wanting to hands things over to us - and this is another example of where in effect the states are saying that this a responsibility of the Commonwealth. I think people are going to, if these Premiers are not careful, people are going to start rhetorically asking the question - do we any longer need states, they keep wanting to hand over their responsibilities to the Federal Government.
MITCHELL:
Thank you for your time. Do you feel your place in history is secure now?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, that's for others to talk about Neil. I just want to try and do some more good things for the Australian people.
MITCHELL:
Reformist Government ahead?
PRIME MINISTER:
Sensible reform, yes. We'll do what we've promised to do, it won't go to our heads, we're not going to, you know, start cutting a swathe through things but we will certainly press ahead very strongly with what we said we'd do.
[ends]