BARTLETT:
We're joined this morning by the Prime Minister from Sydney. Prime Minister Howard good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Liam, how are you?
BARTLETT:
I'm really well thanks, thanks for having a chat to us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good, good to talk to you again.
BARTLETT:
Are you taking a break over Christmas?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. I will be on duty until the early part of January and then I'll be taking proper leave and John Anderson will be acting Prime Minister, but I will be spending the Christmas period with my family in Sydney. And I will be having a decent break over the holiday period, as I encourage most of my Ministers to do because it has been a very active year and next year will be even more active I think.
BARTLETT:
It would be fairly hard to take a low key break though when you're Prime Minister isn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
You can't really do that. I envy some of these people who take a couple of months off, some journalists even do that I sometimes hear.
BARTLETT:
I've only got four weeks.
PRIME MINISTER:
Do you have three weeks, there you go?
BARTLETT:
I've got four weeks.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well everybody deserves a holiday.
BARTLETT:
Well said. Look news today about this scoping study into the full sale of Telstra, is it a foregone conclusion in this term of Government?
PRIME MINISTER:
No it's not a foregone conclusion but if we are to keep alive the option of selling Telstra during this term of Government, we must do the scoping study now; otherwise time will work against us. We've said that we'll go ahead subject to a number of conditions, one of those conditions is that we've got to be satisfied that all the recommendations from the Estens enquiry in relation to services in the bush are met or guaranteed to be met and we must also be satisfied that the price is good, because if the price at which we're likely to be able to sell the remaining interest in Telstra is too low, well it's not in the taxpayers interest for us to go ahead with the sale, so that could affect the timing and of course we must get the legislation through the Parliament, that's much more likely now that we will have the numbers in the Senate after the 30th of June. But we're doing the scoping study because we need to do that to stop time going against us, if and when we get the legislation through.
BARTLETT:
Do you think the rest will be sold off Prime Minister in one hit or in another couple of stages, couple of tranches?
PRIME MINISTER:
We'll have to take advice from the experts on that, and it will depend a bit on the market. If it's more advantageous to do it in stages, we'll do it in stages, if it's more advantageous to do it in one go, we'll do it one go, but that really does depend very much on market conditions and the advice we get from people who understand these things well at the time.
BARTLETT:
Talking about the conditions, they say you obviously need a strong share price to make it possible, the institutions are saying that that can happen much more easily if you allow more foreign ownership of Telstra, are you...?
PRIME MINSITER:
Yes, well we haven't given any consideration to changes in relation to the foreign ownership levels, we have talked about this issue generally, I don't mean the foreign ownership issue but the sale of Telstra generally and that is not something that's come up. I obviously... that is something that maybe put forward at a certain point but at this stage we haven't given it any attention.
BARTLETT:
What are you thinking about that though? I mean if you float something completely and something becomes completely privately owned, would you be (in audible) to keep a cap on foreign ownership?
PRIME MINSITER:
Well you can do that, I mean for example we have a cap on the foreign ownership in Qantas. Now that was an issue of debate between us and the airline; quite a vigorous debate. They wanted the limit lifted but that was before British Airways announced that it was going to sell its 25% interest in Qantas. That is now I don't think any longer an issue because there's plenty of scope for additional foreign equity now that British Airways has got out of them. I'm not saying that Qantas won't still come at us for a change in their... they're entitled to argue for that. These things are always difficult. On the one hand everybody likes everything to be fully Australian owned, I think we all emotionally would like that, on the other hand you can sometimes get more investment and a better price and greater activity. If you allow some greater levels of foreign investment. You have to make an individual judgement in each particular case because each particular case is going to be different.
BARTLETT:
If you would like to ask the Prime Minister a quick question, give us a ring 9484 1720, 9484 1720 or 1800 626 720. Prime Minister Alexander Downer, would you happily let him go if he became the head of the International Atomic Agency?
PRIME MINSITER:
No, I don't want him to leave his present job. It's flattering and understandable that people should think of him as being able and qualified to do a position such as this but I have no desire to see Alexander Downer leave his present position, none what so-ever.
BARTLETT:
Well what do you know about the US Government's approach to him?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I do know that some people have spoken about the possibility of it but I don't think it's going to come off. Obviously that's a matter for him to respond to but I'm making it very plain that he's doing an excellent job where he is now. He's been continuously the Foreign Minister for the last 8 and half years and he's done an excellent job and he'll shortly become Australia's longest serving Foreign Minister. I've got no desire to see him go elsewhere.
BARTLETT:
Has anyone from US officialdom in Canberra asked you about it?
PRIME MINISTER:
The Americans have made it clear to me that they think two terms is enough for the current person. They've been quite public about that, so of course they've put that view to me. As to talking specifically, directly in a formal way to me about Mr Downer, no. But I am aware that they regard him highly and would certainly be quite positive if he were to be interested in the position.
BARTLETT:
Prime Minister, just want to ask you about these figures - the controversial Regional Partnerships Program.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes.
BARTLETT:
Figures appear to show that out of the some 60 million handed out during the last election campaign, projects here in WA received only $577,000 just over half a million out of 60 million, I mean the Tasmanian electorate of Bass got 11 million, how do you explain that if it's not pork barrelling?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I haven't seen all of the figures and but let us for the purpose of this discussion accept what is in the newspapers this morning. I'd make the most obvious point that this particular program is not the only way in which assistance is delivered to individual electorates and to particular states, for example, when I was in Western Australia during the election campaign and I was there on a couple of occasions, I made a number of announcements which were of general assistance to the state of Western Australia. For example the stationing, commissioning of the extra patrol boats that were particularly designed to protect the oil and gas installations in the North West. When I was in Kalgoorlie I announced a number of individual programmes to assist the electorate in Kalgoorlie. None of the those programmes were incidentally part of this Regional Partnerships programme. I think what you've here is that you've got a focus on an individual programme, and people are looking at percentages that went here and there out of that particular programme, but you can only get a proper steer on how fairly or unfairly a state is being treated by looking at all of the Government's expenditure programmes and I would certainly argue that if you look at all of the Government's expenditure programmes, no states have been discriminated against. I mean why would we for any reason, why would we want to discriminate against Western Australia? Why?
BARTLETT:
Well that's not really the question?
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean.....
BARTLETT:
The question is, the question is, on the strength of these funds, in this particular programme and it appears that this particular programme is purposively used by way of supporting those marginal seats. I mean what other conclusion can you reach?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, no I don't think you can argue, you have to look at each individual programme. I mean Governments and Oppositions for that matter, put forward programmes and that's exactly what we've done but we're not, we're not the least bit apologetic and if you actually look on a political basis, if you look at the succuss rate of applications they're spread quite evenly. I don't have the exact figures in front of me but if you look around the country you'll find that there are plenty of Labor electorates that have been assisted as indeed have Coalition electorates. Now there's going to be a Senate enquiry. I think it's a waste of time but all of this can be trawled through, but I don't apologise for any of these decisions, I think all of the programmes have been quite meritorious and you're only dealing with of course a relatively small programme and you're talking about percentages within it. I understand the way the Labor Party is attacking it but the Labor party might be the reminded that it made certain commitments itself in the lead up to the election campaign and one might allege that that was politically motivated.
BARTLETT:
I know you've got limited time this morning so I'll just quickly try and squeeze in a couple of talkback callers. Janette, good morning.
CALLER:
Oh hi, hi John, PM I should say. What concerns me is the term 'adequate' when used in relationship to Telstra services and the feasibility study, I live in urban rural Australia, in Perth, and I still can't even get ASDL broadband and they say it's not even going to happen in the near future and I can't get a service that can give me more than five minutes at a time before dropping out.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look I can't argue with your personal experience with Telstra. I guess I'd make the point that this is happening while it's still majority owned by the Government. There's no guarantee that if something is owned by the Government you get a better service. In fact a lot of people would argue that years and years ago when it was just the PMG the service was much worse than what it is now and it was fully owned by the Government then. You can get better service in my opinion if you have greater competition in the telecommunication market and there are many things that Telstra can be forced to deliver by law which does not require the government to have a particular level of ownership. Telstra's obligations to the community can be embodied in legislation without the need for the Government to own one share in Telstra, it's made the law that certain things be provided then they have to be provided whether the Government owns shares or not.
BARTLETT:
I suppose the question Janette's asking Prime Minister is you know who is the ultimatle arbitrator? Who ultimatly says yes they're adequate enough to sell off the remainder?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the only way you can. I mean we have to lay down some criteria and we have to make that judgement. Janette is right in the sense that it's subjective and we're not perfect but somebody has to make that judgement. You'll never get a service that everybody is satisfied with, never.
BARTLETT:
Ian, good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning, good morning Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Ian.
CALLER:
If I could just follow on from that last caller, you're arguing that services may possibly improve if Telstra is privatised, why then the need to ensure that services in the bush improve before you sell it? Why does that have to be done before you sell it if you believe that services will get better after you sell it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, what I said was that you get better services if you have greater competition and competition is influenced by a number of things, including but not limited to the capacity of Telstra to operate with the inhibitions it now suffers under in the open market. The reason that we have to be satisfied about services in the bush before we sell it is that's what we promised we would do...
CALLER:
... an issue.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hmm?
CALLER:
So obviously that's an issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, what we promised is an issue, yes of course it is. We went to the last election saying that we would only sell the rest of Telstra if we were satisfied that conditions in the bush were up to scratch.
CALLER:
Because you're concerned quite rightly that after the sale that services in the bush will deteriorate even further?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no because not everybody in the community agrees with us that Telstra should be sold. I've never pretended that the sale of Telstra is something that attracts overwhelming support, it's a hotly debated issue and many...
CALLER:
... could you please tell me and everyone else what the advantages, in layman terms, what the advantages of selling Telstra are?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the greatest advantage is that the largest telecommunications in the country will be able to operate as it should be able to operate, without the limitations of being half owned by the Government. It's the biggest company in Australia and it can't in my view be given its full opportunity and potential while it has half owned by the Government. To start with, being half owned by the Government it can't issue raised capital through new share issues because we're not, we can't dilute our ownership below a certain level because that's what the law is and that only has to be said alone to indicate that the company is operating under constraints that no other company is operating. All the other big companies in Australia that are listed on the stock exchange, if they want to raise money through issuing shares they can go ahead and do so, Telstra can't. What Telstra can do is borrow or go through other kinds of financial arrangements, it can't just do what another large company listed on the stock exchange can do. Now that is a huge constraint and to use the vernacular it can't go on being half pregnant indefinitely, it has either got to accept the second rate status as the largest company in Australia or let us be realistic and allow it to operate as such.
BARTLETT:
Prime Minister, last call, Gary good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning Mr Howard, Liam. Just a quick one, I'm a staunch supporter of the present process that we operate under as opposed to becoming a republic. What guarantees has the Liberal Government got to stave off this pro-republic issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Gary, you can't guarantee something like that, the question of whether we become a republic or remain a constitutional Monarchy is ultimately in the hands of the Australian people. I can't guarantee that the issue won't return, I can only say that we had a referendum on it four years ago, or five years ago, and the Australian people voted no. My own personal view is a conservative one, I voted no but I respect the fact that a lot of normally Liberal voting people voted yes and also interestingly a lot of normally Labor voting people voted no, it was one of those issues that cut across party lines. I'm not advocating that the issue be revisited, my suspicion is that it will be revisited at some time in the future but I don't think there's any hurry for people to look at it again and there is still the unresolved fundamental question that is this country were to become a republic do we have an elected president or do we have a president chosen by some other means? I'm opposed to an elected presidency because it would fundamentally alter our current system of government and I think for all its faults the current system of government works quite well. But Gary, whatever my personal views are in a democracy I cannot and would not presume to guarantee that the issue won't be raised again. But that is ultimately a matter for the Australian people.
BARTLETT:
Okay, Gary thanks for calling.
CALLER:
Okay.
BARTLETT:
Cheers. Prime Minister thanks for spending some time with us today and with Christmas just around the corner I've got to ask you, have you got something special lined up for Mrs Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes, but I always sort of tend to keep those things personal and private, I've got a busy, we've got a busy couple of weeks ahead of us, as you know I'm coming over to Western Australia tonight for a little bit of time but we always have a nice family Christmas and she always has, let me put it this way, quite a say about what I buy for her. That sound familiar?
BARTLETT:
Sounds very familiar. How do you Christmas shop when you're the Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh well you get noticed. But I rather like wandering around the shops at Christmas time, it's interesting, people come up and say hello and most people are very polite and friendly, a few take the opportunity of giving me their version of Merry Christmas, but that's life isn't it?
BARTLETT:
Is there any particular Christmas message you'd like to share with others around Western Australia as we finish up?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I just hope that everybody remembers that although this country is doing very well and most people are enjoying the good life not everybody is and this is a time where if you can afford it helping bodies like the Salvation Army and St Vincent de Paul and Anglicare and all those other wonderful organisations that do look after the less fortunate at Christmas time, I think everybody should kick in and give them something because they do a great job and they don't waste any on administration, it all goes where it ought to go and I would encourage people to do that because Christmas is a time of stress and loneliness for quite a number of people, they miss out, and the fact that everybody else is doing so well and so happy makes it a bit more painful.
BARTLETT:
Alright, Prime Minister have a great Christmas.
PRIME MINISTER:
And you too.
BARTLETT:
We look forward to having some challenging conservations with you next year.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm sure we will.
[ends]