PRIME MINISTER:
Well you've got a letter to deliver to me?
COLIN BARNETT:
I have. I haven't brought an Australia Post stamp. But I'd just like to hand to you Prime Minister a letter from me, just re-stating the commitment of a West Australian Coalition Government, if elected, to sign the National Water Initiative. And can I also extend an invitation to the Commonwealth as we develop our canal project, we offer the canal development, I would give an undertaking to provide all the information that's generated to the Commonwealth and I would welcome any assistance or advice the Commonwealth can offer during that process of proving up this project and bringing it to fruition.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well thank you very much Colin. As I think everybody knows membership of the National Water Initiative is a pre-condition to a state sharing in the $2 billion National Water Fund that I announced in the last federal election campaign. Up until now Western Australia has not been part of that National Water Initiative because of the decision taken by Dr Gallop at the relevant COAG meeting not to join it, for reasons that still escape me, because membership of the Water Initiative not only entitles the states to share in the money but it also entitles the state's pastoralists to get the benefit of a national system of water rights and entitlements which is essential to the security of tenure and title that pastoralists have.
So I can assure you Colin that if you win the election on Saturday I will be ready once you've signed the Water Initiative on behalf of Western Australia to have my Ministers sympathetically consider any request for funds, either in relation to the canal project or to other water projects. Western Australia is entitled to her fair share of the $2 billion and at the moment it's being denied that fair share because of the refusal of the Gallop Government to sign the National Water Initiative. I do believe that this project is bold and visionary and it has captured the imagination of the people of Western Australia. I wish you well on Saturday.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, (inaudible)...
PRIME MINISTER:
Who me, yes.
JOURNALIST:
What are the rules regarding infrastructure projects under the National Water Scheme? Do they have to have feasibility studies? Do they have to have independent assessments (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look the project has to obviously be explained and proved up. I mean that's obviously the case. But the first step is to sign the Water Initiative; we can't even consider it unless they sign the Initiative. I mean Dr Gallop wrote to me about this project some time ago, but he still hasn't altered his position on the Water Initiative. So he's just really flailing around. The first step is to sign the Water Initiative and then we'll consider any application.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister do you consider it (inaudible) enough time for the people of Western Australia to scrutinize the Liberal Party's election costings?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think the approach that has been adopted is, by the Opposition here, is quite responsible and it's in accordance with the approaches that have been adopted in the past by other oppositions, I think in fact Labor oppositions.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, last year on the National Water Initiative didn't you say that even if Western Australian didn't sign that Western Australia would still get its share of the money?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but that would be a share that would be through, in effect, unilateral decisions taken by the Federal Government.
JOURNALIST:
So what's the difference here?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well because by signing this Water Initiative West Australians can have a project it is initiating considered by the Federal Government. I mean there's nothing to stop us deciding unilaterally to fund a particular project in Western Australia that doesn't even involve the State Government, but isn't it more sensible for the State to initiate projects?
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, when you first heard about this proposal, how seriously did you take it?
PRIME MINISTER:
I take it very seriously. Western Australia is desperately short of water. I actually know something of the engineering behind the project because Tenix briefed me on it in July or August of last year at a meeting I had with them in Sydney. So I'm not unfamiliar with the project. And I do understand the engineering concept behind it and it was explained to me by one of their chief people.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, on industrial relations matters; you said that Western Australia is the strike capital of the nation, a lot of...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it said that in the newspaper...
JOURNALIST:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I thought on this occasion the newspaper was right.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) taken place between (inaudible) and a company under a federal award or a federal agreement, what really can a state government do in this situation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well what a state government can do is what the Court Government did and that is a freer, less regulated industrial relations system.
JOURNALIST:
But if that's (inaudible) taking place under the federal system there's no involvement of the state government (inaudible).
PRIME MINISTER:
One of the consequences of the change in industrial relations laws in Western Australia since Gallop came to office is there's been a flight of people into the federal awards; so on a statistical basis there are more people covered now by federal awards than used to be the case. But there are sill a lot of people covered by state awards, and it would be far better to have a harmonious interface between the two systems.
JOURNALIST:
And you would push ahead with a single national tribunal, regardless of the...
PRIME MINISTER:
No I haven't said a single national tribunal; I have said there are areas where a national approach would be far better.
JOURNALIST:
And if the states prefer to keep its own tribunal, whether it's a Coalition or not?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we are in the process of working out the detail of that, we had a preliminary discussion on Tuesday and as time goes by we will announce more details.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister (inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't believe that the aim of a policy should be to force or encourage everybody to work even if they would prefer to stay at home. I mean I believe in choice. I think mothers or fathers who decide to stay at home full time to care for their young children, that their choice should be as respected and supported as the decision of parents who decide to enter the workforce. There's an assumption in so much of the commentary on childcare that people should be, as it were, dragged back into the workforce as soon as possible. A lot of people, a lot of women choose in the early years of a child's development to stay at home full time, and that should be respected and supported as much as the alternative.
JOURNALIST:
One more question on the canal. Will you support building the canal regardless of the cost?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well then the Western Australian opposition has committed itself to build the canal, full stop. My position is that if Colin wins, I will sit down with him sympathetically, and examine and have assessed an application for federal support, and I will do that very sympathetically, and I will do it recognising that this is the top of his priorities as far as projects are concerned. I mean if a newly elected Western Australian government comes to us with a proposal and self evidently, we will give it very, very serious consideration and it would make sense for us to give priority to it over and above something that we ourselves might have in mind.
JOURNALIST:
Will cost be a factor?
PRIME MINISTR:
Cost will always be a factor. It will be a factor with Colin in developing.....but look he's made a commitment. I mean the people of Western Australia should understand that he's committed to doing it full stop. There is no argument about that, and what will happen now that he's given me this letter and he'll come along to me and say look will you provide some financial support for it, and we will examine that sympathetically. I can't be plainer than that and that's a sensible, logical, consistent way of doing it.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard (inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
This is the last one because I've got to go.
JOURNALIST:
Okay, (inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have already answered that but 450, the deployment.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we are not contemplating sending any more but I have been asked can I give an absolute guarantee for all time that there will be no additional personnel. No, of course I can't do that. But I can tell you, it is very unlikely and we don't have that in contemplation. The best exit strategy in Iraq is to help the Iraqis look after themselves and that is one thing Mr Beazley won't commit to. And the other thing, while I am on Mr Beazley, could I just say this - he is now contradicting himself on this issue.
When I first announced the deployment on Tuesday, he said I had misled the Australian public at the last election. The implication behind that was that we had decided before October 9 to reverse our previous policy and send this detachment of 450 people. There was no other explanation. He is now saying that we've made a last minute decision and it's 'policy on the run'. Now Mr Beazley, make up your mind. You can't on the one hand, say we had it in mind at the time of the last election and concealed it from the Australian public (and that proposition of course is nonsense) and yet maintain as he is now doing in the last 24 hours, that we have made our minds up right at the very last minute.
The truth is that we didn't have it in contemplation at the election, we did not mislead the Australian public, and we did decide only in the last few weeks to change our policy, and to send this detachment. But what Mr Beazley has done is trip over himself. He has gone from one side of the street to the other on this issue. If we were misleading the public on Tuesday, we are now making the decision at the last minute on Thursday - you can't have it both ways.
I know he is having a get together here in Perth I think, to talk about it. Well instead of me answering questions, I am happy to do so, can he answer the question of that contradiction? You can't have it both ways. The truth is we didn't have it in contemplation at the time of the election. We did not mislead the Australian public. We did decide to change the policy during the last few weeks, and that has been explained by Mr Downer and by myself. It's the right decision, it's difficult, I know it's not popular with some people but it's the right decision and in the fullness of time that will be demonstrated. I think we might end it at that. Very best of luck Colin.
COLIN BARNETT:
Yes, thanks Prime Minister for coming to the campaign.
[ends]