JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, the bombing overnight in Egypt - have you been advised of any Australian casualties?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have been told on the information currently available that there were no Australians involved. Our Consul has gone there to see if he can be of any help and to ascertain as to whether there were any Australians involved but the initial information suggests not. But it is another terrible, brutal event. It is another terrible, brutal attack that has claimed the lives of a whole range of people; different countries, different religions, different ethnicities, different background and it's just another reminder of the brutally indiscriminate character of terrorist attacks.
JOURNALIST:
Apart from the obvious do you have any sense of a pattern involving all of these events which have occurred since September 11, 2001?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the most common characteristic Jim is that they are unforgiving and indiscriminate and designed to cause the maximum fear and confusion and terror within civilian populations and they don't appear to discriminate between countries that are western or countries that are predominantly Islamic. The common element is to kill and maim, to terrorise, to intimidate, to frighten and to intimidate people into changing their way of life.
JOURNALIST:
Are we learning anything more as time goes on about the sophistication and coordination etc of what is going on?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think one of the things that I have learnt very much, particularly in the time that I have been in London is how much we must use modern technology and modern skills and modern responses to deal with contemporary terrorism. I have been greatly impressed with the coordinated British response. I think of all the things that I have taken out of the few days that I have been in London, none has been more powerful than the huge value of surveillance cameras; the speed with which the British police and intelligence services have been able to assimilate all of the thousands of images and you've all seen it in the morning papers and I mean it's quite remarkable, and that's a very practical thing we can, certainly as Australians, at both a Commonwealth and a State level, have a look at. I am not being critical of anything. I am simply making the observation that this is something that has really hit me very hard is just how effective these cameras have been and how valuable they might be and they should certainly be considered in the Australian context.
JOURNALIST:
How would you characterise London's response - you've been here and seen it, how would you describe London's response to the two series of attacks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well from the people I have spoken to, calm resolution, defiance, all the sorts of descriptions that have been used about this city over the years, they're familiar with terrorist attacks, there were 300 individual IRA attacks in London, I think just in London alone during the 20 year campaign by the IRA against the British mainland so they are used to it, it doesn't make it any easier, they don't like it, obviously there is a certain amount of tension in the air but they're absolutely determined not to allow it to get in their way of their normal lives and neither they should, and neither should any of us.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard do you feel in light of the events in London and what you just said about close circuit television cameras there is a case perhaps for a meeting with State Premiers or State Transport or Federal Transport officials to really implement some of the measures that you have seen in practice here?
PRIME MINISTER:
I wouldn't rule that out but I am not announcing that that is the first thing I am going to do when I get back to Australia. It's one of those things you might consider doing, but I mean I am not saying that you know this has been a gap in the past in Australia. I am simply saying that this is something that we can learn from this experience and I think it was very good that we had that police team over here, I met them here on a couple of occasions, they were a suitable mix of Federal and State police, we need a mixed response because so many of the initial response capacities in Australia is at a state level and I want to work with the Premiers and the State Police commissioners and I am making the point that I have been impressed with the apparent value of the surveillance cameras and that is something I have to keep in mind and if we need to meet again and earlier than we might otherwise admit that's myself and the Premiers, then that will happen and I am sure they'll be very willing to work together and this is something way beyond differences that occasionally exist between Prime Ministers and Premiers and something that will be across the political divide. I notice that the NSW Premier's already said a number of things that are quite consistent with the comments I have made.
JOURNALIST:
There was also a call made for some sort of national summit meeting, particularly with the Islamic leaders, what is ...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Mark I am happy to meet community leaders from any part of the country, that is part of my ongoing role, any meeting that I would have with Islamic leaders would have to be upon the basis that we are talking as Australians together and to be upon the basis that the discussions would be designed to see what more could be done to eradicate from our community inflammatory exhortations to violence and intolerance.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister quite obviously the mopping up, the response to all these attacks, particularly in Britain have been, as you say, quite outstanding but what's also remarkable is that despite all that information, all of that knowledge, they still go on, do you think there are real gaps in the way in which civilised nations are able to deal with this in advance?
PRIME MINISTER:
Jim that is quite right, that is quite right and I am sorry I interrupted you.
JOURNALIST:
No I interrupted you.
PRIME MINISTER:
No you go again.
JOURNALIST:
Is there anything really realistically that can more be done or is it simply something that we will have to live with?
PRIME MINISTER:
It is going to go on for some time, there is no doubt the disturbing feature of the 7th July and probably the one two days ago is that there was no prior warning and that the attacks were carried out by British born people, in other words they were carried out by British citizens who acquired their citizenship by birth and not by naturalisation, and that's brought a new element into it and what more can be done? Well we can always try and make our intelligence services better but we also have to encourage the communities with whom potential suicide bombers might be part of or might mingle with [inaudible] responsibility, firstly not to encourage inflammatory attacks, not to encourage intolerance of the value system of a country in which they live and that if people are exhibiting those tendencies, they have an obligation in their communities to try and do something about it. I mean we accept generally as good citizens of our country, the obligation to encourage people to be tolerant, if we hear of people being abusive or intolerant, of people of another religion or another faith or another nationality, our normal reaction is to say that well that's not what should happen, that's not Australian, that's something you shouldn't do and we don't want to have anything to do with you. If you are going to carry on like that, you are not someone we really want to associate with. Now what I am saying is that there must be occasions in some communities where inflammatory conduct is heard and perhaps not rebuked and it has not been made clear and that is the behaviour that is quite unacceptable and I make no bones about saying it when I hear one of the Imams in Melbourne saying that in effect Bin Laden is a good man and that the attacks in London were the responsibility of the Americans. I mean I think that is an appalling thing said, he's got the freedom to say it, I am not contesting that but I've got the freedom to say what I think about it and I think all of us have a private as well as a public obligation to contribute towards a proper denunciation and that applies particularly to people who might regularly come into contact with that sort of attitude or language.
JOURNALIST:
Doesn't there become a fine line between inflammatory talk and being seen to move into the area of actually inciting, which I presume is a crime?
PRIME MINISTER:
I suppose everything has got a fine line but I think we all understand that I mean the point I am simply making that inciting people or attacking different views and attitudes and values of our country is something that most of us understand when we hear it.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister doesn't it mean ultimately though that certainly the British legislation and therefore we assume the measures that you might consider mean limiting the discussion of ideas and the values that these people hold?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Tim it ultimately depends on what form it takes, I mean I am not going to hypothesise about that.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard after the 7 July you talked about, or you were asked about public transport security. I think you said it's something you would look at. I mean there are difficulties, I am wondering what your experiences here, I am wondering what impact they've had on that view if any on the increasing security on public transport at home?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well certainly the points I have made about surveillance cameras are relevant to that, very clearly. The sort of difficulty I had in mind are what would be the implications of the efficient movement of people if every bag taken onto every train or bus in Australia were to be x-rayed, my understanding is that doesn't happen in the United Kingdom, I don't think that happens anywhere in the world, that's the sort of point I was making but there may be additional things that can be done but there may be additional things that can be done. Short of that I mean we have to always apply common sense to these things. You can't in advance define precisely, exactly to the last letter and the last degree what might need to be done. I am simply making the point that in the wake of these things, you have to look at additional measures but you also have to understand the root causes and there has been a common misstatement in my view of the root causes of terrorism and that misstatement is that it's born of social exclusion and political suppression. Now in relative terms the people who have apparently carried out these attacks in Britain were not socially excluded people. They may have belonged to an ethnic minority but a large ethnic minority. On my reading of their backgrounds, they had many of the same opportunities and comforts as other British citizens, not of Asian decent and certainly the same opportunities of many people of an Asian descent and I have drawn a comparison in the past about the tragic death of Sam Ly. People suggesting that he was less or more socially excluded and when he grew up as a child of Vietnamese immigrants and the men who murdered him I think grew up in the north of England so I think we need to re-examine this rather knee jerk explanation that is provided by people. It really is a question of a perverted ideology and that takes me back to my point about the responsibilities of communities and the responsibilities of leaders of individual communities. I mean just as in your own community of commentators you would not want to go by un-remarked or un-rebuked expressions and practices that you regarded as completely unacceptable so I am saying to leaders of other communities within their ranks when they hear it and are aware of it, they should deal with it.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister are you saying that mainstream Islamic leaders in Australia have not been forthright enough in rebuking extreme comments?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think some have not been as strong in denouncing these acts as they should have been and I referred to them a moment ago.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, on the cricket, do you think two days into the first test, England's optimism about its prospects in the Ashes have been a bit misplaced?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it's too early yet, yesterday was quite good, from what I saw of it but we'll wait and see.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] stumps?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I don't know.
JOURNALIST:
Are you going to meet any of the Australian cricket team?
PRIME MINISTER:
I did meet some of them yesterday at a brief reception yesterday that the MCC put on that I was invited to and they were in good spirits. I did have the opportunity of congratulating Glen McGrath. In my view he takes his place in the great trio of great Australian fast bowlers of Ray Lindwall, Dennis Lilley and Glen McGrath. I think they are the three greatest fast bowlers that Australia has ever produced and as good as any the world has produced, he's a very impressive man, he's had his family, his parents, his wife and two children in the crowd on the first day and I think that was terrific for him.
JOURNALIST:
What would you say the critics Mr Howard, you went to the cricket yesterday, you are spending today and tomorrow...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I am spending today, I don't know what I am doing tomorrow.
JOURNALIST:
Would you have any answer to people who say well he's come all the way to London to see the cricket?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it would be absurd, but people will say it whether it's absurd or not, you've just done so.
[ends]