PRIME MINISTER:
Well ladies and gentlemen can I just make a brief comment, a brief local comment and then I'm happy to take any questions; that I did have the opportunity today to express to the people of this community the admiration of their fellow Australians for the very resilient way in which they have bounced back from a terrible tragedy some months ago and it's a wonderful demonstration again of the Australian spirit. And can I particularly pay tribute to Barry Wakelin, the Federal Member, and all the efforts of the local emergency services and volunteer organisations, which as always, in times of such great tragedy, respond in a magnificent and heart warming fashion. And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have about anything you like just for a few minutes, then I have to move on to a property that was affected by the fire and then on to Whyalla.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) more could have been done, (inaudible) could have come earlier. What is your response to those comments?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well for a combination of reasons it was not physically possible for me to come in January, but any suggestion that the Federal Government didn't play to the full its role financially, through the presence of other Ministers and through all the assistance and cooperation with the State Government is quite wrong. It's not commonly understood, for example, the disaster relief arrangements. Once a certain, quite low threshold has been passed the great bulk of the cost of that is picked up by the Federal Government and there were other areas of assistance which were provided, which are normally provided in disasters of this kind. So this suggestion that the Federal Government ignored the plight of these people is quite wrong.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what do you make of the claims that there are 50 to 60 people in terror cells in Sydney and Melbourne?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have always said that there is a real possibility of some kind of terrorist incident in Australia. I said that a couple of weeks ago and I was criticised by the Opposition for not adding further detail. It's self evident that no country is immune from terrorism. I would be cautious about fixing on particular numbers. Importantly though ASIO, the body which is principally responsible for these matters, has informed me that those people who are regarded as a threat, or are regarded as of interest, they are under very regular surveillance. I don't want to go into the detail of that, that doesn't help anybody for me to do so. And there's great cooperation between the agencies, ASIO, the Australian Federal Police and the state police services. They are all together doing a very effective job, but there's no revelation that there are some people in this country who trained overseas with terrorist organisations. At the time they did so, that was not a criminal offence and I think it's very important we bear that in mind. But I want to assure the Australian public that the agencies involved are doing the right thing in keeping an eye on the people concerned. I don't want to go any further than that and I won't go any further than that.
JOURNALIST:
So is it reasonable then to monitor Islamic groups in particular?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's reasonable to monitor individuals. We are not in the business of stereotyping groups of people. There are thousands of Muslim Australians who are wonderful citizens and who are as concerned about terrorism as you and I might be. But it is the case nonetheless that extreme Islam is at the heart of the terrorist ideology. Now the people of concern are the people who should be monitored and we need the assistance of all Australians in dealing with this challenge. We can't be complacent, but equally we don't want to overreact. It's quite a difficult balance. The important message I have for the Australian people is that we are aware of the people who should be under surveillance, and the right thing is being done in relation to them.
JOURNALIST:
So you wouldn't support for example, the targeting of people of Middle Eastern appearance just because of appearance?
PRIME MINISTER:
No of course I don't. I don't think anybody should be targeted because of their physical appearance. We value people on their behaviour, their character, their worth, their contribution to this country. We don't discriminate on the basis of somebody's colour or appearance. That has never been the, certainly in the experience of all of us, that has not been the Australian way and it wont be the Australian way. But we shouldn't underestimate the terrorist challenge. I mean, no Australian should imagine complacently that this country is immune, it's not. And we have to redouble our efforts, and we are looking at whether it is necessary to make further changes to the law in light of what's happened in London, and there will be a number of proposals coming forward and we'll have a very careful look at that. And this is going to involve a very difficult balance between the traditional freedoms we all cherish, but also the need to take all steps necessary to protect us against the evil of terrorism.
JOURNALIST:
Sol Trujillo has added his weight to the Nationals' call for a Telstra fund. Did that add any credibility to the call?
PRIME MINISTER:
We will examine all of those proposals. I'm not going to give a running commentary on each day's Telstra talk. I think what I will do is get all the talk together at one meeting and have a look at it with my senior colleagues. There are good reasons to sell Telstra. There are good reasons for the bush for Telstra to be sold, but I'm not going to be providing commentary on the daily Telstra talk.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) your reaction to Mr Trujillo's claim that Telstra's over regulated and (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well one of the reasons that Telstra is highly regulated is the desire of governments to see that the bush gets a fair crack of the whip. He can't have it both ways. You can't run around saying 'well we want to reduce the regulations but we want to improve circumstances for the bush'. I mean we've all got to have a reality check on that. You can't, I mean there are obligations imposed on Telstra and they are to ensure that services are widely available in the Australian community and anybody who understands how that company operates would understand the reasons for that regulation and the history of that regulation.
JOURNALIST:
Do you agree that other providers should perhaps share the responsibility of bush services?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the most important thing is that the bush should have the services. That's my starting point and it's my end point and obviously there has to be a fair sharing of the burden along the way. But Telstra is the biggest operator in the paddock so it's obvious that they've got to make a bigger contribution.
JOURNALIST:
Do you have any extra funding or concessions in mind for the bushfire victims (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well a number of issues were raised as I went around today and without making any promises, and I don't make promises of that kind on the run without fully investigating and I've got to check back about different things that have already been provided. I mean, I have to say again that all of the things that are normally provided by the Federal Government in relation to disasters of this kind were provided and were provided very promptly. And a lot of the assistance that appeared to come perhaps from other sources, ultimately the cost of it will be borne by the Federal Government. That's the nature of the arrangement that we have. And I don't denigrate in any way, the role of the State Government or the local. Everybody worked together magnificently. I'm just rejecting any suggestion that the Commonwealth didn't play its part. But if there are other things that should probably be done they will be, but I'll have a look at the proposals that were put me.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) prosecutor has now walked away from the Hicks Military Commission. At what (inaudible) do you become concerned about (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I am satisfied that the Military Commission process will provide a fair trial for David Hicks. Remember that David Hicks is alleged to have trained with Al Qaeda, he's alleged, after witnessing the events of the 11th of September 2001, to have rejoined the people with whom he trained. So you're not dealing with somebody who allegedly had just a passing interest. You're dealing with somebody who actually trained with a terrorist organisation. If he returns to Australia, because that was not a criminal offence at the time it happened, he can't be prosecuted. And that is why I believe, subject to our being satisfied about the veracity of the process, he should be tried before the American Military Commission. Thank you.
[ends]