MURRAY:
Good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello there Paul good to be with you again.
MURRAY:
Nice to have you back in our studio. You're in town for the State Liberal Party Conference. State Liberal leader Matt Burney has adopted some strange positions on some significant issues here in WA. He's non-committal on uranium mining, even though this state depends on uranium for its prosperity. He's sitting on the fence on your industrial relations reforms. Do you think Liberal leaders should have firmer views on important issues like this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well this Liberal leader, namely the federal Liberal leader is not going to give gratuitous advice to his state colleagues. I'll argue my...
MURRAY:
It doesn't have to be gratuitous.
PRIME MINISTER:
No I will argue my position and we, of course, have a very well known position on both of those issues. It's in the interest of this country to have uranium mining, subject to strict safeguards. The three-mine uranium policy of the Labor Party is the greatest load of hypocrisy imaginable and in a world where alternative energy sources are the order of the day, it is illogical, indeed against the national interest, not to sensibly exploit Australia's uranium reserves. And that is what this Government will, in a measured, sensible, responsible way, do.
As far as industrial relations is concerned, I am very committed to our reforms. Those reforms have the very strong support of the business community here in Western Australia - very strong support, and particularly small business. I addressed a meeting yesterday called by the Western Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and I was able to talk in detail about the weaknesses of the present unfair dismissal laws and how they're a burden on small business; in particular how they discourage small business from employing more staff, and how they really make a lot of hard working staff in small firms cranky.
If you're living in a small business environment, you've got say five or eight people in an office or a workshop and one of them is a pain in the neck and is making life difficult for everybody else, it's the workers in any cases more than the boss that would like to see the back of him. That's a point that's overlooked by some of our union critics.
MURRAY:
What if they just want to get rid of him because we won't sign a workplace agreement?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that can't happen. That's illegal and it will remain illegal. I'm glad you asked me that. It's in fact expressly forbidden under the present law. You cannot sack somebody because they refuse to sign a workplace agreement.
MURRAY:
What if he refused to trade off some of his conditions for a pay rise?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well under the present law and indeed under the future law there will be protections in relation to those sorts of things. There'll be a guaranteed minimum hourly rate taken from the relevant award. They'll be a guarantee of holiday pay and sick leave, of course the long service leave provisions of the existing state laws will continue, superannuation, all of those things will be guaranteed. But it will be possible for people to negotiate more flexibility. It will be possible I believe to get agreements that are more suitable to individual workplaces.
MURRAY:
In your new regime, if someone does want to take an action for unlawful dismissal, you say you'll give them up to $4,000; the reality is that's a drop in the bucket isn't it for what the real cost will be to fight that sort of action?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Paul it is a lot more than is available now and anything that is an additional contribution to legal expenses for people who need it, and this will be subject to a means test, is desirable. Can I just distinguish here of course between unfair dismissals and unlawful termination. Unlawful termination (and that's what we're making the $4,000 provision for), is where you are sacked because of your race, because of your gender, because of family responsibilities, because you belong to a union or belong to some other association that your employer may not like. Now those things - sacking for those things will remain unlawful.
MURRAY:
And they're the only things you'll get a certificate from the Commission?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well you'll go to the Commission and... well you can pursue your case, but you go to the Commission. If the Commission says that you've a reasonable case, in other words it's not a frivolous vexatious case, then you'll get the $4,000 support. Now in relation to the unfair dismissal laws which have really never been specified as to what... the unfair dismissal has never been specified (what represents an unfair dismissal) and of course that makes those laws so... I think bad... those laws are going to be repealed for firms employing fewer than 100 people.
MURRAY:
If the boss just says you're slacking, you're not pulling your weight and I want you to go...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well a boss doesn't do that to somebody Paul, particularly at present where it's a real workers market. I mean good staff now are very hard to get. When I go around Australia the complaint I get from employers is they can't get enough good people.
MURRAY:
But if a boss did sack someone on that basis, I don't you're pulling you weight. You'd have nowhere to go?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the reality is that in all of these things you need a balance and you can't have a law which clearly has created a situation where people are frightened of taking on more staff through fear that if it doesn't work out they can't let them go without giving them go away money - $15,000 or $20,000. Now that's what happens. I have a legion of war stories on this of people who've said, 'look I don't mind giving somebody a go, but if it doesn't work out, and the fellow or woman is not working well enough with the rest of my staff, and making everybody else unhappy because of their attitude, I've got to let them go - I shouldn't have to pay them to go. I shouldn't have to be told by my lawyer, well look this case can only be defended if you're prepared to take time off from your business' - and in small businesses the absence of the principal means the place grinds to a holt in many cases; that's the nature of a micro-business. You have 3 or 4 employees and somebody... and the person who's running it and owns it is away for weeks defending a case in a tribunal, heavens above he's going to turn around and say well what does it cost to relieve me of this problem.
MURRAY:
You've got your war stories, the unions say they've got a legion of war stories of people who have been (inaudible) because their...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Paul you've got to look at the overall reality of the labour market, and the overall reality of the labour market now is that we have a 30 year low in unemployment, we have a shortage of skilled people and we have a situation where more and more people are looking for good staff and adequate staff, competent staff. And I have been told and I know from my own experience that the best asset you have is your staff. And if you want to run a successful business that people you look after most of all as well as you customers of course, are your staff.
MURRAY:
But human nature is human nature...
PRIME MINISTER:
It's a question of balance and I think the and the Government believes in the experience of these laws for 12 years is that the balance has been tilted (inaudible) are in favour of vexatious claims and created a situation where the net result is that people are frightened to take on staff they might otherwise take on through fear that they can't let them go without paying a large amount of go away money, and many small first can't afford that.
MURRAY:
Callers lined up for you Prime Minister. This is Steven from Safety Bay is first. Morning Steven, the Prime Minister is listening.
CALLER:
Morning Paul, Mr Prime Minister. I would like know how you can justify with these industrial relations changes, average Australians losing whatever job security they might have by signing AWA's, they maybe pressured into signing or feel that they have to sign because of, they won't get the job or they could lose their job, they could end up losing lots of overtime, payments, loss of leave loading, long service leave, redundancy payments, How can you justify that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well what you're asserting is not correct. For example long service leave is guaranteed by legislation.
CALLER:
Yeh if they sign an agreement.
PRIME MINISTER:
No well that can't override the legislation. May I say this is an example. Now can I also make the point to you, Steven is it?
CALLER:
Yes correct.
PRIME MINISTER:
That in the end the real guarantor of job security is a prosperous economy. We had in the early 1990s an even more highly regulated, rule-ridden industrial relations system than we have now. And in the early 1990s that didn't stop a million people being thrown out of work and it didn't stop people's real wages falling. In the end you've got to have an industrial relations system that helps promote a strong economy. There's a false belief that you can legislate to make the economy strong. There's a false belief that if you pass laws you're guaranteed job security. The only thing that guarantees job security, you can have everything that the ACTU argues for, but if the firm that's employing you has no business it can't go on employing you any longer. And in the end what we need in this country is an industrial relations system that promotes prosperity.
MURRAY:
John in Subiaco Prime Minister. Morning John.
CALLER:
Thanks Prime Minister. My fellow Australians and I would like to know your core and non-core promises, those from which you will not cut and resile on industrial relations. You've already resiled from your 1998 statement that no Australian would suffer disadvantage, you've just said that you can't be sacked because of race. Here in Perth, Australian Defence Industry will probably sack Australians citizens not born in Australia because the US told them to. So we know about your never ever and cast iron guarantees, what can you tell us about that please?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well in relation to ADI, sir I think your facts are wrong. To start with, it's nationality and not race and what you said about somebody who is Australian nationality...
CALLER:
It was a tribunal decision here...
PRIME MINISTER:
It was a tribunal decision, for Federal... that is the first point I'd make. There was a tribunal decision, ADI received the permission of the Western Australian Anti-discrimination Tribunal in the interests of fulfilling the contract that's made with the United States to employ people with Australian and American nationality and the other point I'd make is that discrimination on the grounds of nationality is not prohibited by the Federal Racial Discrimination Act for the very good reason that you wouldn't be able to discriminate in favour of Australians.
MURRAY:
Judy in Cottesloe, Judy morning Judy. Hi Judy?
CALLER:
Morning Prime Minister, I want to congratulate you for being our Prime Minister and thank God we have you, that's the first thing. But the civil rights people who are questioning your industrial...
PRIME MINISTER:
The anti-terrorism laws?
CALLER:
They frighten the daylights out of me, not the terrorists, it's the civil rights people, I think they are the ones we should watch.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think they're misguided on some of these issues, I certainly agree with that. But they are not as dangerous as the terrorists, we are a free country and they've got a right to put their point of view but these laws, the State Labor Premiers unanimously supported last Tuesday are unfortunately necessary and won't guarantee that there will be no attack in Australia, it's just that they will give us a little bit more protection against the possibility and it's necessary that they be brought in.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister the Australian newspaper reports today that you are thinking of changes to the federal electoral system, what have you got in mind?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it hasn't really reached the stage of the government considering anything, this has come out of the joint parliamentary committee on electoral matters which reports on a regular basis and I haven't seen the report but there are a lot of rumours that it might raise the issue of four year terms and I was asked by the Australian what my view was, and I gave them my view. My view is that it would be a good year to have four year terms at the federal level as we do at most state levels except Queensland. My personal preference is to have a minimum of three years with a maximum of four so that the Prime Minister of the day and the government of the day can decide the exact date.
MURRAY:
Why should they have the right to do that? I can never understand...
PRIME MINISTER:
Because it's always been part of our system of government.
MURRAY:
But doesn't make any sense.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think...
MURRAY:
Why should they have the right to decide when they go to the people?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well because they are the people that were last elected to govern by the electorate, that's the reason, I don't think there's any...
MURRAY:
It gives you a significant advantage over the...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no but you don't have untrammelled power because you are limited to the maximum period set by the constitution. I mean I can't decide to extend Parliament by another year beyond the three years. What in reality, I have as Prime Minister and all Australian Prime Ministers before me have had on both sides is the power to decide the precise date and that's been part of the parliamentary Westminster system, it remains the situation in Britain, you have these fixed terms in Australia which, I mean I am not saying they do great violence to democracy, I am not suggesting that the arguments are overwhelmingly one way or another, it's just that I have a strong preference for a system that preserves a certain degree of flexibility for the government of the day and I never supported fixed terms when I was in Opposition so I am not just arguing from a point of view of personal convenience.
MURRAY:
So these matters being discussed in the Australian story today, seem to just favour executive government, if you wanted an extra year, why would you also put the people a proposition for something like the recall elections they have in America whereby if the government breaks its word mid term, enough people can get together and they can recall the government and make it go to another election as happened recently in California. That seems to me to be a fair trade-off between you wanting an extra year of government, to give you more ability to plan well but it also gives a safeguard to the people, that if you are going to break your word mid-term that we can have another go at you if we want to.
PRIME MINISTER:
Paul I am not mad keen to have a referendum (inaudible) another year - it's not right at the top of my list. I have been Prime Minister now for 9 « years and this has not been at the top of my list. I am not certain incidentally that even if it were supported by both sides of politics that the Australian people would vote in favour of four year terms in a referendum and I am not certain they would and I would think very carefully before putting it up. But you're asking my opinion, and I get asked my opinion on a whole range of things and I am giving it you.
MURRAY:
It's on the news agenda today.
PRIME MINISTER:
But it's not the most important pebble on the beach as far as I am concerned and I am not going to lay awake at night worrying about it.
MURRAY:
Alright let's move on to another rock. Jim in Double View, morning Jim.
CALLER:
Good morning Paul and good morning Prime Minister. You made a statement before Mr Prime Minister, good staff are very hard to get and we are looking overseas for people. I believe that we are the only country in the world with such good unemployment benefits and I would like, now that you've got control of the Senate, to stop that.
PRIME MINISTER:
You mean make the unemployment benefits less generous?
CALLER:
Make people work for any that they get.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well sir, we do that now. We have a work for the dole scheme, it's not applied for much older workers, it doesn't apply to them, although they do have some job search obligations but for younger and middle aged people, we do have a work for the dole obligation and I believe it has helped to reduce unemployment. I am not in favour of making the dole so strict that it creates a social underclass. That's a mistake I believe the Americans have made. There's a lot about America I admire, but there's a lot I don't and I don't think their social welfare system is as good as ours, I think in this country we have struck a right balance between not being too paternal as the Europeans are, and they have a lot higher unemployment levels, particularly the Germans and the French. Not the British, because Margaret Thatcher's government cleaned up a lot of those things and Tony Blair was sensible enough not to change them when he got into power. I think we have the balance right in Australia, it's not perfect. I think we do and our long term unemployment level now as distinct from the actual unemployment level, total unemployment level, is about a third of what it was in the early 1990s so we are making a lot of progress on that front.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister do you ever get a chance to have a good look at the hospital system around the nation? The federal government funds health but the states run the hospital system.
PRIME MINISTER:
We half...
MURRAY:
It is somewhat diverted...
PRIME MINISTER:
We half fund it.
MURRAY:
Yes yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
The state's put in, to be fair, they put in the other half, and they run them.
MURRAY:
Yes but you're somewhat divorced from the end-problems because you are not running it. We never see pictures of you visiting hospitals. I just wonder whether you've got a good handle on the crisis that appears to be happening in hospitals right around the nation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I do visit them, perhaps less frequently than I do nursing homes because you obviously visit areas where you have this problem. Look I have a lot of talk, it varies. I get a lot of stories of problems, I also get a lot of people speaking admiringly of the quality of care in public hospitals and it's very important that we don't rubbish a system for all its imperfections that is much better than you'd find in the United States or in Britain or in Germany or in Japan, it's got a lot of weaknesses the Australian health system, but gee it is better than anywhere else, don't get sick somewhere else, if you're a battler it's better to get crook in Australia than some other country.
MURRAY:
We know that health costs are...
PRIME MINISTER:
They are going up.
MURRAY:
...rapidly increasing in Australia.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. Well they are increasing for two reasons - we have an ageing population and the longer that people live, they need more medical attention, that's logical. And the other reason is that medical science is making cures and responses and all sorts of systems available to help people with their health problems but they are very expensive but quite rightly as an egalitarian society we say that these aids should be available to everybody and not just available to the wealthiest in the country.
MURRAY:
Martin from Bald Creek is on the line for you Prime Minister, morning Martin.
CALLER:
Hello Paul, good morning Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
CALLER:
Sir, I am very perturbed and really concerned that this country seems to be going down the banana republic (inaudible) with we are importing inferior products, produce (inaudible) and we are dumping it by the tonnes. We grow the most beautiful oranges and crops it's possible to get and yet we import this inferior product to the detriment... and we are not considering the welfare of our producers.
PRIME MINISTER:
Martin I understand that you were probably distressed to see that footage of oranges that were dumped. I saw that footage and it had the same impact on me. The problem of course is that we want other countries to take what we produce and if we want other countries to take what we produce we must subject to (inaudible) laws in relation to quarantine and subject to laws in relation to dumping, we have to be willing to take what other people produce. That sometimes leads to situations that you've mentioned particularly in relation to oranges, it's been a case of the market is suffering somewhat of a glut. As some people say well if that happens you stop the product coming in from overseas, the difficulty with that is that if there's a glut in something that we're selling into another market, other countries might turn around and do the same thing to us and we complain about it. So we've always got to balance those considerations but I understand your reactions; it's very human.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister Telstra, it appears is going to run a big advertising campaign to let us know how much regulation adds to the cost of their business. Is that a good spending of shareholders funds do you think?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that's a matter that should be raised at the annual general meeting of Telstra by the shareholders. You are really making the government's case for getting out of it. I don't really want to become a commentator on Telstra. We've just approved through parliament, the sale of the government's remaining shares and that will take place at the appropriate time. But the regulation let me say is designed to bolster competition; what we want in the telecommunications market is greater competition. We have superb competition in the mobile phone market and as a result we have unprecedented penetration of mobile phones in Australia - they're cheap, it's a very good service and the population knows how much we love and use them, and how relatively inexpensive they are now compared to what they were a few years ago.
MURRAY:
One of the callers to the breakfast programme this morning wanted to know if you've got a mobile phone.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I have.
MURRAY:
You have.
PRIME MINISTER:
I have got it with me at the moment and it's off.
MURRAY:
Just remind me to get your number before you leave.
PRIME MINISTER:
No mate, no, no.
MURRAY:
What is your message today to T2 shareholders who bought at $7.40 encouraged by your government, with Telstra shares now down to $4.00?
PRIME MINISTER:
I won't give a comment on where I think the share price will be at a particular time, that wouldn't be right. I will make a general comment - I think Telstra is a great company, it is a great Australian company and it has a great future and once it is free of the yolk of majority government ownership, it will do a lot better.
MURRAY:
Another question from our breakfast callers, they want to know if you've got a tattoo?
PRIME MINISTER:
No.
MURRAY:
If you haven't...
PRIME MINISTER:
No.
MURRAY:
...and were you to have one, what would it be of?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I wouldn't have one.
MURRAY:
Not even a nice little Winston Churchill head or something on the shoulder?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, not sort of my style, can't sort of compete with the blokes who are into that, I sort of missed out on that.
MURRAY:
Good luck at the Liberal Party State Conference tomorrow. I know you've got a few people to convince about your industrial relations changes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I think there are some people who have question marks on the State's rights issues but the interests of Western Australian business and the Western Australian economy will be greatly aided by these changes. Western Australia will benefit economically from these changes and that I am sure will carry today.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister thanks for your time today.
[ends]