PRIME MINISTER:
Ladies and gentlemen as you know I leave this morning to go to the United States and then after that I'll go to Canada and Ireland. It's always important to visit the United States, our closest and most powerful ally. There is much on the international scene, including in particular Iran, relations with China and the situation in the Asia Pacific region generally and they are some of the matters that I will discuss with the President and other senior members of the Administration. I'll have the opportunity when I'm there to meet all of them, as well as delivering a major speech on Australian foreign policy in Chicago. After then I visit Canada at the invitation of the newly elected Canadian Prime Minister. As fellow Commonwealth countries, Australia and Canada have much in common and this will be an opportunity for us to talk about many things that, as energy rich countries, Australia and Canada have in common. And finally, for the first time as Prime Minister I will visit Ireland and given the very close historical and sentimental links between Australia and Ireland, that is a visit which is long overdue.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, Kim Beazley's labelled this trip a holiday.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that is just childish. It is in the interests of this country that the Prime Minister of Australia, no matter who he is, Labor or Liberal, should travel regularly and that is what I'm doing. It's in Australia's interests that I undertake this sort of travel and he knows it.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, what will you be telling the Americans about David Hicks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we want Hicks brought to trial as soon as possible. That's been our position for a long time. What's holding it up at the moment is not the American Administration or the Australian Government. It's a court challenge within the United States which has the sympathy and the support of Mr Hicks and his lawyers and until that court challenge is resolved, the Military Commission trial can not go ahead, and that challenge has been responsible for about at least a year's delay in Hicks being brought to trial. But I certainly am unhappy that it is taking so long for him to be brought to trial, but some of the recent delays are not the fault of the American Government and it's certainly not the fault of the Australian Government.
JOURNALIST:
What will happen to David Hicks if Guantanamo Bay closes?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the important thing is to get the trial brought on and I don't believe that Guantanamo Bay is going to change in the near future and I would certainly hope that the Military Commission trial of Mr Hicks is brought on as soon as possible. But we do not believe that he should come back to Australia without facing a Military Commission. He can not be charged with any offence in this country and given the seriousness of the allegations made against him, we remain of the view that he should face trial before the Military Commission and the conditions of that Military Commission have been greatly changed as a result of representations made by Australia.
JOURNALIST:
I'm sure Lord Goldsmith's remarks would be something that would be discussed, would they be something you would be discussing with the President?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not necessarily, no.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, is Australia's involvement in any planned military action in Iran an option?
PRIME MINISTER:
In Iran?
JOURNALIST:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
There's been absolutely no thought given to that. I'm not in favour of other than trying to achieve a diplomatic solution. It's quite hard. This is a test for the United Nations. At the time of the Coalition operation in Iraq, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom were all attacked for not leaving it to the United Nations. Now Iran is in the hands of the United Nations and it will be a very big test of the processes of the United Nations to see if that matter can be resolved. I think we should continue to try diplomatic processes.
JOURNALIST:
But given that you didn't trust the UN in the case of Iraq, what's changed with Iran?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's not a question of not trusting the UN, it's a question of the UN having failed in Iraq. Now it has another opportunity on this occasion. I mean what we did in Iraq was based on a Security Council Resolution. But the alternative was that we should leave it endlessly to further United Nations processes and that did not work. The United Nations failed in relation to Iraq. I hope it now has an opportunity to succeed in relation to Iran, and it should be given the opportunity to do so.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, what do you think it entails this time?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not going to start hypothesising about that. We all want a sensible resolution but a resolution that recognises that a nuclear Iran is a potential danger to the Middle East.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister in Iraq, will Australian troops go to more dangerous areas like Basra?
PRIME MINISTER:
We have said that we'll continue to look after the Japanese and if the Japanese, as is anticipated, sometime this year pull out of Al Muthanna, we will maintain a presence in the southern part of Iraq. We'll be involved in training, we'll be involved in other matters related to the security of the country with a view to the Iraqis themselves being able to look after their position. We are still considering and discussing with our allies precisely what Australian troops will do. I can assure you that the decision we take will pay particular regard to their security and their safety. But we must understand that no matter where people are in Iraq, it is dangerous.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, on the home front, what do you think of Mr Beazley's speech last night?
PRIME MINISTER:
Mr Beazley's had ten years in opposition and he still has not got a coherent alternative plan to maintain and develop the Australian economy. The key challenge for an alternative Prime Minister is to tell Australians how he would do it better. He didn't even tell us how he would do it as well.
JOURNALIST:
You said it was Simon Crean's effort I think...
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I thought Simon Crean's Budget reply in 2003 was a very good Budget reply. See what Mr Crean did in 2003 was actually lay out some alternative policies in areas like health and education. He had a go at being an alternative prime minister in his Budget reply. Mr Beazley's had 10 years. I mean it's not as if he's just become the Leader of the Opposition. He's had 10 years and he still has not given the Australian people an alternative of how the country would be governed under Labor.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, can I ask you about the Papuan woman Mrs Wainggai? What is the Government doing about that situation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it's important that we allow the normal processes to operate and it's not for us to do, other than follow Australian law, which we have done in relation to the 43. Thank you.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) are heading north to West Papua. Can you tell us why the urgency?
PRIME MINISTER:
Heading where?
JOURNALIST:
...I believe they are heading north to West Papua.
PRIME MINISTER:
They don't have any instructions to go to West Papua.
JOURNALIST:
Are they heading north?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look the Australian Defence Force, they've got to head somewhere, I mean they can't just sort of remain becalmed like the 'Ancient Mariner', and they are obviously being deployed, and what the ADF does, is to make sure that the assets of the Australian Defence Forces are used in such a fashion that if requests for assistance do come, we're in a position to respond to them quickly.
JOURNALIST:
Is it an urgency that they're moving?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there have been no requests for any involvement if you're thinking of East Timor. Put Papua out of your mind please. If you're thinking of East Timor, we have had absolutely no requests, but I simply repeat that what the military does, quite sensibly, is use its assets in such a way that if we were to receive a request we'd be able to respond. Thank you.
[ends]