Subjects: Defence White Paper; Woodside; Port Hedland detention centre; electoral rorts; Derby Tidal Power Scheme; road funding; family trusts.
E&OE……………………………………………………………………………………
MURRAY:
Good morning Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Paul.
MURRAY:
Nice to have you back on the show again sir.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good to be with you.
MURRAY:
Was it our experience in East Timor which has galvanised your thinking on this White Paper. It appears we got fairly badly stretched fairly quickly on what was an essentially small conflict?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Paul it had an influence. The white paper process was under way before the East Timor deployment took place. But I was certainly quite influenced by that deployment particularly in relation to the greater readiness and more effective deployability of our ground forces. And if you go through the White Paper and more particularly my tabling statement you can see the two strands, the emphasis on high technology in relation to air and maritime defence, but also the reinforcement of the basics of the deployability of our ground forces. But we were in the White Paper channel before Timor came along. But it obviously had an influence as it should have because it was a very important engagement by the ADF, the biggest engagement by the ADF since Vietnam and therefore you would be a strange government if you didn’t take some account of it.
MURRAY:
The White Paper says our strategic objective is to defend Australia from direct military attack. Is that ever achievable?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well is it ever achievable? Well I think I can start by saying the likelihood of a direct military attack on Australia is remote but you can never rule it out. And of course we believe it’s achievable and that’s the basis of our defence policy. But I have to stress that the likelihood of a direct military attack on Australia is very remote but the whole essence of defence is that you guard against the remote and you guard against the unlikely.
MURRAY:
You go to an election next year. You’re promising in the White Paper some $23 billion over the next decade. Michael O’Connor from the Australian Defence Association today is questioning whether your government or any successive government will live up to this because he says they never have in the past.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well my answer to that would be to draw his attention and your attention to the fact that when I was Leader of the Opposition in 1996 I promised in our election campaign for that election which we won that we would quarantine defence from any spending cuts and we’d maintain it in real terms. Now I delivered on that promise. It was the one area that was quarantined from spending cuts in our first budget when we had to deal with the $10.5 billion deficit that Mr Beazley left, and the $80 billion of accumulated national debt. And year after year after year we have kept defence isolated from spending cuts. But that wasn’t enough. The time has now come to do more than just maintain defence spending in real terms. We’ve got to increase it and that’s why we’re putting next year another $500 million, a further $500 million the following year. That’s a billion in that budget over and above what is there now. And then 3% in real terms in each year of the remainder of the decade. And as you said in your introduction that adds up to $23 billion over the decade. Now it’s the right investment and I note that the Leader of the Opposition has said we broadly got it right. Now it’s a very important document. It’s one of the major achievements of this Government. It gives new detail. We have a defence capability plan in the White Paper which actually itemises the various areas of defence capability, what money we need for them. We’re giving defence a clearer set of instructions than they’ve been given before and as far as I’m concerned we will stick to our commitments. I would hope the same would be the attitude of any future Labor government.
MURRAY:
Well Michael O’Connor says the 1987 White Paper brought down by Labor said they would spend an average of 2.8% of GDP. Now that hasn’t been lived up to and he says over the last 13 years it amounts to a shortfall of some $100 million.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I didn’t bring down the 1987 White Paper. Now that was brought down by a Labor government. I think Mr Beazley was the Defence Minister then. So I haven’t got a brief to defend what the former government did. I can tell you what I’ve done. I can point out that the one commitment I’ve made and I’ve been judged on over four-and-a-half years in relation to defence spending I’ve kept. And there’s no reason therefore why I won’t keep it in relation to this. I’ve taken a very strong personal interest in the defence issue. But I also want to say what a terrific contribution the Defence Minister John Moore has made, not only to the policy development but also to bring forth better management practices within the Defence Department because they not only need more money but they have to spend it very wisely as well.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister before I hand you over to the callers I just want to raise one other issue with you in the national interest – last night at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce meeting here in the Perth, the Premier in an address talked about the takeover, or the attempted takeover of Woodside, the big oil and gas producer in Western Australia, by Shell the big multinational. And he said, talking about the need for federal intervention in this, he said I know of no other country in the world which would allow foreign ownership of such a strategic asset. And he called on the federal government to stop the takeover. Will you do that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we’ll assess that request in accordance with our foreign investment policy. Foreign investment has been very beneficial to this country. It’s been very beneficial to the development of the resource industries of Western Australia. And if you look at the history of Western Australian development over the last 30 or 40 years you’ll see and understand that without foreign investment the living standard of Western Australians would be lower and the living standards of Australians would be lower. It’s easy to be populist about foreign investment. It’s important to remember the contribution it’s going to make. I don’t give foreign investment decisions on the run and I think your listeners would understand that and I would think the Premier would understand that. We have a set foreign investment policy and if a company wants to take over an asset, that application is assessed in accordance with the policy and the Treasurer on behalf of the government takes a decision. Now we will follow the same approach in relation to this particular proposal as we’ve followed in relation to others. And if it’s in accordance with policy, our policy doesn’t automatically bless every foreign takeover and it’s a mistake of anybody to imagine that. But it has to be done in accordance with proper guidelines and proper criteria because if you don’t do that you’ll scare foreign investors away and I don’t think anybody would want that to occur.
MURRAY:
Yes, but not all investments are the same are they?
PRIME MINISTER:
I agree with that.
MURRAY:
…and the Premier says this is a crucial strategic investment. He says 10% of Australia’s total exports will come from this region off our northwest shelf. Why allow foreigners to control that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Paul, what I’m saying in reply to that is that we have a policy and we will take those considerations into account in assessing the Shell application. That’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying yes or no to it, and I think it would be ridiculous to expect me to. And the sort of things that you’ve mentioned we’ll take into account.
MURRAY:
Okay Prime Minister, Eddie’s on the line and would like to talk to you. Good morning Eddie.
CALLER:
Good morning Paul. Thank you, you’ve got a very good program there. I want to talk to the Prime Minister regarding two things. One thing is that there’s a report in the Australian this morning talking about escort officer molested detainees. Now I will like the Prime Minister what action he’s going to take.
MURRAY:
Now let’s just talk about that. That’s all about an officer from the Port Hedland detention camp who allegedly molested Chinese women who he was escorting out of Australia, and he worked for a private contractor who has the guard duties at the Port Hedland detention camp. Prime Minister are you aware of that story….?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I’ve seen the story in the Australian and if that happened, well that’s obviously a very concerning thing, a very distressing thing. If it has happened it’s a breach of the law, the criminal law of Australia and that is something that has to be investigated by the South Australian Police. In relation to matters generally coming out of the Woomera detention centre….
MURRAY:
This one’s Port Hedland sir…..
PRIME MINISTER:
I’m sorry, Port Hedland, that is a matter for investigation by the Western Australian Police.
MURRAY:
Yes Eddie, and you have another question.
CALLER:
Yes another one for the Prime Minister that there’s a fair bit of controversy about swapping preferences. We started a few Labor Party members in Queensland [inaudible]. Now at the moment Labor is digging up against your members, particularly this lady in New South Wales. This morning’s press report that your department or your government refused to let her be interviewed by, you know, the appropriate authorities. So what, is that a double standard thank you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there’s no double standard. The one person in Federal Parliament who’s being investigated by the Federal Police – Mr Swan – it’s in relation to an allegation of bribery concerning Australian Democrat preferences. Mr Swan himself has admitted that money was given to the Democrat candidate. He denies that it amounted to bribery and I don’t take the allegation any further than that. It’s got to be investigated by the police. In relation to Jackie Kelly, who’s the lady, she’s the Minister for Sport and Tourism. There’s no wrong doing on her part. There was an allegation raised in relation to some local government elections. That was all investigated several years ago and the Electoral Commission after getting a report from the police took no further action. In relation to a former staff person of hers who was living in her home for a while and stayed on the roll after he left there, that was not something for which she was responsible and any suggestion that there’s any comparison….I mean Mrs Kelly has not given any money to a Democrat candidate. The comparison the Labor Party seeks to draw between her and Wayne Swan is quite false and therefore there’s no reason why I should refer the matter to the Federal Police. That would be plainly ridiculous.
[ad break]
MURRAY:
Good morning Robyn.
CALLER:
Good morning.
MURRAY:
The Prime Minister’s listening Robyn.
CALLER:
Mr Prime Minister in 1997 you announced Australia’s response to the Kyoto and specifically mentioned tidal power. Now bearing in mind the outcomes in the Hague where there’s [inaudible] no carbon sinks what progress needs to be made to allow tidal power to assume its necessary role?
PRIME MINISTER:
I am not sure that I specifically committed us to tidal power in ‘97 but we are quite sympathetic as you know in relation to the Derby Tidal Power project, we are quite sympathetic to that. We need the understanding and co-operation of the Western Australian Government, they seem to have a different view. We believe in examining alternative energy sources. We have a $400 million fund which was established to encourage alternative energy sources. We do take the view that it’s important to pursue them. In relation to the sinks, we remain very strongly committed to a world agreement on emissions which does involve allowance for carbon sinks. We believe that a country like Australia should be entitled to set off against emissions the environmental benefits of different policies in relation to tree clearing and re-afforestation and that’s something we’re going to hold onto very firmly in the negotiations that are going on. But the Derby Tidal Power Scheme is something that we’ve been quite interested in and we seem to have a somewhat different view from the Western Australian Government. I mean I understand their reasoning but we remain very interested in that project.
MURRAY:
Prime Minister what’s happened to the due diligence review the Federal Government’s done on that? We understood it was due to be tabled sometime this week but it hasn’t appeared. Is it imminent?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I’d have to find out about that I am not sure why it hasn’t been tabled but I have no, I have no particular objections to it being tabled unless there’s some reason why the people who wrote it don’t want it to be. But I will have to take that as they say on notice. It was my understanding that it was going to be tabled this week.
MURRAY:
Yes, okay thanks Prime Minister. It’s all right, Peter’s on the line. Good morning.
CALLER:
Good morning Paul and Mr Howard. Just recently I heard that Western Australia gives Australia a quarter of percent of its wealth and then about two weeks after that I read that we were about fourth in line from the monies that you gave to all the states about the roads. I just want to know why states like Queensland get something like I think $60 million more than what we did?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don’t have the figures in front of me but the allocation to Western Australia was a fair allocation based on the historic formula that we inherited from the former government and a reassessment based on population and distance. The figure of a quarter, that’s a quarter of the export income that comes out of industries in Western Australia. But can I say that I tend to look at these things in terms of us being Australians first. As far as I am concerned an Australian dollar is an Australian dollar earned wherever it is whether you live in Queensland or Western Australia or . . .
CALLER:
Well I was born here Mr Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I understand that.
CALLER:
Yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
I gathered you might have been and it’s a terrific place but if you look at the allocations I don’t think you can say that Western Australia, you’ve got to remember with roads that Queensland is a more decentralised state than Western Australia. Queensland is the only state in Australia where the majority of people don’t live in the capital city. Although Western Australia is a very big state it is not as decentralised as Queensland and that has an impact on the road structure and the services of the state. Queensland is a state in a sense that is dominated by the large provincial cities like Toowoomba and Townsville and Cairns and Rockhampton and so forth. Where as Western Australia has vast distances but of course the great bulk of the people live in the southern part of the state. Now that has an impact when you’re distributing funds, but I can assure you that we in no way discriminate against Western Australians. They’re Australians like the rest of us and we try and get these things done fairly and the other thing I’d make is that we’re, the point I’d make is that when the money gets to the state it’s distributed strictly in accordance with a formula laid down by indeed the former government between the various local government areas. I mean Mr Beazley called it a boondoggle which he thought meant porkbarrelling, that’s the American definition of porkbarrelling I mean I prefer Australian definitions to American any day. And in Australia it means trivial and irrelevant well it’s not trivial and irrelevant to give a whole lot of extra money to local councils to spend on roads, I think it’s very important.
MURRAY:
Okay, thanks Peter. Good morning Geoff.
CALLER:
Good morning Paul.
MURRAY:
Hello Geoff, the Prime Minister’s listening.
CALLER:
Good morning Mr Howard.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
CALLER:
Hi, firstly on a lighter note I met you back in the mid-80s at the Balcatta Function for the Balcatta Business Association.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh. It’s nice to hear from you again.
CALLER:
A long time ago. There was about 250 people there I shook your hand.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good on you.
CALLER:
And on the way out Nigel Satley got a hundred dollar cheque off me and he’s given the wrong answer, I want it back with interest.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh gee, how long ago was it?
CALLER:
Can we say?
PRIME MINISTER:
1885 or 1985?
CALLER:
1985, so there you go. Very briefly, I’ll carry on. Basically my question this morning is about the Fremantle Artillery Barracks Museum down in Fremantle. My interest is real in that my family, my father died in 1958 when I was five years of age and I’ve marched with Legacy since then in Anzac Day parades and his death was attributed to being due to his war service. Also my mother dies who served in the Air Force during World War II in 1968 when I was fifteen and I was educated at Trinity College Perth through rebound and help with my brothers. Also I am considering updating and organising the books and information that relate to my father’s battalion and it’s located at the Leeuwin Barracks in Karrakatta. Now I am extremely angry with Richard Court’s Government and a bit perturbed with your Government in approving Richard Court’s Government approving the Catalina Aviation Museum which is a big flying base from World War II to be located at the Matilda Bay area and University of Western Australia. Now the funding for this is in the order of $700,000 I believe from the state government without them saying much and about the same amount has been raised by private enterprise by a tax deductible donation scheme which I think is a fantastic innovation which I hope we can use in other things. Now basically I feel the state government and your government has been provoking the public veterans and families by not taking decisive action to call off the sale of the barracks. The sad part about this is that the imminent sale and the proposed relocation to Leeuwin Barracks, Karrakatta is basically I feel a whitewash and so do my kids as I’m told my father’s army veteran friends that they…..
MURRAY:
Ok, get to your point please Geoff.
CALLER:
Basically I feel that WA definitely urgently needs a permanent war museum. And in 1958 I visited Canberra with my school, went through the War Museum and could not find any display for the second seven of artillery division which my father fought in in the Battle of Allemande, which we won against …
MURRAY:
Come on Geoff, get to your point.
CALLER:
I’m hoping that you can come up with some decisive action on this museum for a permanent site. Thank you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well can I, this may not be the right answer and I’m glad it’s only 1985 but I’ll have to get some further advice on that. I guess we have a national War Museum. It’s difficult therefore for the Federal Government to have a separate War Museum in every State capital. As to whether there’s any memorial to or any recognition of the second seven in the Australian War Memorial I don’t know. I’ll have to find out about that. Can I find out some more about the barracks – where that’s sitting – I know I’ve had some representations about the closure of some barracks in Western Australia.
MURRAY:
Fremantle, that’s right sir.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, Fremantle. So I’ll find out where that’s sitting at the present time. I know there’s a lot of interest in that and I share your interest in the military history of this country and I’ll have a look at it.
MURRAY:
Yes, it’s a very hot issue here sir and one of the plans is to move it to Erwin and many of the veteran community think Erwin’s going to be sold too.
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand that and I’ll just see what the current state of it is and it’s a fair question of him to have asked.
MURRAY:
Ok, Ken’s on the line. Good morning.
CALLER:
Oh good morning Paul. Good morning Prime Minister. Yes I’d like to say something about defence for Australia. I think one of the obvious places is if anyone wanted to invade Australia would be at the northern part. But I feel that if anyone has got the money to travel all that far, they would come in at the southern part of Australia on the southern part of the west coast and on the southern part of the east coast. So I do hope that you will prepare all the way round Australia for the defence to keep us nice and safe.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I agree with that. I don’t expect, and all of our advice is to the same effect, I don’t expect anybody to attack Australia in the near future or indeed the medium term future. But you’ve always got to be prepared for it and the whole idea of having an emphasis on sophisticated air and maritime defence systems is to provide that continental coverage that you refer to. And you’re absolutely right to be concerned about that.
MURRAY:
Finally Prime Minister, one of your election promises was to crack down on trusts and there’s legislation coming forward on that from Peter Costello and this is part of your new tax system and it appears trusts are being rorted in terms of tax to the tune of billions of dollars. There appears to be some sort of backlash coming out of the National Party which is worried about how this will impact on farmers and small business people. Will you hold the line?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh we will certainly have legislation against the tax avoidance abuse of trusts. That was part of the policy that we took to the people in 1998. I have no objection at all – and I support the use of trusts for legitimate family and business reasons and family and business purposes – but I don’t support their use for tax avoidance purposes. And there are tax avoidance practices involved in the use by some people of some trusts. Not all trusts are tax avoidance vehicles. It’s very important to make that point – they’re not. But some of them are and our aim is to stamp out the tax avoidance. We’ve put out a draft Bill – an exposure draft – and we’re getting comment on that Bill. When we’ve got all of that comment we’ll make a decision about the final shape of the legislation.
MURRAY:
Are you concerned about the threats by the National Party to vote against the Bill in its current form?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they haven’t threatened, as you put it, to vote against the Bill.
MURRAY:
I thought they made that decision on Monday night?
PRIME MINISTER:
We run a joint party. We are joint parties in government. I deal with my National Party colleagues as part of the joint party room. I don’t deal separately with the National Party any more than Mr Anderson deals separately with the Liberal Party. We are a coalition and we resolve these matters in the Coalition Party Room and we resolve these matters in a coalition Cabinet of which I’m the Prime Minister and Mr Anderson is the deputy. This matter will be resolved. People have some concerns about some of the things in the exposure draft – that’s fair enough – but when it is resolved you will see that it stacks up against what I’ve said.
MURRAY:
Ok, Prime Minister, thanks for talking us again today. We appreciate it.
PRIME MINISTER:
And can I just say how pleased I am that tomorrow Adam Gilchrist will be captaining the Prime Minister’s XI in the match at Manuka Oval against the West Indies.
MURRAY:
We’ve adopted him – he’s really one of yours, Prime Minister but we’ve adopted him.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I know you did. He’s a great Australian cricketer.
MURRAY:
He surely is. Thanks Prime Minister. See you again.