MONDAY CONFERENCE
( Broadcast: . MONDAY 5iTH DECEMBER, 1971)
This edition of ',! ONDAY CONFERENCE was recorded on
December 5th, 1971, in the ABC's Core Hill Studios, Sydney, for
transmission to all states on Decemiber 6th. In New South Wales,
the programme goes to air at 9.35p. m.
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE WILLIAM4 McF'AT[ ON, M. P.
Prime Minister of Australia
IS ON CAMERA WITH
ROBERT MOORE, ABC Executive Producer and Programme Anchorman
ALLAN BARNES Canberra Correspondent of " The Age"
RICHARD CARLETON Canberra Correspondent of " This Day Tonight"
DAVID SOLOMON Political Correspondent of " The Canberra Times"
ROBERT MOORE: The Right Honourable William Yc~ 4ahon, Prime minister
of Australia. Mr. McMahon was elected Leader of the Liberal Party
in March of this year. He's been a Member of Parliament since
1949.
Tonight, on MONDAY CONFERENCE, the PRIDTE MINISTER.
Good evening. Next year, some time, there'll be a
general election. M~ any people have an opinion about when it will
be and what the result will be, but the man whose opinion really
matters is of course the Prime Minister. fir. flci~ ahon will have the
final say as to when the election will be held and it will be his
judgement, more than anybody else's, which will be vindicated or
not by the result. M4r. M cMahon has recently returned from
discussinns on foreign affairs and related matters in the United
States and Britain, and last week his Government survived a vote
of no-confidence on its handling of the economy. Wlell those two
subjects, foreign affairs and the economy, are very much bound up
with the next election.
To question the Prime Minister:
Allan Barnes, Chief Political Correspondent of " The Age";
Richard Carleton, Canberra Correspondent of " This Day Tonight"; and
David Solomon, Political Correspondent of " The Canberra Times".
Prime Ifinister, on Monday Conference at the end of October, Senator
Gair said that the economy would bo the paramount issue at the next
election. Last Week, as I've said, there was a no-confidence motion
in your Government's handling of the economy, and in the last few
days you've been subjected to a very strong attack in a number of
newspaper editorials about the economy. In the light of this, do
you see the next election being fought on the economy?
PRIPE MINISTER: No I don't. I think there are a number of issues on
which we'll fight the elction. The basic one, I believe, will be
defence and security. Then of course there will be the economy, there
will be the problem of industrial law and oublic order. There'll
be the problem relating to our immigration programme and many other
problems of a similar kind.
MOORE: Prime Minister, could I ask you this then? Are you
suggesting that one reason why the election won't be fought on the
state of the economy is that you will delay an election until the
economy is in a much healthier state?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, I'm not going to give you any help at all as
to when the election will be held, but I can assure you your gess
isn't right.
MOORE: Could it be in March?
PRIME MINISTER: It could be later than March. I haven't made up my
mind, so that it's not much use you probing me as to date. You
won't get any help.
ALLAN BARNES: Prime Ministerr M1r. Snedden on this programme some...
a couple of months ago, said that he thought the economy would not
be an issue against the Government if the election was held at its
normal time, the end of the year, implying that he thought the Budget
strategy would work through and the economy would settle down. You
seem to be taking a similar line. Would that be appropriate?
PRIME MINISTER: I'm not taking any line about the date of the election,
and I told Mr. Moore that and I'm not going to help you either.
RICHARD CARLETON: Prime Minister, what sorry.
PRIME IMlINISTER: The simple look, I wonder if I could finish,
because if I am asked a question I think there's a responsibility
to let me answer the question in full, rather than get interrupted
half way round. So if I want to answer your question completely I
agree with what Mr. Snedden said about the date of the election if
it were held late the economic issue would not be a real one. But
after all I feel confident about the way the economy is going now,
and the way in which we were able to virtually annihilate the
Opposition on Wednesday, as you well know, was a clear indication
that we're handling the economy pretty well by world standards too,
and I think we'll go on handling it exactly the same way between now
and the time we hold an election, no matter when it might be.
BARNES: The day after you annihilated the Opposition in that censure
motionhowever, you did take measures to correct the unemployment
situation in the country. Does this indicate there may be more
measures in the pipeline?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, we took those the decision had been taken
beforehand but I couldn't I felt first of all it was inappropriate
to mention the measures during a no-confidence motion, and secondly
I had to let some of the States or virtually all of the State
Premiers know first. / 3
So that was the reason why I didn'tmentionit then but I've made
clear over and over again that if we find there is some difficulty
emerging then we will take action to either prevent it or to
introduce remedial measures. WAe won't hesitate. Tie did it in the
case of nursing home attention, we did it in the case of rural
unemployment, and we'll do it whenever else we think that a need
has arisen which we feel demands or requires action.
BARNES: The question of unemployment is however one of the primary
ones worrying you at the moment, surely?
PRI'VE MINISTER: Yes, it is. It is one of the primary ones. But I
don't want you to forget for one moment that the dominant one is
inflationery p~ ressures, due fundamentally to the wage-cost squeeze.
So they are two, but they are virtually the same because unless we
solve the inflation pressure then in the long term we create great
troubles for ourselves in unemployment.
HOORE. Prime Minister, could I sorry interrupt just for
a moment. In the short run, on this very point, does the Government's
attack on inflation depend on the-P being less than full employment?
In the short run.
PRIME MIINISTER: Not necessarily, no. our policy is one of combating
inflation, at the same time getting a fairly good growth rate and
I hope you'll ask me questions about this later and at the same
time keeping unemployment to a minimum. Those are our goals and I
think we've got reasonably good prospects of keeping them.
BARNES: How would you define a minimum, Sir?
PRIME MINISTER: No, I wonder if I could get a little bit of coherence
rather than everyone coming in and stopping mo from giving a complete
answer. That's what I want to do, because there are a lot of vie:: wers
and they're entitled to get the full answer, so please, which one is
the next one?
CARLETON: Mr. McMahon, let me ask you what are the factors that are
going to weigh in your mind in deciding in favour of an early
election or putting the election of f until the say the end of
next year?
PRIME I-INISTER: I've answered that already Mir. Carleton.
CARLETON: You haven't mentioned the factors.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes I've would I give away whatever advantages I
had of surprise? Would I commit myself at this early stage? Of
course I wouldn't, and I won't do so.
CARLETON: Well, I think it's fair to ask you Sir
PRIME MINISTER: Well I don't think it is; well it might be fair, but
it's not reasonable. When I feel that an election should be held
and is in the interests of this country then I'll make my mind up,
but at the present time I haven't made up my mind and consequently
I feel that this is not an occasion when I could give you a finite
answer to the question you've put to me.
CARLETON: Well what's the attitude of the Country Party towards an
early election?
PRIPM MINISTER-. They haven't discussed it with me.
DAVID SOLOMON: Prime Minister, on the question of the economy, could
you give us an indication of how high you expect unemployment to
go in the next few months, when school leavers will be a real
problem.
PRIME MINISTER: No, I couldn't give an answer to that question, but
what I can say is the numbers today are just a little above the
-year average. But we have certain problems we have to deal
with and the main one is that over the next few months, in fact
from the last two weeks in November right through to January, we
have 190 thousand school leavers, and people who've passed their
tertiary education 190 thousand; and under the economic conditions
in which we live, particularly the matter of overseas... problems
of overseas parities in the international exchanges, the difficulties
associated with the rural economy, industrial indiscipline, we have
a set of circumstances that we've not previously had to face, so
anyone wanting to make up his mind and give precise figures is, I
think, looking into the crystal ball and not being realistic.
SOLOMON: Sir, some of the ecomomic conaitions are those of the
Government's making, in terms of the last Budget the restriction
on public service employment for example; the limitation on the
amount of money that the Commonwealth was making available for works.
Are you convinced that these are the right measures at this time.?
PRIM-E MINISTER: I've said that I believe that whenever it is necessary
for us to take any remedial or preventive action, we will do so
so of course to deal with the first vart of your question, when I
saw that Public Service recruitment was not as high as the approval
we'd given for the whole of the Budget year, I asked that it be
corrected and that we adopt a liberal policy about it. Similarly
too, I took other action, so far -as it related to the rural unemployment.
Just prior to that as you know, before I went away, went
overseas, I had a look at the interest rate policy, and on bonds
we reduced interest rates over the whole range.
Those were but just some of the measures that we took and of course
we look at other lines of action that we feel may be helpful and
when we think~ a change is necessary, I can assure again I assure
you we'll take the measures.
MOORE: Prime Minister would you see the state of our primary industries
as being the most permanent weakness in our economy at present?
PRIME MI14ISTER: It depends which part of the primary industries you're
talkingabout, and if you're looking at the problems of wool, I
think that this is a long term problem that we have to handle and
if I can make this one comment, a commendatory comment the fact
that we've had a growth rate this year, or will1 have a growth rate
of something like five por cent, despite the fact that the price of
wool has fallen so dramatically and sharply, is I think, a tribute
to the resilience of the Australian economy, and I believe the
energy and the industry of the Australian people.
MO0ORE: Does the Government have a long term strategy to get those
farmers who must leave the land of f the land Are you working
on it at that level:
PRIME MIINISTER: We had an immediatte and~ then a long term problem.
The immediate Droblem was this, that because no-one could forecast
what the price of wool would be at the opening or during the season,
and because we had to keep up the income flow during this year, we
had to take immediate steps; first of all to give as it were
subsidy to the wool producer, and secondly to permit the Commis! รต ion
to buy in wool if it was thought necessary to sustain the price.
But evcn at t-he last Budget time we had a look at the long term
prospects as, for example, taking people off the land, giving long
term finance and farm reconstruction, and now we have appointed a
committee under Sir Richard RAndall, the former permanent Head of
the Treasury, who will be able to recruit a large proportion of
his own staff, and will be assisted by senior representatives of
other Government departments, and we hope he'll put up long term
answers to us, or recommendations to us, by the end of March next
year.
M4OORE: Do you in fact see a lot of people leaving the wool industry
in Australia
PRIM4E 1M1INISTER: Yes, I do, I do; and in fact when we first looked at
it at Budget time this year, we thought that there were at least
between eleven thousand and fourteen thousand who should be withdrawn
from the industry.
CARLETON: Prime~ Minister, have you made an in-principle decision not
to continue thei wool subsidy in next year's Budgct
PRIME MINISTER: Not an in-principlc decision, no, but we have said we
will not again give open-end commitments, either to the deficiency
paymonts, or and that is of coursel the subsidy nor will we give
unlimited authority to the Commission to buy in wool. But everything
will depend upon... first of all upon the facts as presented to us
by the Randall Committee and our analysis of conditions as they
exist at the time we have: to make the decision.
SOLOM4ON: In last year's Budget, Sir, your Government gave a t~ irtv
million dollar grant for special aid for woolgrowers which was
going to be for one year only, and this year the budgeted amount
for spocial assistance on a one-year scheme was sixty-million, and
it looks as though that'll probably be 120 or 150 million. Could
you give us soma indication of the -amount of money that the Government
would be prepared to commit in future years 7
PRIISE MINISTER: No, I couldn't give that. We haven't thought of it
yet because, as I said to you, we've just a ppointed the Randall
Committee, and I think it'd be wise for us to wait until the
Randall Committee has submitted its roport before we make up our
minds.
BARNES: On the general economic question, Prime minister, your predecessor,
MR Gorton, in speaking in the censure motion last week,
suggested some form of variation of a wages and prices freeze.
Does this appeal to you
PRI14E MINISTER: Not very much, n, because I don't think it's practicablc
in Australia. We have no constitutional power to control
prices. Under thle arbitration pirt of the Constitution, that part
of the law of the Constitution, it is the Arbitration Commission
that has the power to d, terzmino official awards and consequently
sets the pattern for wage rates throughout Australia. We haven't
got that power.
BARNES: On ' the short.... I'm sorry Sir.
PRIME MINISTER: No in the long run. On any run. But in any event
one of those parts of the recommendations of the group of ten who
the ten economists who made some recommendations to us last week
I think the one part that I would agree with was that in Australia
an attempt to control wages, prices, is a pretty difficult proposition
and is rather apt to lead to a misappropriation of resources
and create bottlenecks rather than find real solutions.
BARNES-, President Mixon applied this only for three months the
Ninety Day Freeze. Couldn't you do the same thing by using your
taxing powers without the necessity for a Constitutional
PRIME MINISTER: I doubt it, I doubt it, but in any avent that would
be a very long term measure to introduce taxing powers. Nixon
fortunately had the power to do it, but I wonder even in his case,
I wonder how long it'll be successful for, and in any event our
problems arc nowhere near as serious as theirs.
BARNES: The problem as I see I'm sorry, I just wanted to follow
this the problem as I see it is that the Commonwealth will
go before the Arbitration Commission and either recommend no
increase whatsoever in the National Wage Case, or a mtinimium increase,
and.., but you leave yourself open to thce criticism that you're not
doing anything about profits or prices. Surely this shows up an
inconsistency zand surely the Governmcnt needs to use some powers
to balance the picture in the minds of the workers
PRI17. MINISTER: Well on the facts, and the facts are important, let's
establish them; I think you'll find that average earnings went up
between thirteen and... well'about thirteen per cent in the corresponding
period of last year, and that was mainly due to Arbitration
awards, but... not ' awards, but agreements that were made outside the
Commission, and that was the basic cause of our problem. But
profits did not go up substantially at all. In fact they went up
to a minimal extent and they have slightly increased in the
corresponding pcr-iod of this year as compared with last year ; so
we haven't got the problem of profits rising in a way that is
completely unacceptable. But that doesn't touch the basic problem;
the basic problem is how to be successful, and I doubt whether
under Australian conditions we would be able to introduce a system
of income controls, whether it was on wages or on profits. But
there are two ways in which we c,-ngo about this. The first one
relates to the Arbitration Commission. THere of course we were
willing to intervene in the Metal Trades case, but an agreement was
made outside the Commission and we were not able to put arguments.
But we did intervene in the carpenters' case, we did in the annual
leave case, and we did, as you know, also intervcne in the national
wage case. Secondly, if we felt that we really wanted to take
action so far as profits are concerned, we've got the taxation
mechanism, and when we looked at profits we realised that wasn't
an angle that needed immediate attention. So we can do something,
but I don't think it is the answer to the problem. The real answer
to the problem of inflation is trying to dampen down the conditions
that arc favourable to inflation and that is create conditions when
people can write into thcir prices any awards that might take place,
or over-award payments, or the losses that can occur because of
industrial indiscipline.
MOORE: Prime Minister, do you read into Sir Richard Kirby's report on
the Arbitration Commission a warning against the Government taking
stronger action in industrial relations o./ 7o
PRIME MINISTER: No, bu ' t you put me in a very difficult position
here because Sir Richard has written to the Government over the
last few days protesting about the way in which his report had been
presented to the public, so that on Tuesday either the Minister for
Labour and National Service, or myself I hope the Minister for
Labour and National Service would in one way or other have to read
out the protest of Sir Richard. I think it's a pity, a great pity
that he's been misrepresented in the way he has been.
MOORE: Does the Government in fact intend to adopt a tougher industrial
relations policy?
PRIM1E MINISTER: Could I go back -first of all to Sir Richard because
I think he is as I said he has been misrepresented. I've known
Sir Richard for a long, long time. I was Minister for Labour and
National Service for eight years and I knew him before then and I
know he would never be critical of a Government for what it did in
its legislation. He thinks of himself as there to administer that
legislation and to have the arbitration in the legislative context
and wouldn't present a view of the kind that he's been represented
as presenting. Then the other part of your question
MOORE: Well, does the Government intend to adopt a tougher industrial
relations policy?
PRIME MINISTER: Again, it's been made plain that my colleague, the
Minister for Labour and National Service, will be making a statement
next week on the Government proposals relating to arbitration. It
will be a comprehensive review of the whole of the Arbitration
processes and procedures. We've been working on it now, I believe,
for very nearly seven months, and we completed our final review of
it on Thursday of this week. I don't want to, as it were, get into
his jurisdiction. I think it's appropriate and proper that I leave
him to explain his own case on Tuesday or Wednesday. But this I can
say to you. It is a thorough-going review, it is one that will
cover many aspects of arbitration, and we will not introduce a Bill
on this occasion, but we will put down a paper that will open up the
way for others to see what we propose, and so that they will be able
to present their arguments, whether it's the the trade
unions, whether it is the industrialists or the commercial interests,
they'll be able to say well look we don't like this, we think a
different sort of an approach should be made. So we hope for widespread
debates, widespread discussion, but we do hope it'll be the
beginning of a process that we can have another look and a better
look at industrial law.
MOORE: So there won't be legislation
PRIME MINISTER: No, no, it'll only he a statement and the legislation
will not be brought in, a Bill will not be brought in, until the
next session.
SOLOMON: Sir does Sir Richard's statement, in this letter, counter his
own statement in his report that he thought that improvements in
industrial relations are more likely to arise from changed attitudes
from the employers and the trade unions, than mere Acts of
Parliament?
PRIME MINISTER: Look there are several points on which he' made a
complaint at least six, and probably more. I don't think that
one is isolated by him, and I don't think it is referred to, but I
couldn't be sure.
SOLOMON: No, he put that as a very strong view in his report.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, well, I too believe that one of the remedies
is better relationships between employer and employee. To that
extent I do agree with him.
M. IOORE: Can we turn to foreign affairs , I'm sorry can we move
on to foreign affairs now for a while, and I we do have to begin
with the conflict between India and Pakistan for the moment anyway.
how serious do you see that conflict?
PRIME MINISTER. Very serious, and very regrettable because I don't
think either country can really afford to get involved in a war of
this kind and of course there can be too great a loss of life that
was avoidable. I did write, or make diplomatic representations to
Yahya Xhan, President of Pakistan on at least four occasions; I
spoke to Madame Gandhi's representatives, and I wrote to her too.
I just feel it's something that we all hoped we could avoid,.
particularly amongst two members of the Commonwealth; but they've
declared war now, it's in the hands of the United Nations I believe,
and my colleague, the M-inister for Foreign Affairs, has made a
statement and again, this is within his jurisdiction and I don't
want to add anything to it tonight.
MOORE: Prime Minister, I'm sorry, could I
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, you can.
MOORE:. Could I ask you, what did President Yahya Xhan say in his
replies to your letter?,
PRIME MINISTER: He didn't give one.
MOORE: He didn't give you a reply?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
BARNES: There was a suggestion
MOORE: Are you disappointed in that?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, very disappointed. other countries have done
exactly the same. Some have got a rather sharp response, an
unfortunately sharp response. We hope that there can bo an agreed
solution, but it is n extrenely difficult problem and the big
nations, the more powerful nations, must all gct together to see
if they can try and get an agreed solution between the two.
MOORE: Do you see it possible for Australia to play significant
and s, 3ecial role in this kind of conflict? / 9
PRIME MINISTER: No I don't. I think this is will be basically
between India and Pakistan, and I only hope that thyl see the
light and that they'll start to negotiate now. B3ut I don't see an
immediate prospect of that happening. But I don't think the great
powers either would be able to influence them to any great extent.
BARNES. There were reports from New York when you wore there Sir,
that you were contemp* la ting actually going to India and Pakistan on
your way home from London, and then later it appeared that you'd
either abandoned it or been dissuaded by your talks over there. Is
that correct?
PRI. ME ! INISTER: I didn't know of any reports whilst I -was in either
Washington, New York or London. ' But before I left, some of the Press
Gallery in Canberra suggested. to ma that I should go to Pakistan
and to Ncw Delhi. I knew I could not go -to New Delhi because Mrs.
Gandlhi would be in Washington at thc same time as I was there and if
I went to Rawalpindi, if I went to Pakistan first and then didn't
go to India, I think it could create greater troubles than * I wanted.
And in any event I also decided whilst I was in ' Washington that I
would write another letter to the Presidcnt of Pakistan. We did all
we could, and other nations, particularly the United States and the
United Kingdom, have done all they could, in order to minimise, even
to avoid, a war breakirna out between the two countries. They feel
the same as we do about it.
BARNES: Prime Minister, could I move the discussion a little further
south. The main area of dobate recently has been regarding the
Indian Ocean, in Australia. How seriously do you view the presence
of some Russian ships in the Indian Ocean, from Australia's Point of
view?
PRIIME M4INISTER: Not at the omont very seriously. The real problem
arises from the fact and this hasn't been made clear before but
the real problem arises from the fact that now, the Soviet has taken
an interest in the Indian Oceapn. Until a few years ago she'd had
no interest whatsoever. The second important fact is that at least
at the mo-ment her naval forces are concentrated in the west and the
north, mainly around the Suez Canal., R~ ed Sea and the Gulf area, and
secondly, they are able to mobiliso and to add to their naval
presence very quickly. It is this that is the cause of worry to us,
and of course, none of us know what the future is likely to hold,
particularly the relationship between the People's Republic of China
and of the Soviet, so we must remain constantly aware of the~ ' thnqers,
we must be ready to build up our own defence capabilities steadily
build up our defence capability and try and ensure that our allies
have the same approach to the problem of the Indian Ocean as we have.
BARNES: Haven't the Americans in fact played it down in rather low
key? I tL-hink in your report to Parliament you said that Mr. Laird,
particularly in your talks with him, had indicated that America
didn't see it as any sort of a threat whatsoever. There seems to be
some conflict between the attitude taken in the Australian
Parliament and by our major allies. 0/ 10
PRIME MINISTER: I don't think you could put it in quite that language
because in my talks with Mr. Laird ho recognised the difficulties in
the ability to build up for the soviet to build up its naval
pres ncn fairly rcrpi1?. But they havc problems, not only with the
Administral-jon but the prubipmms they have with their Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, so they're not prepared to be too outspoken
about this probleyp, but they understand the Problem in exactly the
same way as we do. They've indicated that they will use, if it's
necessary, Learmonth and Cockburn, that's the naval base at Cockburn
thtwe're building; they're establishing a signal station at Diego
Garcia; they've indicated clearly that they will have voyages there,
missions there by naval presence, and as you know only recently they
had a carrier and a support crew, support ships, travelling around
the Indian Ocean. They know the difficulties. But just as importantly
the British know the difficulties that exist too, and whilst I was in
London, Mr. Heath gave me the clear assurance that what he said in
Singapore about Britain maintaining a presence in the Indian Ocean
would be confirmed, and it was confirmed. They are interested in the
Indian Ocean as a great trading area, as an area that is necessary
for them to live by, and they'll keeD a presence there too.
BARNES: Is it worthwhile us spending eight hundred million on a fleet
of ships to patrol the Indian Ocean the light aircraft carriers, the
light destroyers I'm talking of now.
PRIMYE MINISTER: Up until the -moment I have no proposals before me from
the defence machine as to the size of the presence they would like
in the Indian Ocean. Until I get a submission from them I couldn't
give you an answer to your question.
MOORE: Prime rinister I'm sorry what has happened to the study
group that was set up at the Commonwealth Conference in Singapore at
the beginning of the year?
PRIME -MINISTER: It's wasted away.
M4ORFE: It's wasted? Well are you sorry about that, or glad to see it
go?
PRIME MINISTER: No I think it would have been a failure. When I was
in Singapore I felt it would not succeed and it hasn't succeeded.
We have said we were willing to participate if necessary, or to give
whatever help was necessary, but we also believe that political
problems would intrude and would superimpose themselves on the
analysis, and it was only analysis that was to be attempted. I think
each country itself has got to make up its mind what the problem is,
and take whatever action it thinks is in its best interests.
CARLETON: Prime Minister, can I take you up to Vietnam. The
Government's position seems to be that -the position in Vietnam has
improved to the degree that we can now withdraw all our troops. If
the situation in Vietnam was to deteriorate next year, could our
troops go back?
PRIME MINISTER: I stated in the House we have no intention of sending
troops back to South Vietnam. I stand on that statement. 0../ 1 1
11.
CARLETON: No matter how much it deteriorates?
PRI14E MINISTER: I would not commit myself.-on-a hypothetical question
as to what might happen if thcere-were completely changed circumstances,
-but-I-belie've, and I state this as a belief, that the probability, or
the possibility, of sending any troops back is extremely remote.
SOLOMON: Sir are you concerned that the Democratic Labor Party has not
seen great merit in your statements on your return to Australia,
regarding defence?
PRIME, MINISTER: The Democratic Labor Party is also a political party,
and of course it has to play the game politically, in the way it
thinks suits its best interests. That doesn't moan to say that they've
got necessarily grave doubts about our defence posture, and what we
intend to do. What it does indicate is they'd like to see us doing
much more because that is the kind of policy on which the Demoncratic
Party must succeed.
SOLOMON: Are you going to accede to their demands?
PRIME MINISTER: I will riot ma-ke any forecasts about future policy.
I respect the Democratic Labor Party but that doesn't necessarily
mean that . because I'm asked a question at a conference, however
ikLLgortant this one might be, when I'm askcd a question I immediately
give an answer on what is a high level political and policy decision.
BARNES: You were to the Defence Minister, Mr. Fairbairn, was to
have made a statement to the House during this session he's now
said it won't be made why have you postponed this if defence is so
important to you?
PRIME MINISTER: I gave instructions that I wanted a White Paper
prepared because we first of all had a strategic appreciation that
gives the global picture of the dangers of warfare, whether of a
general kind, a limited kind, or insurgency or subversion. It was
pretty reassuring and said we couldn't expect global or even limited
types of warfare during the next decade; but I pointed out at that
time that I felt that we also needed, based upon that strategic
review, something to do with the size, the structure, the disposition
and role of the Australian military forces, and I asked that a White
Paper be prepared for presentation to the House. The Dafence
machine tell me they can't do it in time, that you can't make instant
coffee decisions and we have to wait till somewheile about February.
Regrettably I have to wait. I'm sorry about it, ut that's the
answer.
BARNES: I thought the idea of Mr. Fairbairn wanting to put down a
statement, during this session, was to give these defence planners a
bit of time to work out their priorities, instead of the usual
scramble for money in a pre-Budget period, when everyone's in for,
whatever, guns and boats. Aren't you defeating this by not giving
them some quidance now?
PRIME MINISTER: No, it was my oai idea and I believe it's based upon
normal Cabinet or Government practice. I wanted a document setting
out the role, composition and size of -the forces, and therefore the
way in which they should be equipped and manned. ./ 12
12.
But they told me Mr Fairbairn himself told me that they could
not do it in-time.. That is the reason, there isn't any other one.
MOORE: Prime M4inister, how close are we to recognising China?
PRIME MINISTER: I can't tell you because it's in the hands of the
Chinese.
MOORE: Why do you say that?
PRIME MINISTER: Because we opened up, or wanted to open up a dialogue
with them. So far as we're concerned we permit our people to freely
go to China and to come back. Subject to security requirements, any
Chinese can conme to Australia. We trade with them freely, other than
in strategic goods. We welcome cultural and scientific exchanges,
and I did say, I think you know one of the first speeches I made as
Minister for Foreign Affairs, largely as a result of my own
initiatives, that we would want to open up a dialogue with China as
soon as we could. And we thought, quite frankly, that we were on the
way to some sort of success, but the Chinese act in their own
inscrutable ways, and suddenly they cut off, ' without rhyme, without
reason, and we don't know when they're likely to resume them again.
MOORE: In your Departmcnt's discussions, does the Government of Taiwan
still claim to be the Government of China, or has it recognised
reality?
PRIME MINISTER: I can't anssQ -that on bohalf of the Taiwan Government,
but our attitude is a clear one. The de facto control of continental
China resides in the Peking Government, that's the Pcople's Republic.
De facto control and jurisdiction in T'aiwan resides in the hands of
the Taiwanese Government. So consequently we don't recognise the
claim that is made by Taiwan to jurisdiction over co-ntinental China.
MOORE: Can we turn, just back to defence for a moment. What again
what is the present status of the Jervis Bay nuclear powcr station?
Is that
PRIME MINISTER: That's postponed for the time being. I haven't heard
of it since the statement was made by my colleague, the Minister for
National Development.
MOORE: But in principle, do you see the n~ eed for Alistralia to be
prepared to be able to make nuclear weapons if it needed to?
PRIME MINISTER: Thatis a question I as you know I couldn't answer,
because as you know, we have signed, or we have initialled I'm sorry,
not signed, the document of the united Nations relating
to nuclear weapons and while we haven't ratified it we've kept that
in abeyance because other countries haven't ratified it either yet
we are keeping well up with nuclear developments, particularly in the
industrial world, and that of course would help us if ever in the
future we had to make up our minds which way we wanted to go.
MOORE: But you don't soce it as a matter or urgency?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't. / 13
BARNES: Prime Minister, could I open up the area of politics,
domestic politics? Mr. Killen, your ' former Minister, the former
Minister for the Navy, gave notice I think a couple of months ago
that he wanted a special meeting of the Parliamentary Liberal Party
this session to decide the issue of an elected ministry or otherwise.
Do you intend to held that meeting this week?
PRIME MINISTER: I will hold it as soon as I can, probably this week.
BARNES: What is your attitude towards an elected Ministry?
PRIME MINISTER: I'll reserve my statement about an elected Ministry
until I have to discuss it in the Party room, and I will listen to
what they have to say, but hitherto I've been Qpposed to an elected
Ministry.
BARNES: Are you concerned about Mr. Killen's approach to this as
maybe damaging your position as Prime Minister, the traditional role
of ai Liberal Prime Minister of being able to choose his own MinistersZ
Does it concern you that this may be damaged by the adoption of an
elected Ministry?
PRIME M4INISTER: No I don't think that, but in any event, because I want
to discuss it in my Party room first, I believe that's the place
where my opinion must be expressed, and I think that it would be
imprudent for me to openly discuss it before I lot my Party knew
what I thought.
SOLOMON: Sir are you concerned about criticism which Mr. K~ illen has
been making of you and the way you've been handling yourself as
Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER: I will not discuss Any of my colleagues publicly. I've
stated over and over again that I believe in fighting on issues and
on policies, and relying* on : the public approval for what we do andthe
way we comport ourselves, and I will not under any circumstances
discuss Mr. Killen or his views, or for'that mattert any other of my
colleagues and their views.
SOLOMON: Do you think that things which people say within your Party
can be of political damage to the Party?
PRIME MINISTER: I think they can be of political damage. Yes of
course they can be. But I think if you look at the recent Gallup
ratings, includin~ g the one in " The Age", " Sydney Morning Herald",
I think you can see that our rating's going up nicely and I think
better than most people would have predicted, and in any event I
believe that there's been too much exaggeration about the extent Of
the difficulties within my Party, and particularly the state of my
Party today. I don't think the public have been effectively presented
with the state of the Party as it now exists.
BARNES: Do you think this has been a misinterpretation? Do you think
the Press has mishandled the reporting of the state of the Liberal
P arty? / 14
that we'are prepared to act, not only in thc interests of those
people in need and defence and othor avenues, but wherever we feel
it's necessary we'll act, and we won't be bound by precedent and we'll
not hesitate to take action when we think it's necessary.
BARNES: You mentioned social services, sir. In Melbourne, on Friday,
you promised a war on poverty. The economists, whom you mentioned
earlier, suggested that the first shot in this war could be fired by
imcreasing unemployment benefits and pensions, as a way of
stimulating demand. Does this appeal to you?
PRIDT MINISTER: I think you know that at the last Budget we gave the
biggest increase, single increase in the pensicn that had been granted,
and that followed one, a mid-term increase of a half a dollar; added
together they were pretty big increases, and accepted as such by the
Australian people; because I've heard less comment about the pension
increase this year than in the twenty-one years that I've been in
Parliament. I doubt whether that is the way to stimulate demand.
The way we are going about it now, and I'd have to repeat this, but
I might have even made it clear before; I think you know though I'd
better make this as a preface but there is a potential for very
much in very great growth-in demand becausG savings are at an a~ l
time high, and if the economy starts to gather speed, and it can do
that fairly quickly, then we could have demand inflation superim~ posing
itself on cost inflati~ on, and that would create great damage -nd great
problems for the community. But what we've done I'll mention them
ene by one to you. We gave help for, I thought, the area of grqatest
need and that was nursing homes and nursing attention. We then
intervened on interest rates. We took action so far as migration was
concerned, to cut it down, particularly over the Christmas period.
And I announced what we would do, on Thursday, about rural
unemployment. So you'll see here a Government anxious and willing
tC? take action when the need arises. But you asked me another
question, and that was the question of w~ here we'd gone wrong. I don't
think we've gone wrong anywhere and I'd like somebody to tell me
where we'ye gone wrong, and if they can, I'll give them the answer,
the answer from my Government's point of view.
MOORE: Sir, in the light of your experience as Prime Minister, are there
any. major changes that you would like to see made to Parliamentary
procedure?
PRIME MINISTER: I am disturbed about Parliamentary procedures, yes. I
had one major one Mr. Solomon will well recognise about the bank
up of Bills at the end of sessions, and we've overcome that, I think
more or less completely.
MOORE: Are you happy with the working of Question Time? That's often
being criticised.
PRIME MINISTER: At the moment, at the momrent, I think the main problem,
about Questinpi Time is that petitions are presented in the way they
are, and I think it's taken away from the vitality and the great
interest there was in Question Time. If you have fifteen minutes on
petitions, somehow or other the interest goes out of it and the
vitality is gone. Now petitions must be presented, but I'd like to
see Question Time get back to its former vitality.
The second point that I'd like to make is that I think too much is
made of trying to concentrate on the Prime Minister in matters that
are outside his jurisdiction and portfolio. I'm trying to ensure
that we got back to the British Cabinet system of Government practicer
and for that matter the Menzies Government Cabiinet practices of
directing questions to the responsible Minister; I'd like that to
change.
But the other big change that I'd like to ensure is that matters of
great public importance, like the state of the economy, defence, the
Ind~ an Ocean, social services, are debated in the House. We can't
do that because we really have so much legislation, so many Bills'
comning forward, that if we want to get through within a reasonable
time, then we have to reduce the time during which we can discuss
matters of great public importance.
MOORE: Would you like to see Parliament televised?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
BARNES: Sir, Mr. Gorton said on the eve of the last elections, that
h , e believed 18-year olds would have the vote by the next election.
Will they?
PRIIC MINISTER: Again you're asking me what is a policy decision and I
wouldn't answer a policy decision on a quostinn and -answer sessi~ on,
even though it's as an important a one as the one I'm attending today.
SOLOMON: Sir, are you considering any changes in your Ministry?
PRIME MINISTER: I beg your pardon?
SOLOMON: Are you considering any changes in your ministry or are you
satisfied with the way all of your Ministers have gone?
PRIME MINISTER: I'm very satisfied with my C--abinet and Ministry.
CARLETON: Prime Minister, can I raise a major political issue within
your jurisdiction....
PRIME MINISTER: I hadn't quite finished what I wanted to say to David
Solomon. Would you mind if I just finished it? I'm sorry to keep
saying this to you, but I would like to finish the answer. Leaving
Sir Robert out of it, I think this is probably leaving myself out
of it, too, I think this is probably the best Cabinet I've sat with.
They each have an opportunity to, nresent their views when they want
to, and they do so. They're highly intelligent people and I believe
the decisions they've been making are right, so I'm proud to be a
member of the team, and I'm proud to be able to lead a group of
blokes who .1 think have got a lot of intelligence, and certainly
present their ideas in a very cogent way.
CARLETON: Sir, a major Political issue rIght within your jurisdiction,
and that is the issue of Parliamentary salaries. Now the argument
from yourself and from the Treasurer so often is that the economy
falls down because the unions demand too much by way of wage demands.
Is it not incumbent u. Don you to set a good example next week and not
tdke a salary rise yourself?
17.
PRIME MINISTER: It is incumbent upon us and a very heavy responsibilityto
use my own phrase to show moderation andl to give leadership, and
we will.
BARNES: Sir, when Mr. Whitlam was on this programme, he challenged us
that if ever you were on the programme we'd ask you the same matters
on law reform. May I ask you sir what is your attitude towards
abortion reform?
PRIKE MINISTER: I gave the answer to this question in the House.
Fundamentally this is a State problem and it only concerns us in the
Federal capital and in the territories. I would not give an answer
to this until I had discussed it with my Cabinet and with my Party,
because there are strong differences of opinion there and I would
want to test their views before I'd be prepared to introduce a Bill
into the House, I see no prospect of introducing a Bil. in the House
during this Parliament.
BARNES: But do you have a personal view on the matter sir?
PRIME MINISTER: I have a personal view, yes. I Wkould not express it.
SOLOMON: Does that mean that the prnposed criminal code for the A. C. T.
and the Northern Territory which was tabled in the Parliament in
1969 and which was going to be introduced next year won't come in?
Because it deals with the...
PRIME MINISTER: a question. I did not know about this
pxoposal relating to the Australian Capital Territory. I've not
heard of it before and I can't give you an answer to that question.
As you know I've been the Prime Minister for nine months and if it
was introduced then it was introduced at a time when I was not the
Prime Minister and it didn't come within my jurisdiction as the
Foreign Minister.
BARNES*: Capital punishment is also included in this Bill Sir. The
Committee which set and recommended the Bill declined to make
recommendations on what they saw as policy issues. Capital
punishment, abortion refonmhomosexuality..... . we've dealt
with abortion. Could you tell us your attitude towards capital*
punishment?
PRIME MINISTER: Well I can tell you my attitude towards capital
punishment. I've got a horror of capital punishment. It seems
stringe that I should put it to you in that way but I have, and on
every occasion when the question of capital punishment has come into
the Federal Cabinet, I have expressed my strong, and I believe,
unchangeab-1-view that I don't believ. e in capital punishment. I
don't think it's a practical question therefore because in all the
time that I've been there twenty, twenty-one years whatever it
happens to be the recommendations, if there have been any relating
to capital punishment, have never been agreed to, and consequently no
such recommendations have been made to the Governor-General. I
think it's improbable, highly improbable, that there'd ever be
capital punishment, certainly whilst I'm the Prime Minister, or while
the Liberal-Country Party is in power. .4./ 18
18.
CARL~ ETON: A very very quick question, Mr. McMahon. Will you ever go
on television in a television debate with Mr. Whitlam?
PRIME MINISTER: I'll make up my mind when the circumstances arise.
CARLETON: Prior to the next election?
PRIME MINISTER: I'm not going to.. mnot going, to commit myself
under any circumstances to hypothetical questions, but when I've
previously been with Mr. Whitlam I think most people remember the
results. I've got a phenomonally good memory and know what I'm
talking about.
MOORE: Sir, we began we're nearly to the end of our time we
began this conference by looking ahead to the~ next election, and
tees one issue that some people think may be an issue at the
election that we haven't mentioned yet, and that is immigration,
our immigration policy. Do you see our immigration policy as being
an issue at the next election?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, I do, and a very important issue, and we will not
change our policy, which is based on two seprartate considerations
or three. The first one is that we must be certain that the person
can be integrated into the A11ustralian community, that he has talents
of t"-he kind that we want, and that he will be able to make his
contribution to the development of our country. Now we are not
racist but we are selective in the people that we chcose to comne here.
On the contrary the Labor Party's attitude is one that it believes
that apart from family reunions then there should be a nondiscriminatory
practice with regard to others. Now if this happened,
over sixty per cent of British migrants would be prevented fr-) m
coming; we'd get practically none from Western Germany, from the
Scandinavian countries, or from South American countries; or I think
too, but I'm not absolutely certain of this, from North America. So
their poli& j therefore is one that is dif-ferent to ours in this
sen ' se. We base ours on what we regard as in our best interests, the
best interests of Australia, and consequently we select those that we
think will help uis. Theirs, so far as I ye said. is non-discriminatory,
and consequently you can find people coming in that won't make the
kind of contribution I think they should be in a position to make.
MOORE: Do you believe in a homogeneous Australia?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, I do.
MOORE: And what does that mean to you homogeneous?
PRIME MINISTER: It means integration, it means the people will become
Australian6, and we won't have little enclaves here, and we won't
introduce the kind of problem that other countries have at the moment.
MOORE: Is colour a factor in determining whether the country is
homogeneous?
PRIME MINISTER: No I don't think it is
MOORE: It's irrelevant? ./ 19
19.
PRIME M4INISTER: I'don't think it is, but we want to be certain that
as I said, and I gave this answer before, so I'm really repeating
what I said a few moments ago, we are not racist and I think my
history is enough--to show how well I get on with the Asian and
African people, my great liking for them. But we're not going to
introduce problems here of a kind they have in other parts of the
world.
MOORE: But you also said that colour is not a factor to be taken into
acQount?
PRI14E MINISTER: No, and if you look at our policy, you will find, and
I haven't got the figures readily in my mind, but they've been
mentioned in the House on several occasions, that of course we
introduce, or we allow people of different colours and different
religions and different races to come in here.
BARNES: Sir isn't it racist to allow those people to come here and yet
not pay them assisted passage, and yet to pay assisted passage to
people who are white skinned?
PRIME MINSITER: I don't think that that's got anything to do with the
principles at all. That's the means by which you get them here.
BARNES: But it's a racist discrimination between one another, sir, I would
suggest.
-PRIME, M INISTER: I don't. I think you're playing with words saying that;
merely because you don't give then assisted passages doesn't mean to
say that it's racist. We've got our policy relating to the kind of
people that we'll bring in anA it is non-racist in origin. -The mere
fact as an incident of that we have p~ roblems associated with assisted
pas sages I don't think is relevant. But can I take you a little
further? Shortly the British will be terminating, or giving-an
indication or a clear indication that they will terminate assisted
passages. Now does that mean that because we might not then, if this
comes to fruition, we might not then have assisted passages from the
United Kingdom, does that mean to say we're treating them as racist?
BARNES: No, if white and black are treated the same, sir , I wouldn't
call it racist.
PRI14E MINISTER: Well I can't agree with you, with qreat respect to you.
I don't think it is relevant. The real problem is one, the real
issue is one of what are our principles and policies, and our
principles and policies are the three that I mentioned, and we do
allow coloured people to come in I don't like using the word
coloured pople but we do allow noeple of other race and ! other
colours to come in, and I'd be only too happy to get the figures for
you and let you have them some time tonight.
MOORE: Prime Minister, thank you very much for giving us so much time
on MONDAY CONFERENCE.