33
PRESS BRIEFING
CONCLUSION OF MEETING OF LIBERAL PARTY JOINT
STANDING COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL POLICY 7 APRIL 1972
PM: Gentlemenk' I think you know that over the last few days
there has been some publicity about the meeting of the
Standing Committee on Federal Policy which is that section
of the Organisation, or that Policy Group within the
Organisation, that can make recommendations to the
Government about matters which it feels should be taken
into consideration, and if thought desirable, implemented
by the Government.
Under no circumstances can they do more than put a
recommendation to us and certainly can't tell us what
we should do. And consequently, whatever I say, therefore,
must be considered against that background.
We have had two meetings already: Each one extending over
very nearly two days, that's four days in total.
And we're decided that unlike most-cases in the past, that
it would be wise if I, as the Chairman of the Committee,
gave you a general survey of the kind of subject we
discussed, and how we intend to handle them in the future.
As to the subjects that-we've discussed, there are
about fourteen.
In each case, a paper has been prepared and they've been
particularly well prepared, and have dealt with the subject
in depth, both from a philosophic point of view, and from
the point of view of making concrete recommendations.
Each one of the submission or papers, together with the
recommendations, necessarily have to go to me as the
PRIME Minister, and then on to either the Minister
primarily concerned, or to the Cabinet. In most cases
I think they'll go to the Cabinet.
And subsequent to that they will then be announced
when the decision has been made, as part of the Government
policy. The Standing Committee decided that we should not tryan
hoard acisiong following the recommendations, but
we should be ready at all times to make decisions either
prior to the rising of the House and
announce them prior to the rising of the House, and
during the period of the Budget, or if thought desirable,
to keep the decisions for policies.,
But, as they believe public opinion is best served by
making the decisions at the most appropriate time, they've
recommended to the Government that we shouldn't be hesitant
in letting the public know what we think and why we think
it.
PM: I don't know whether you'd like me to read out the
fourteen subjects to you, but I can do that if you
want it.
Yes please.
PM: There are such matters as the ecnm and which way
we should proceed in ensuring a sensible rate of growth.
Development, defence, foreign affairs, the quality of
life, urban development, immigration, arbitration and
industrial law, the rural of law, national health,
national goals, education, social welfare, and rural
matters. In particular today, we dealt$ with defence, national
goals, education, urban development, and rural matters.
Some of the others have been dealt with before and we
have about three, including social welfare and social
services, that will have to be dealt with the next time
we meet.
And we'll be meeting again on the 21st April.,
I personally believe they* are some of the best papers
that we have had prepared, and they've done by groups
of members of the Liberal Party, drawn from the
Parliamentary Party, including the Cabinet and Ministry,
members of the Organisa~ ion, and the Officials, particularly
the Secretaries, and the Research officer such as Graham
Starr, Federal Secretariat, and Jim Carleton from N. S. W.,
together with today, the new Secretary from Victoria.
There was, I believe, the fullest discussion of these
problems, and I think the range of the subjects indicate
pretty clearly what they see, not only as subjects which
are of great national importance, but subjects that they
believe a politically high in the order of priorities.
And therefore they wanted to drive home their message
of what they think has to be done in order to create
the proper atmosphere and psychology in which we can
start to develope an election programme, an electi-oh
policy. I think that's about all I can say to you as to what's
happened.
IQ. That's all on the record?
PM: All that is on the record.
Q. Did you discuss the national superannuation plan,
and decide to defer it
PM: We had that on the paper to be discussed today,
but we didn't reach it, and it's put down as the first
subject for discussion, amongst other social welfare
matters, for the next meeting of the Standing Committee
on Policy and the Federal Executive immediately after. / 3
3.7/
Q. Sir, most of these things presumably, wil 1 have
to be translated into Government policy. National
goals is a philosophical thing Can you tell -us what
deicisions were made in that area
PM: No, I can't, because for most of them, there are
so many of them, they will, I believe, each one
of them, have to be put to the Government. Because for
the most part they deal with social issues: And social
issues of a kind that are of increasing importance in
a public relations sense, and we did decide that
each one of them would have to go to Cabinet for decision.
Q. ( An you tell us some of the recommendations, Sir
PM: No, I can't.
Q. Sir, what's the objection of the Liberal Party
telling us what their policies are
PM: The reason is, and this one of the other papers
that I wasn't going to mention, showing the differences
between the Liberal and Country Parties and the!
Opposition. The simple fact is that in our case they
can ONLY make a recommendation. They can-do no more,
adastfrere are Ministers present on the Standing
Committee on Federal policy, we don't want to put ourselves
in the position where that Committee can make
recommendations which subsequently might not be accepted
by Cabinet as a whole, or might not be regarded as
satisfactory for the Government, which means the
Coalition Parites.
Q But as the Leader of the Liberal Party, Sir,
don't you feel that the Australian public are entitled
to know what the Liberal Party policy is, before it
gets into power?
PM: No, I do not. I believe that when we are
looking at ' policy decisions, we must look at policy
decisions which mean something, and which will be
carried into effect. It is no use flying a kite wheni
there is a possibility that it might not be accepted,
because I think people want predictability and certainty.
That is the reason why we don't announce the recommendations,
and I emphasise again, they are recommendations,
Q. When will Oabinet consider these recommendations?
PM: I can't tell you yet. We've got so much on our
plate at the moment, and I've got to now convert these
into Cabinet documents. that I couldn't give you. But
we will try and get them out as and when we think it is
appropriate and as soon as we can. / 4
Q. Will it be a matter of weeks or months
PM: I couldn't give you a clue.
Q. At the meeting today, did they discuss the
standing of the Government in the cormmunity
PM: No, they didn't.
Q. Sir to'get an idea of the level on which some
of the discussions took place, to pin you down
the discussion on inimig ration. Did that evolve around
a new immi(; tion policy for the Government, unless you
already have one, or how you can exploit Labor's policy
PM: Mainly, it centered round the paper that was
delivered by the Minister for Immigration, over in
Western Australia, an explanation of what it involved,
and particularly precautions that were necessary that
there could be no possibility of the idea of racism
entering into considerion of our policies.
Q. But this was the speech in which he talked about
racism ? 0
PM: Mfe made it abundantly clear that there was no
racism in our policies.
Q WHich Minister for Immigration, Dr. Forbes
PM: Dr. Forbes.
Q It would appear therefore, that your discussion
on immigration was on status quo. Dr. Forbes did not
put forward any new
PM: I won't go any further than that because now
you are starting to cross-examine me on an aspect that
I'm not prepared to be cross-examined on . I said that
we are here to give you an outline of what happened at
the Standing Committee on Federal Policy, and whatever
whaasd dtoi sguoc ssteod , a wMaisn isdtiesrc usosr edt o onCA btihme-etb, a ckagnrd outnhda t thIa t woiutld
not elaborate fully on those untill the Minister or
Cabinethad considered it.
Q. You'd said it was based on Dr. Forbbs paper......
PM:-' Based upon' is the word I used.
Q. And Dr. Forbes' paper did not advance policy
PM: I didn't say that at all, I eaid ' based upon'.
Q. Sir,-it's been suggested that there will be
a racist tone in the campaign
PM,: There'll be nio racist slant to the campaign in
any shape or form, and no-one, of goodwill and honesty
of intention, can think, if they look at the components
of our immigration programme, that racism can be involved.
Prime Minister, you suggested that the policy
decisions if adopted by the CAbinet, and yourself, would
be spaced out possibly. That is what the Standing
Committee recommended. Do you see that some of these
might be acted upon and brought into Parliament before
the House rises, say on May 25, or thereabouts
PM: I'd be fairly certain that some of them will be
because they want them spaced out, and they want the
people to understand that work is being done now, and
put quickly into -operation so that the people get the
benefit.
Q. That only gives you seven weeks though
PM: Yes, but that's not a bad time.
Q. SIr,-. what justification is there in holding on
to policies until three weeks before the election, at
this stage
PM: I think if you had a great deal of experience of
policy-making and policy speeches, you'd have to accept
that no one has ever gone into an election campaign
without some policy matters. But that doesn't aniswerI
the question. As I put it to you, we will * be making
policy announcements as and when we can, and we will be
trying to do in a pretty regular fashion, and as and when
we ' re in a position to make the policy announcement.
In other words, unless there is something quite precisely
and definitely associated with the policy speech, we'll
make them immediately.
Q. Did you say that to the Policy Committee
PM: Yes.
Q. Could I take you a step further on that one?
PM: Alan, which are you talking about. I've been
putting the point of view that I have for long that
you can't save anything up for the Budget or for a
policy speech. You can't do that. And speaking in a
background way, I've been like a bullocky driving a
bullock team in order to ensure that we do, whenever
we can make a decision, we make it and we announce it,
and this is now generally accepted.
Q. This was a change of attitude? I had the impression
that policy-planning was in fact planning for your policy
speech..
PM: I think you can take it that it is a total change
of policy.
Q. You talked them around you said now ' Let's
get the think out as we arrive at it'
6. 2-3
PM: And it doesn't only apply to background. It
applies to Government as well. another
Q. Sir, I'd like to ask question on imlration
that I hope you can clarify. Dr. Forbes' spe9c; T-h I c h
you said was the basis of this discussion, was interpreted
in the press publicly as an attempt to raise the issue of
Labor opening the flood-gates, and I think Alan wrote a
piece calling it a " grubby little speech". Was today's
discussion aimed at making sure that this approach wasn't
adopted at any Government
PM: I've said that I will go no further because
I said it was the basis on which we started to discuss it;
I'm not going any further until I take the matter back to
Cabinet again and we are definitive on what we're doing.
What I will say is that the basis on which we act is
one that we are not, and never have been, racist, and that's
proved by the number of non-European that we permit to come
into the country, and welcome them. And what can be
recorded, if you wish to call it, the Oppermann concept
which sets out our policy. For the rest, I go no further
because we will be having another good look at this,
particularly with regard to assisted passages, adid then
we'll be able to make a decision.
Q. Did you say numbers of assisted passages for
widening it
PM: Look, I'm not going any further on this. That's
as far as I'll go.
Q. I doh't want to ask about Government policy, but
from what you've said, immigr.-i& ton will not be an
election campaign
PM: I didn't say that, and I don't mean it.
Q. Well, on what grounds would it be a campaign i' 3sue
PM: I will not go any further than I've already gone.
0 Q. PRIME iVIinister, could you tell me why you called
it the loppermann concept" I thought the most recent
change in Government policy was the Snedden concept where
we did in fact step up our intake of non-Europeans
PM. Yes, but the Oppermann concept is the three
conditions on which we accept non-Europeans. But I'm
not going any further on the immigration one.
Q. Could I ask you a question not applying to your
policy, but about I was in Parramatta last night,
and I was shown the Documents had been placed in a
letterbox saying ' If you want a nigger neighbour, vote
Labor'. Do you have any comment on that sort of campaign / 7.
PM I have never seen one. I hope I don't ever see one.
I think it's a disgraceful way of acting.
Q. PM, I realise we are not going any further on
immigration
PM: Look, I'm not going any further
Q. I'd like to decide a point which Mr Reid made,
when he looked up in suprise when you said ' you'd be
looking at this in the context of assisted passage'
Now you mean assisted passage as we accept it now
PM: We'll be looking at this whole question. I go no
further than saying that. I'm not going to be drawn in.
Q. Sir, you've already gone to a point where you've
made it very major. I mean to say, at present the
principle is assisted passages for Euorpeans. The
Government has stated, as a matter of definitive policy,
no assisted passage for non-Euorpean migrants. Now you
are saying you are going to look at assisted passages.
PM: In a different context altogether from the one
you're trying to imply that I'm getting into. We -are
not going to cut down on the number of migrants.
Q. That's the point I want to make clear.
PM: We are not going to cut down on the number.
Q. Will you be putting most of the recommendations
from this meeting through CAbinet yourself?
PM: No, they tjo through the relevant Minister.
Q. Just for historical purposes, Sir, why do you
say the Oppermann concept and not the whole concept
PM: Look, I'm not going any further than that other than
the issue was raised and I was just raising the Oppeimann
concept to explain what our attitude was. And that has
notbeen changed.
Qould we have two more quesi-icns please
PM: Well, look it was a pity that we spent so much time
on o~ ne subject. I
Q. Are you confident that the House will rise as planned
PM: I will make a decision on that because I am not going
to permit the House to rise until we've finished our business.
Q. Does that mean Sir, that you are going to keep to
your three weeks prelimary that no legislation can be
introduced three weeks before the House rises
PM: We will try. -, But I am not going to raise the
House prematurely.
Q. So it's not a fixed rising period
PM: We will try to the best of our capacity we will
try to raise it on that particular date. But if I find
that it's going to be a rush, the House is. not going to
rise,
Q. Sir, could I ask when we might have a general
on-record press conference
PM: You find the time for me.
Q. Well, Sir, in view of the fact that there hasn't
been one this year
PM: Look, I've had a fair amount of exposure. I will
try and give you one. My trouble is how I get lthrough
the work, as I explained to. you when I met you the other
night: The only real difficulty I've got.* 1
Q. Sir, as an alternative, we got a few minutes left,
could we ask you about other subjects now.
PM: No.
Q. Will you make any comment on the last public
opinion poll
PM: No.
Q. Any reason why not Sir
PM: I haven't got to answer every question that is asked.
And you've formed your opinions and I don't want to get
into an argument between yourself and myself.