T1HE PRIME MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE
AT PARLIANEI\ TT HOUSE, CANBERITA
, TUESDAY, 6 FEBRUARY 1973
PRIME MINISTER: Wfell ladies and gentlemen, I have tried to get some
of these conferences in time for the afternoon papers. This is one
of the few occasions when I have been able to do so, but I will have
to rush off because of the Federal Executive resuming at 2 o'clock
and then I am sorry to have kept you waiting I came as quickly as
I could get something to eat after the Cabinet meeting.
First then, the Cabinet decisions:
Senator Wriedt will be making a statement at 5 o'clock or if he
makes it before that it will be embargoed until 5 o'clock concerning
adjustment assistance for rural industries. The embargo is required
because the Premiers have to receive the contents of the Cabinet
decision before they hear it otherwise. It has been announced to the
members of the Agricultural Council who have been meeting with Senator
Wriedt and, of course, Mr. Enderby, the Minister for the Northern
Territory, this morning and yesterday. Senator Wriedt partly
because of the preparations for the Agricultural Council meeting
was unable to prepare by Friday ( which is the closing date for
Cabinet agenda items) proposals for conducting the referehidum on
merino exports. He hopes to have that next Tuesday. He has discussed
it with the State ministers on the Agricultural Council.
There were two Tariff Board reports concerning by-law admissions
by Senator Murphy as Minis-ter for Customs and Excise. There was a
inter-departmental committee set up by the previous Government it
hasn4t met it has been reconstituted and its membership broadened.
It is to have membership from the Prime Minister's Department, Treasury,
Customs and Excise, Overseas Trade and Secondary Industry. It will
cover the whole question of the effect of imports under by-law
exemptions and the effect they have on costs and on protection.
There were seven submissions by Senator Murphy, as Attorney-General
on extradition treaties with Germany, Australia, Italy, Israel, Sweden
and the United States, and amendments to our extradition legislation.
Further details on these matters by-laws and extradition can be
got from Senator Murphy.
There was a submission by Mr. Barnard concerning the use of V. I. P.
aircraft. The present rules were tabled by Senator Drake Brockman
in September 1970. New rules will be tabled when the Parliament sits.
In essence they amplify the old rules in two respects. Firstly, it
will be plain that a V. I. P. aircraft can only be used when there are
not appropriate other commercial forms of transport available. I should
add, that there has been no suggestion that any of the V. I. P.
applications by ministers could have been fulfilled by commercial
aircraft. The other amplification of the rules is, in effect, that if
-2-
members Of a V. I. P'S family other than his wife are sought to be
included the case must be referred to the Prime Minister for
consideration. In the same context, perhaps I should mention that when
the week after next I go on my visit to Indonesia I will be
accompanied by my daughter who, hitherto, has lived with us and is
dependent on us and who was invited by the President to accompany us.
Also, as unofficial members of the party, there will be the President
of the Commonwealth Conciliatiion and Arbitration Commission, Sir
Richard Kirby, and his wife, and Mr. Bruce Grant.
Sir Richard Kirby is coming in the party because he represented
Australia on the Good Officers' Committee in the 1940' s and is
remembered with affection in Indonesia and is visited by any
distinguished Indonesians who come to Australia. And Mr. Bruce Grant,
as you know, has long been interested, academically, in Indonesia and
has written several books on it the first when President Sukarno was
still in office.
It is very likely that you have heard of the matters about
possible Australian representation in Hanoi.' I might therefore state
that the Government's consideration for legal and practical questions
associated with possible Australian representation in Hanoi is nearly
complete. I expect to be instructing officials to seek to start
discussions with the North Vietnamese shortly. We have already informed
a number of neighbouring and associated countries of our intentions.
Once it is clear that the ceasefire has been established and that
there may be a contribution in aid by Australia, we can give further
consideration in the light of requirements the qid requirements of
the countries concerned, the likely contribution from other donors and
North Vietnamese willingness to accept aid.
Gentlemen, those are the only announcements I have to make.
2Sir, why did you move the motion at yesterday's Executive to
congratulate the Cabinet on the prompt and effective steps to control
the price and volume of mineral exports? Was it designed to strengthen
your hand against any Minister, in particular Dr. Patterson, in any
action you might take?
PRIME MINISTER: Proceedings at the Federal Executive of the party are
in the province of the Federal Secretary, Mr. Young, to announce. Hie's
already made statements on this and answered questions about it. The
resolution to which you refer arose out of an agenda item on the
Federal E7xecutive's papers. You mention about Dr. Patterson: at the
Cabinet this morning it was agreed that Mr. Connor and Dr. Patterson
would confer before any further statements were made on the export of
minerals. QSir, the A. L. P. Platform attacks the former Government's refusal
to inform the Parliament and the public of the general purposes and
possible consequences of the joint defence installations and facilities
at Pine Gap and Nurrungar. Will you arrange for the press to have an
unrestricted tour of Pine Gap and Nurrungar so that we may inform at
least the public of the general purposes and possible consequences of
those bases?
-3-
PRIL1E MINISTER: I thank you for quoting what the Party says on this.
You'll notice that we have criticised the former Government's failure
to inform the Parliament and the public. We will be informing the
Parliament and, through it, the public, including the Press.
Q. Mr. 1Whitlam, also quoting the Party Platform which says:
" Australian forces should not be committed overseas except subject to
clear and public international agreement." Will there be such an
agreement covering the logistic force in Singapore?
PRIMCE MINISTER: There is. Gentlemien, there is I'm sure you know an
agreement published in the Australian Treaty series two years ago the
Five Power defence arrangements a summary of them was included in
my Policy Speech, and perhaps I should read that to you.
" Pending neutralisation we will honor the full terms of the
Five Power Arrangements under which Australia agrees to provide
Malaysia and Singapore with personnel, facilities and courses for
training their forces and assistance in operational and technical
matters and the supply of equipment. We will be willing to make similar
arrangements with Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand and Fiji.
The Five Power Arrangements do not require an Australian garrison in
Singapore; the battalion and battery there will not be replaced when
they complete their tour of duty."
I've noticed many references to the Party's policy in this matter.
Therefore, may I quote the relevant passages from the 1971 revision
of the Platform. Many people quote the Platform or resolutions as
they left earl. ier conferences in 1969. I will quote the two passages
which bear upon this subject in the 1971 Platform. First under the
heading of Defence: " A strong defence capability can be further
enhanced by participation in mutual defence arrangements with other
nations in South-East Asia and the Pacific and Indian Ocean areas
consistent with the requirements of the United Nations Charter and the
objectives of existing treaties". And secondly under Foreign Affairs:
" Australian forces should not be committed overseas except subject to
clear and public international agreements."
There is a clear and public international agreement. Under it we
are fulfilling and continuing to fulfil the obligations which the
Party Platform envisages which the Policy Speech reiterated. I'm
surprised that there's been a great number of figures given as to the
number of soldiers that will remain. I was askzed last time whether
there'd be 500 or 600. I said " Yes". That's the total number, and
that's all forces.
Q. Does this include the Air Force?
PRIME MINIJSTEIR: No. Singapore includes the Air Force yes.
Q. Your interpretation of garrison, Sir. A lot of people have
interpreted... J? 1LIN~ E MINISTER: There will be no combat troops -there.
-4-
Q. But a garrison under the strict definition doesn't necessarily
mean combat troops... 500 or 600 people could be termed a garrison.
In your interpretation it's not a garrison?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, yes. These are logistic and other training
matters in the terms of the agreement. I pointed out the agreement
did not refer require the presence of a battalion or a battery. That
is the combatant ones. And they'll be coming out at the end of their
tour of duty and, as I was told in an answer to a question last year:
" 4th Battalion R. A. R. and 106th Field Battery. Both will complete their
tour of duty in Singapore as part of ANZUK force in January 1974."
You might find other relevant matters in this in that answer on the
17th October last.
Q. Was this matter discussed at Cabinet this morning.
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Do you expect it to be discussed tomorrow at the Caucus Meeting?
Do you expect it to be endorsed at the Caucus Meeting?
PRIME . MINISTER: The Caucus ieeting tomorrow is being called under the
Standing Orders as stated in the telegram I despatched summoning the
meeting to discuss projected legislation and, accordingly, Ministers
will be putting to the Caucus the subject matter of legislation which
the Cabinet has asked to be drafted.
Q. Sir, After the battalion comes back in early 1974, will another
battalion go out on location for a month or two or something like that?
PRII ME MINISTER: No.
PRIME MINISTER: There may be training exercises, yes, and that may be
a two-way thing.
Q. But it has not definitely been decided yet?
PRIfME MINISTER: No. Nobody wants to be precise on these things. The
Malaysians, the Singaporeans, the British have rmade no proposals this
way. But, as you know, as we've stated for years we are very happy to
have joint exercises and training and communications and procurement
programs with not only Malaysia and Singapore but with all our neighbours
as I stated in the Policy Speech on the last occasion.
Q. Prime Minister, could you give us a breakdown of the 500 or 600
troops that are going to remain there in Singapore?
PRIME MINISTER: No. No, I can't give that.
Q. Can you tell us, Sir, whether the Five Power Agreement has been
jeopardised in any way by Australian policy?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Q. It hasn't?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Q. The Lord Carrington talks made no difference?
PRIME MINISTER: I had quite a. time with Lord Carrington last Thursday
and last Friday and there was no suggestion of any jeopardy to the
arrangements for all five nations and, of course, I discussed them with
Mr. Kirk two weeks ago, and they suit all five members.
Q. Mr. Whitlan, you said that it was agreed that Mr. Connor and Dr.
Patterson would confer before making statements on the export of minerals.
Was that an agreement reached by the two men, or was it an agreement
made by the Cabinet?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, there was a discussion and they agreed. I've got
no more to say on that.
Q. Does it apply to all exports of minerals or only those that come
from the northern..
PRIME MINISTER: I said the export of minerals.
Q. Why is it necessary for two Ministers to come to that agreement?
Why not just..
PRIME MINISTER: Well I've got no more to say on this.
Q. Sir, would you care to comment on the Queensland Government's decision
to oppose your decision to have the export control of all minerals?
PRIME~ MINISTER: They're entitled to take any action which commends itself
to them. We will of course resist any such claims. I've no doubt we'd
win in the courts.
Q. Sir, just before the election Mr. Brnard suggested that Australia
should seek access to ocean surveillance information gathered by U. S.
satellites and U. S. aircraft in return for America's use of Australian
bases. Has the Government taken this up with the U. S. authorities and,
if so, with what results?
PRIME MINISTER: The Government has. I've not discussed this with
Mr. Barnard.
Q. Sir, since the last press conference, you apparently have received
formal requests for a Premiers Conference. Could you tell us whether
you've given any further consideration to this and whether there will
be a Premiers Conference in February or March?
PRIM4E MINISTER: There will not be a Premiers Conference in February
or March. My general attitude to these matters is that if any variation
is required in the financial arrangements for any particular year
any variation of the formula or of the arrangements made at the regular
Premiers Conference, then it should be backed by a proper submission
that there should bc some headings and some documentation to justify
them. Up to now Premiers Conferences have had an agenda in this area
there's been a one-line entry Commonwealth/ State Financial Relations.
The new Federal Government will require something more explicit than
that. Our general attitude is that there should be proper investigation
-6-
of all Government expenditure which the Commonwealth undertakes or
which it is asked to underwrite. We want to seek advice, and in many
cases we will be making that advice public. Now there have been some
statements that there was a firm undertaking to have a Premiers
Conference this month. There was no such firm undertaking. I was
interested to notice that when Mr. Snedden, who was the Treasurer at
the time, made a comment on this subject a couple of days ago he didn't
assert there was a firm undertaking. lie knew there was not a firm
undertaking. I1 reiterate what I said a week ago: There were proposals
put by all the Premiers in some cases orally in other cases in
writing largely in the context of employment creating work, but
sometimes also in connection with programs which were announced for this
financial year in the Party's Policy Speech. In each of those cases
the Premiers' propositions were examined by the Federal officials.
In each of these cases I have written in reply. Now if there's any
variation, I take the basic proposition that if people can't put a case
in writing, they haven't got a strong case.
Q. Sir, have you received the report of Mr. JusticeMoore on the
inquiry into 13. H. P.? I. Then do you expect you might receive it, and
when you do receive it, when do you think it might be made public?
Finally, are you in a position-yet to tell us the name of the company
which followed B. II. P.' s example with a request for an investigation?
PRIM4E MINISTER: I haven't yet received Mr. Justice Moore's report. I
don't know when I will receive it. I would expect that I would release
it very soon after receiving it. I would obviously want to show it to
the Treasurer and to the Attorney-General because the three of us 0 -ev
up the terms of reference for Mr. Justice Moore. I haven't followed
up whether I can release the name of -the company which did apply, but
without their permission I don't think I could release it.
Q. Mr. Prime Minister, according to Lord Carrington the A~ ustralian
Government has not had time to consider the question of nuclear shio-s
entering Australian ports. ' Then is this likely to be considered, and
what is your attitude?
PRIM IINIST3R: The Government only considers matters which come before
it by way of Cabinet submission and the procedure is for these to be
given to me on the Friday at the latest and then I can list them for
-the next Cabinet on the Tuesday. There's no submission on this subject.
11r. Barnard and I were pretty fully briefed about this matter before
Lord Carrington arrived because we knew that he would be w., anting to
discuss this matter. We are looking at it in the general context of
the safety for Australian ports and the people living near them or using
them as far as nuclear-driven ships naval and mercantile sare
concerned. It's not just ships such as submarines. It's also ships
like the ' Savannah'. I think the " lest Germans also have a nuclearpowered
ship. There is an international agreement concerning nuclearpowered
ships mercantile ships merchant ships. The whole question
is being examined. Ile will of course have in mind the safety of people
living near our ports or coming into them.
* If asked by -the Federal Executive, will you accept the position as
Federal President?
-7-
PRIME MINISTER: I'll wait till I'm asked. I never knew of the
proposition until I read it in today's papers. I'm immensely
flattered at the suggestion, but I would think it could be more
appropriately held by persons other than members of the Parliament and
that it should rotate every couple of years. Look, I haven't been
asked. Q. With the decision of -the New Zealand Rugby Union to go ahead with
the Springbok tour, is our position absolutely unchanged and do you
. see that this might place in jeopardy the Commonwealth Games; and
w ill Australia do anything to help or hinder the actual staging of those
Games? PRIME MINISTE1: There has been no reconsideration sought of the
Government's decision to deny entry or transit to racially selected
sporting teams. I fear that if the New Zealand football authorities
persist and succeed in having a visit by a Spring bok team this will
very seriously truncate the Commonwealth Games which are to be held in
Christchurch later this year. The Australian Government hasn't taken
any steps it's not likely to take any steps to prevent Australians
playing what they like and where they like. I am, however already
asked our missions in all Commonwealth countries to ascertain the
effects of a Spring bok tour of New Zealand on the Commonwealth Games
in New Zealand. It's quite clear that half the Commonwealth countries
would not be able to participate in those Games because half of them
depend on Government assistance to participate. That Government
assistance would be withheld if New Zealand condones the New Zealand
Government doesn't but if New Zealanders appear to condone the
racial discrimination policies which the South African Government
imposes on South African sporting teams representing South Africa, then
there can be no question that the Commonwealth Games will be in peril
and all of us interested in sport or interested in the Commonwealth
will be disadvantaged by the stubbornness of that single section of the
New Zealand population.