PRIME MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE
PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA
TUESDAY, 24 SEPTEMBER 1974
. PRIME MINISTER: Have you any questions?
QUESTION: You have made some grave charges against some of your
colleagues of peddling lies. Do you propose to ask for or seek
their resignation from the Cabinet? If not, do you propose to
continue to lead a ministerial team among which are some
ministers against whom you have made such grave charges?
PRIME MINISTER: I have not made grave charges; I haven't made the
charges that you have just peddled. I was asked a question in
the House about this; I andwered it. Several of ; you were at
the dinner last night and recorded what I said. Play the whole
of it! Nobody at the dinner was under any misapprehension as
to what I meant.
QUESTION: Do you repudiate it?
PRIME MINISTER: I never made the charges.
QUESTION: ' If those charges were not made, certainly there have been
implications that they were. Could you tell us exactly what you
did say in relation to what has been said here today?
PRIME MINISTER: No. I invite you to play the tapn-that you took
of my whole speech. I do not respond here to invitations to pick
and select what I have said or to comment on interpretatiodn* I
don't recall on this or any other matter that any of my colleagues
in or outside the Cabinet have knowingly given false information.
I do believe that there are many people in public life including
the Parliament, as I have said; on both sides, in each House,
front benchears and backbenchers who too readily and-uncritically
accept information which is given to them. They ought to
scrutinise it before spreading it or publicising it. I believe
some of the people that have given the information know it to be
false. They are the people who make the lies. But people ought
to be scrupulous in giving currency to false information. They
ought to check the accuracy of the information.
QUESTION: Have any of your colleagues sought clarification today
of your statement last night?
PRIME MINISTER: No. There were several of them there,. You weren't
there. There were a great number of people invited. Who was
there from my side? There was Mr Connor, there was Sonator
Jim McClelland, there was Mr Anthony, there was SaEnator Cotton,
Mr Gorton.
QUESTION: Could I read an extract from your speech last night?
PRIME MINISTER: No, you won't. No. You have the whole of the text,
haven't you?
QUESTION: Yes, sir.
PRIME MINISTER: Well, play the lot of it. / 2
-2-
QUESTION: Yes, but I
PRIME MINISTER: No, if you don't mind.
QUESTION: This is quoting from you in the House today', if that's
allowed. You indicated that you thought that this Gcvernment would
succumb, admittedly less readily, to the conspiracy br~ uween the
unions and the multinationals. Do you think that this Government....
PRIME MINISTER: I didn't use the word " conspiracy".
QUESTION: Oh well, to the arrangement.
PRIME MINISTER: " Collusion" was the term I used, wasn't it? Yes.
QUESTION: The collusion between the unions and the multinationals.
Do you think your colleagues are about to cave in on the motor
industry?
PRIME MINISTER: I think that some of them, after hearing some pleas
from some particular sections of the motor industry, are likely to
have misgivings about the recommendations of the Industries Assistance
Commission. Anybody who has read the IAC report will know that
there has been a rort at the expense of the Australian consumer in
many aspects of the motor industry. But the whole of the motor
industry is being consulted at this moment; I feel sure there will
be some changes in the proposals that the IAC made.
QUESTION: What arm of Government the AIDC or the Atomic Energy
Commission or what will be responsible for underwriting tlie
new share issue of Mary Kathleen uranium that the governm ent announced
it would do recently but didn't specify the agency? Was this
decision taken through Cabinet? And thirdly, what briefly was the
justification for saving the underwriting cost which was to be borne
by the predominantly foreign-owned CRA from underwriting a venture
which most ' financial commentators see as not very attractive at all?
PRIME MINISTER: The proper minister to ask about what agency will
provide the money would be Mr Connor or Dr Cairns. There are
companies operating in Australia which have obligations to supply
uranium overseas. The Australian Government is, of course,
conscious that such contracts must be honoured. The proposals
which have been made will help those contracts to be honoured. CRA
will be less overseas controlled as a result of the arrangements.
QUESTION: Last night you said, quote, " I have nothing but contempt
PRIME MINISTER: Now, Mr Kelly, I invite any of you to publish
the speech in full but, if you don't mind, I will not respond here
to questions based on some selected pieces of a speech which I am
told took over half an hour.
QUESTION: Can I ask....
PRIME MINISTER: No, not on this.
* QUESTION: Do you retract anything you said last night, Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER: No, of course not. After all, I have invited you to
play the whole of the speech, so I am scarcely retracting anything
I said.
QUESTION: If you know of any people who knowingly giv.-the Government
false information what action can you take or will you take against
these people?
PRIME MINISTER: One is wary of them in future. I would make the
point that people who give exaggerated or false information, that is
misinformation, to the Government are not only lowering themselves
in the eyes of the Government and spoiling their cases for assistance
but, of course, they are wanting the Government to help them take
the public down. All I want ip that the facts should be known.
QUESTION: What action will you take against your colleagues who
promote that false information?
PRIME MINISTER: I have taken it.
QUESTION: Could you tell us what it is?
PRIME MINISTER: The speech last night will make people, I am quite
certain, more careful in checking the sources of the information
they are given.
QUESTION: Can you give us any examples of this misleading information,
how widespread...
PRIME MINISTER: I quoted three last night. I am sorry you weren't
there. QUESTION: Well, for the radio and television audience now, Prime
Minister PRIME MINISTER: No, if you don't mind, you can play the tape.
QUESTION: But that's not much use to the audience who are watching
and listening to this.
PRIME MINISTER: I am sorry they weren't there last night, but on
your radio station you can play the lot.
QUESTION: Last week Senator Willesee, as Foreign minister, released
copies of letters he had sent to Australian companies with
subsidiaries or associates in South Africa suggesting that they should
do several things to upgrade the conditions of black and coloured
employees in South Africa. Has the Government any power at all to
enforce such improvements, and does the Government intend to take
any action to try to enforce improvements or is this just a general
moral exhortation which will probably be ignored?
PRIME MINISTER: We might not have any sanctions against the companies
concerned. They are not breaking any Australian law. There might not
be any law that the Australian Parliament can make about it. They
aren't breaking South African laws. But other countries have, for
some time past, used this method of spurring th6ir subsidiaries the
companies who are domiciled in their countries but who have
subsidiaries in South Africa they have used these methods to spur
-4-
them to improve conditions in South Africa. Particularly the
United States and the United Kingdom have done it; but the
Scandinavians, West Germany and, I think, above all, Canada have
done so. It was time we did it; there has been some improvement
as a result of what the other governments have done. V~ hope there
will be some improvement on the part of subsidiaries ot ,. LiJtralian
companies.
QUESTION: I was thinking specifically of things like exchange
coming back to Australia from these subsidiaries and possible
taxing powers on companies. You had nothing of that sort in mind?
PRIME MINISTER: I would doubt it.
QUESTION: Back to your speech last night. In the course of that
you referred to nervous Nellies in your party on tariff matters.
Could you give us any examples or indicate the areas in which we
might find these nervous Nellies?
PRIME MINISTER: Now, if the tape is played I haven't got a
copy of it you will find that I was not just referring to
nervous Nellies in my party. I said nervous Nellies in public
life, including in the. Parliament, and there were some of them
in my party.'
QUESTION: Well, that was the point I
PRIME MINISTER: Yes. Well, I am not going to specify it, no.
QUESTION: After the Budget last week you made a strong speechdi
in which you said that the Budget laid the groundwork for
co-operation and restraint. Will the policies outlined in that
Budget work if you don't get wage restraint? If not, will you take
action on a different policy?
PRIME MINISTER: The policies in the Budget will obviously work much
more effectively and promptly if there is wage restraint. No
Government in Australia can deal with all these matters which have
to be done in the economy. There are a great number of things
which have to be done by employers, employees and investors and
the Budget would encourage all of them to do some of those things.
It is important for employees to understand that the Government's
policy of restraint in the growth of wages and other incomes doesn't
mean that the Government intends to reduce the purchasing power of
wages. When we use the word " wage restraint" we don't mean that
we mean to reduce the real level of wages or the level of real wages.
What we want to do is to discourage the excessive claims which were
being made and the frequency of those claims. One of the things we
are doing is to help the indexation of wages, the restoration of
automatic, periodic wage adjustments. When this comes about, as
there seems to be a very good chance of it * coming about as a result
of agreements between employers and employees at Mr Justice Moore's
conferences, then there will clearly be less incentive for employeesblue
collarwhite collar employees to make exaggerated claims.
They will know that indexation will maintain the level of their real
income. I am hopeful that the ACTU unions at present meeting in
Sydney will bring about a situation where the overwhelming majority
of trade unions will co-operate with the Government which is pledged
to fight inflation and to minimise unemployment using policy
instruments which will be fair and equitable over the community as
a whole.
QUESTION: Do you think the unemployment caused by tariff cuts has
been serious? What action do you think is needed against it? And
specifically, can I ask you your view on the arrangements between
the Government and the unions to impose quotas on certain'items
made in the announcement last Friday?
PRIME MINISTER: There has been serious unemployment brought about
in some regions. As a result partly of the tariff reduction and
partly as a result of revaluation, and maybe partly as a result of
reducing the excessive liquidity. You ask about restoring tariffs,
is that it? Or imposing quotas?
QUESTION: I was asking specifically about the decision last Friday
to impose quotas on textiles?
PRIME MINISTER: This is from South Korea. Previously you will
remember there were agreements made with Hong Kong, India and
China. Also, since they are not in GATT, restrictions were imposed
on Taiwan. The general emphasis on what we are doing is to maintain
employment, either by giving assistance to those particular textile
factories or to other forms of employment in the regions concerned.
I am not attracted to the idea of imposing quotas all over or
increasing tariffs all over or placing embargoes or refusing to
unload cargoes because these would help areas where help is not
required. There is a problem which we are tackling in certain
non-metropolitan areas.
QUESTION: The situation concerning information coming-to the
Government which prompted you to make those remarks last night.,
do you think that that posed a real threat to the drive for'*
tariff reform which has been one of the features of your Government?
PRIME MINISTER: I very real threat, yes, I do.
QUESTION: Do you think that the threat is silly, and d6 you
accept that you are in the vanguard of your own party in questions
of tariff reform and particularly to the fore of your deputy?
PRIME MINISTER: There is a continuing threat to the rational use
of resources in Australia by the misinformation which is sedulously
peddled by some industries. My deputy and I are in complete
agreement, constant consultation, on all these aspects. There is
no disagreement; there hasn't been; there is most unlikely to be.
But I do believe that the press has some obligation too in letting
the public know the facts. Very often, I regret to say, lobbyists
are able to get their stories in the newspapers, including sometimes
in your own. Now, you are all commendably inquisitive or critical
or cynical about things that elected people say, iuncluding ministers
or the Prime Minster himself. You are quite reightly critical in
these matters but you are not, if I may sa-y so, sufficiently critical
of some of the stories that are giveni to you by lobbyists.
I wohldv e toucjt Lhat the reports of Industries
Assistance Commission, of which the establishment was one of the
triumphs of my Government so far, would illustrate how much the public
are taken down by the rorts which have grown up behind Government
assistance of one form and another. I don't want to see policies
which were taken at an easier economic time reversed or abandoned too
readily. If hardship is being caused to individuals then that
hardship must be alleviated promptly and fully. But there is no
excuse for using the hardship of some communities to impose on the
-6-
whole community for the benefit of some industries in some areas
where no assistance is justified.
I was speaking last night at this Heavy Engineering
Manufacturers dinner and I pointed out that manufacturers, in general
in Australia, should get out of the purely negative, defensive
attitude of saying that their future depends upon Governments
imposing tariffs on competing imports or imposing embargoes or quotas
on competing imports or paying subsidies for certain local products
or allowing taxation deductions for the production of certain local
products. A much more positive way to assist basic industries in
Australia is to have a rational, procurement program by governments.
Now the industries concerned last night were particularly
apt to benefit from rational programs. I pointed out that the heavy
engineering manufacturers depend very greatly on orders coming from
the public sector and my Government has tried, conspicuously in the
transport field, to see that there are forward orders for that
industry. The industry will be much more assisted by, say, a
re-equipment program for the railways or a proper national roads program
or pipeline program or I know this one is more difficult a
shipbuilding program, in all of which government orders are crucial,
sometimes a predominant factor, than those industries will be
assisted by just putting up the price of everything for the Australian
consumer. I believe the message got across there.
Naturally enough I also commended them for the fact that
they do not tender or peddle misinformation. They are an effective
industry association and I think them for the fact that they have
publicly expressed support for some of the policies which my
Government has proposed to help them gain export markets. We still
don't have an export bank in Australia. We are going to establish
one. We still don't have an overseas trading corporation. My
Government is going to establish one. And the Heavy Engineering
Manufacturers have not opposed, in fact they have very often
expressed support for, the expansion of the Australian Industry
Development Corporation, the Pipeline Authority, the Petroleum
and Minerals Authority, the Australian Government Purchasing
Commission. They are a good body, but one's entitled to draw the
contrast. One takes notice of an organisation which collects and
submits accurate information and cogent arguments. By contrast some
other industries ought to understand that if they give misinformation,
not only is the Government less likely to be impressed, but the
public also ought to be alerted.
QUESTION: Do you believe that the strong stand which you are now
taking on tariff protection could prejudice the efforts of your
Government to secure support from the trade union movement for wage
restraint? If you do believe that, are you prepared to modify the
stand you are currently taking?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't believe that anything I've said would be
resented or resisted by most responsible trade union people. After
all, I am certain that trade unions as well as companies and
governments will only have public support if the public is certain
that they are acting on accurate information. The public shouldn't
the government shouldn't blithely accept an imposition on the
taxpayer for the benefit of people who can't make out an accurate,
honest case.
-7-
QUESTION: My question goes back to your earlier comment on wage
indexation. if agreement can be reached with the union movement
on the introduction of wage indexation, would you see n-vrit in the
system of tax indexation which would ensure the cost of -iving
increases granted are not taken away again in higher taxation?
In other words, when the cost of living rises push a worker into a
higher tax scale, can he be sure that the real cost of living
adjustment, the adjustment for inflation, will not be diminished
by higher income tax?
PRIME MINISTER: There are many attractive features about tax
indexation. I was discussing them with Mr van Lennep the Secretary-
General of the OECD about 12 days ago. Mr Crean, however, has
pointed out that it might be better still to have an annual review
of the tax schedule. Tax indexation would preserve the present
ratio of incomes to taxation but it would do nothing to remove the
unfair features of the present scale of the scale which there
was until Mr Crean announced the changes, the firs * t changes for
years in the Budget last Tuesday. So I don't want to discount
the advantages of having tax indexation but I believe to have an
annual review of the tax scales and, as Mr Crean has done for the
first time last Tuesday,' would have advantages in that it would be
more fair.
QUESTION: You said that there were allegations made that somewhere
in the vicinity of 900 people had been laid off in the textile
industry in Launceston. When investigations were made into that it
was shown that only 360 people were being laid off.
PRIME MINISTER: No, 340.
* QUESTION: 340. Well, you said 360 last night.
PRIME MINISTER: I was speaking, you will remember, from memory
of a glance at the report. I have now seen the report again.
QUESTION: So that we may be better informed on the effects of
your tariff decisions, is it possible for that report into Launceston
to be released?
PRIME MINTSTFlR: Mr Cameron soJ-. qht And got. 1% he report. You should
ask him.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, if you can get agreement on indexation
and wage restraint from the union movement would you see any merit
in going again to the people to try to get wage and price control
at a referendum so that that indexation and restraint: could be
imposed both ways?
PRIME MINISTER: As all of you would know quite 1 " ell, i believe 1-he
Australian Parliament ought to have tho ame ai-tliori ty ; avz), . i. aos
with respect to prices and incomes and interest rates that every
n. ther national government has. Nevertheless I have to look at tK-c!
timing of these matters. I expect that after the next meetinq of tht-
Constitutional Convention, which is in the first full we-ek of
': o' 7ember, there will. be agreement between most Governments in
-u. Lc--aif I wouldn't like to forecast that the agreement of the
Queensland Government would be forthcoming on the proposal for
interchange of power which one or tow governm~ ent New South Wales
and there might have been another one too suggested at the
Convention in September last year and which I accepted. Most Premiers,
I believe all Premiers except Bjelke-Petersen and Sir Charles Court,
have accepted the draft which was prepared by the Parli,... e2ntary
draftsman and circulated. There is a very good chance of such a
referendum therefore being endorsed by the leaders of the Governments
or the majority of the Governments in Australia. Also, one ought
to expect that there should be a referendum on say, syncronising,
the two Houses and perhaps abolishing appeals to the Privy Council
and also simplifying the industrial laws. As you remember, the
Constitution says that the Australian Parliament can only pass laws
with respect to conciliation and arbitration for the settlement
of industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of any one State.
It would be very much better if the Parliament had constitutional
power to pass laws with respect to conciliation and arbitration
for the settlement of industrial disputes.
QUESTION: Are you suggesting there that you would hold these
referendums simultaneously?
PRIME MINISTER: I mention a range of ones. Let me see what the
options are.. Clearly one would plan to hold any referendums at
the same time as there was a Senate election.
Gentlemen, I will be seeing some of you within the next
fortnight, I believe, in the South Seas and in North A ' merica.
Perhaps I could give you the expected itinerary. On Friday we will
go to Rarotonga in the Cook Islands where there is a meeting--of
the South Pacific Commission. The Government will be represented
by Mr Morrison and the Parliament by Senators Primmer and Bonner.
I am inviting them to come with me and we will spend the morning
the dateline of course will mean that it will still be Friday
morning with the delegates to the South Pacific Conference. We
will then go to New York for the General Assembly and then to
Washington on Wednesday 2nd October where I will meet President Ford;
on Friday 4 October to Ottawa where I will meet Mr Trudeau; and
I am going back to " meet the Press" in Washington on 6 October.
Then we are going to Fiji, which is celebrating the 100th anniversary
of the cession to Britain. Prince Charles is also attending those
celebrations. It is the first time that a senior ininisLer from
Australia has ever visited Fiji and they have become a bit restive
at that fact. Thert we will. go to Norfolk Island, which Captain Cook
discovered, as far as Europeans are concerned, on 10 October 1774.
So I am looking forward immensely to the company of those distinguished
members of thje gallery whose proprietors have sponsored them.