PRIME MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE
SURFER'S PARADISE
18 NOVEMBER, 1974
PRIME MINISTER: For the benefit of the news persons from the
South, I should introduce you to Mrs. Marian Reed, the candidate
for the Gold Coast State Electorate, and Bill Darcy, the M. L. A.
for Albert. Needless to say, if Queensland's Parliament was
composed on a democratic basis there would be twice as many
members from this area because the electorates are the most
populace in the* State.
One of the refreshing things about visiting Queensland
is that I'm able to read the Queensland papers first, and read
the Southern ones later in the day. I must say that it was
enlightening to read the Sunday Mail yesterday and the Courier
Mail today. A front page box in the Sunday. Mail warned its
readers that Sir Gordon Chalk had admitted wanting to be Premier
instead of Mr. Ejelke-Petersen, his National Party coalition.
partner. What's more he said he'd make a better job of it. This
doesn't surprise me because I've said the same things myself.
Given a choice between the outgoing Premier's obstructionism
and his outgoing Deputy's untried potential for co-operation in
the Askin/ Hamer manner, any Australian Prime Minister would say
it was time for a change. Any sensible Australian Prime Minister
would want that change to be in Perc Tucker's favour. I am
confident that it can be.
It was still interesting to read the interview Sir
Gordon Chalk gave in today's Courier Mail. It just underlined
all those obvious ambitions of the underrepresented Liberals in
the outgoing State Government. And yet, as I said, given a
choice between the two coalition partners I would go for the Liberal
potential for co-operation, rather than the demonstrated Country
Party obstruction. You'll notice that I keep calling it the
Country Party, I can't quite get into the habit of calling it the
National Party. And just when I was getting into the habit over
the weekend, I find that the National Conference of this Party
held in all places in Canberra, the centre itself, decided that it
./ 2
-2-
was going to be the National Country Party.
And then, of course, they also said some kind thin gs
about their Liberal partners in the various State Parliaments.
Perhaps I might draw your attention to the things which Sir
Gordon Chalk said in the Courier Mail this morning. Sir
Gordon, if he were Premier, would not be so rock-hard about:
Canberra. He says: nWe've got to get round the table with these
fellows and see how-many arguments we can win. We've got a
Labor Government in Canberra, we've got to get rid of it, but
we're stuck with it for the time being. We must have a softer
line with Canberra. We have to live with them." And again: ' I've
never been guilty of criticising my Premier, but what worries me
is that, to him, Canberra can do nothing right. -Therehas got to
be something good in Canberra, it just can't be all that bad.
I'm very opposed to Canberra's political philosophy, but if
Queensland and the Commonwealth are to go ahead.-there has to be
some basis for harmony. How to achieve Queensland harmony with
Canberra, I admit I'm not quite sure, but given the opportunity
I feel I might be able to bring about a better understanding."
Now, I might say a couple of local matters here. You
will have noticed that the Regional Employment Development Scheme
is examining proposals which come from local government bodies
to promote employment locally and to do jobs which will have
enduring value. Last Wednesday, at the weekely meeting of the
ministers concerned, they finalised the proposals which came from
the Gold Coast City Council. The Gold Coast -4t~ l Council had put
in avery great number of proposals and of course they all had to
be examined, but nevertheless, we are now able to go ahead with
nine projects amounting in all to about $ 46,000, and I won't read
them out to you, I think it would suit you best if I handed them
out to you. Now the projects which are preferred are those which
will give a great deal of employment. The emphasis is on
-employment rather than just on materials. The Scheme will be
administered by the Southport office of the Commonwealth
Employment Service.. Excluding supervisory and specialist personnel
all labour requirements will be drawn from persons . elegible for
unemployment benefits. In selecting the labour required, preference
will be given to persons with dependents who have been unemployed
a/
-3-
for the longest time. Married persons workin part-ti~ t u on
short-time will not necessarily be disqualified, however, from
employment on projects. All persons employed under the schcm
will be work tested for suitable employment at not less than
monthly intervals and their continued employment on a project
at Australian Government expense will be conditional on there
being no such alternative employment. This will ensure that
projects don't compete for labour with regular employers.
Proposals for projects that may recieve assistance may emminate
from such bodies as Local Government Authorities, Community
Groups, Special Purpose Groups, Business Enterprises, or State
Departments. There's another couple of matters that I might
mention to you. It is unfortunately true that the Gold Coast
area is the least satisfactorily sewered part. in Australia. There's
only 20% of the premises which are sewered, yet it is the most
rapidly growing urban area in Australia. And accordingly it is
one of those areas where a State Government should move quickly
with proposals, because the Australian Government has extended the
whole scheme, the urban sewerage proposals, from the State
capitals to places of the population of the Gold Coast or less.
So that the sooner proposals can be made, by the State Government
and local authorities, the sooner the money can flow. There is
still dispute, of course, as to how to dispose of the effluent.
Now, there can be no question that it is now possible to dispose
of it in the most healthy and satisfactory because the
Australian Government is making that possible.
The concluding thing I want to raise of local interest
is the question of public transport between the Gold Coast and
Brisbane. It is of vourse, now seen to be the folly which we
said it was all along, to discontinue the railway between
Coolangatta and later Southport and Beenlea. I think Sir Gordon
Chalk was the Minister for Transport in 1961 when the line to
Coolangatta was discontinued and in 1964 when the line from
Southport to Beenlea in turn was discontinued. And folly on folly,
of course, they have now sold much of the track. Now the Gold
Coast is easily the largest city in Australia which does not have
/ 4
-4-
public transport by rail with other places. AnOe as I said
earlier, it is the most rapidly growing area in Australia.
So we would be happy as a Government, Federally, to consul~ t
with the State Government on this proposal. There again,
it is something which the Federal Government cannot do on its
own. The Constitution prevents the Federal Parliament building
any railway without the consent of the State Government. And
accordingly, it does require co-operation with a State
Government before this can be done. But it is very clear, that
this distance, this population is ideal for having public transport.
It can be quicker, safer, and cheaper than public transport by
buses and it also provides an alternative for individuals. if they
prefer to go by public transport instead of driving their own
cars. PRIME MINISTER: Are there any questions you would like to ask me.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, after you finished reading the Courier
mail this morning, did you notice * in the National Press reports
that Sir Charles. Court in Western Australian has written to
mining companies telling them that if they accept financial
help from the Government they could not expect to get mining
leases on or off-shore in Western Australia. Do you have any comment
on that?
PRIME MINISTER: I only know what I saw in the paper and it is very
short. I don't want to, I haven't seen any of the letters that
Sir Charles Court wrote, so I'm rather reluctant to comment about
them. -It is quite an " fliin,. -company wih
interests in Australia has to consider the attitude of the
National , Government, because men, materials, money, coming into
Australia, any materials going out of Australia do so under
arrangements made with the Australian Government. State Governments
do not have any authority in those matters. My Government has,
tight from the outset, set out to. see, two things: that there was
an increasing Australian control over natural resources,
including mining resources, and secondly that there was a propor
return on exports of mineral products from Australia. No Statc'
has benefited more from this policy than Queensland.' Alrnady one
hundred million dollars more has been got for export of minerals
from Queensland than would have been got under the arrangements
which were in operation before my Government -3licted.
Butt there's been a review of a very great number of these
contracts and that review will mean that about eighteen hundred
million more available for Queensland exports than would have
been got under the arrangements which were there before we came
in.
You mention also off-shore matters, This is a matter before the
High Court . In our view the attitude which Mr. Gorton' s
Government took and which my Governmenthas taken will be upheld
by the Court and this means that matters off-shore will in fact
be'determined by the Australian Government. Up till now, the
rivalry between State Governments in mineral matters-has been
very much to the disadvantage of the people in the industry,
because State Governments were competing with each other to
provide exports at the very best terms for the overseas
companies. They were cutting each others throats. Now the whole
of Australia, including the States concerned, are benefiting
very much more * from the co-ordinated National approach which
my Government has been able to bring in.
QUJESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, Sir, I announce myself ( unclear),
from Gold Coast Mirror. Now, what the Gold Coast has many records,
and one is that it now has the highest proportion of pensioners
living in its population, of any part of Australia, in fact I
think the figure is 23%. Now in view of the fact that many
pensioners are living on savings that they've accumulated throuc. Out
their lifetime may you tell us, Sir, what exactly is the
position concerning the unearned income tax, that was propose-. 1
in your September budget. Is in fact this tax on thrift tobc
proceeded with and become Federal Law, because I feel it woula be
a very bad move and hitting the people who are defenceless an'-,
least able to help themselves in these times of rapidly rising
inflation?
PRIME MINISTER: If the new law was taken in isolation then-, Lnere:.;
might be that consequence for some retired people. But, of
course, this is not the only piece-of legislation. ' Most of these
people would have had no hope of pensions under the arrangement
-6-
which applied before my Government was elected. My Goverinent
has now made it possible for people who are seventy-five or
mor6 to receive pensions whatever their other income or
property may be. To take an extreme case, a millionaire of
seventy-five, can now get a full-age pension. As from next
April the same will apply to everybody who, is seventy or more,
and then, of course, later on it will be for everybody who is
sixty-five or more. The net result is therefore, that people
of those age groups will get a full pension irrespective of
their incomes or their property. This will be a very great
benefit to everybody who is retired. Furthermore, the age
pension is being increased in its value. When we came in., the
age pension was worth 20% of average weekely earnings; it's now
worth about 24% ' and it's going to be brought up to 25%, so there
can be no question that there will be indexation of pensions.
we are determined that people who are least able to bear the
consequences of inflation,-will be given every assistance to
maintain their standard of living. That obviously includes pensions.
QUESTION: Yes * Sir, with due respect, Sir, I fully appreciate
that situation, but I did ask what is the position of the
proposal to tax, to put an unearned income tax on unearned
income that many pensioners are now living on and will continue
to live on, because life savings have arrived at out of taxed
income. Now, you did say there would be a 10% surcharge, in
effect, on unearned income, which must come from bank deposits and...
PRIME MINISTER: Over' certain income, yes. People don't keep
bank deposits on incomes effected because they don't get anything
for bank deposits, savings bank deposits of those amounts. No,
our attitude is it's a perfectly reasonable attitude that people
shouldn't have to pay so much tax on what they earn, as they
should pay on what they don't earn. But, the proposal is, of
course, going ahead.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, in the press this morning there
was a report to the effect that you said that you were havia,.
just as much trouble as John Gorton in getting the Queenslnz-
Government to update its aboriginal policies. Could you tell
us,, Sir, why you don't put into effect the powers you had under
the 1967 referendum to legislate?
I,
-7-
PRIME MINSISTER: Well, we are going to do so. We have, of
course, being trying to do these things by negotiation wi-' i. the
States. It's clear that negotiations are useless with the
type of Government Queensland's had up to this stage. We
haven't had to bring in such legislation with respect to any
of the other States. New South Wales, Victoria, and now
Western Australia, no the other order, but all those three Liberal
States have made agreements with the Australian Government with
respect to Aboriginal rights. There has been no difficulty at all,
no legislation was needed therefore, but negotiations have not
succeeded with the Queensland Government. So, I think we might
have to resort to legislation there.
QUESTION: Frank Holmes, ( unclear), Mr. Prime Minister. The
State Government providea the Gold Coast City Council with a
subsidy towards beach restoration as an aid to tourism.
Your Government hasn't ( unclear) this, is it likely to introduce
similiar aid in future?
PRIME MINISTER: There would have to be a very much more persuasive
case than hitherto has been put. The fact is that you can't expect
the taxpayers as a whole to come in and compensate Councils for
their own follies. The beach along here has been eroded because
people have built on sand-dunes. That is not the fault of the
Australian Government.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, your opening comments with Sir Gordc.--
Chalk, in dealing with him up to now, how have you found him as
Deputy Premier and Treasurer?
PRIME MINISTER: In a personal way, he's a very good comnz-. anion
As you'd all know. Nevertheless, he is saddled with the attitude
o~ f the outgoing Premier.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, you hold up Mr. Hamer, Victoria,
as one of the co-operative members. Does it disappoint you that
Mr. Hamer has rejected your application to allow the Evert Royal
Commission to deal directly with Victorian agencies. As I understand
it Mr. Hamer has now written back to you'saying, no the
Commission will have to deal through the Premier.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, I thought he was rather defencive about
the matter. As you know hewever, this is not necessarily my .( 8
-8-
request or my initiative. It was an initiativa taken by'-i.
Parliament, the private members on both sides. I think
mover was a Liberal private member, and the seconder was one
of the Labor private members, and the motion was carried on a
non-Party vote, that there. should be a Royal Commission
composed of, I forget how many it said, but it was to be
several Royal Commissioners. It was not to be a sole Royal
Commission. This was carried last year, I think it was, and
accordingly it's a Parliamentary initiative. Under those
circumstances, the Government should try to carry out what the
Parliament has resolved so it's, but only a Government, of
course can appoint a Royal Commission, only the Government can
advise the Governor-General. So this Royal Commission c omposed . of
Justice Elizabeth Evert, and Archbishop Felix Arnott, and Mrs.
Anne Deveson, has been established by the Government because the
House of Representatives passed the resolution that there should
be such a Royal Commission. In those circumstances, I would have
thought that Premier Hamer could have been a bit more forthcoming.
It~ s not however, a Government matter.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Bjelke-Petersen opened his
Government's campaign at Southport. You are here today, Mr.
Bjelke-Petersen * is back here tomorrow. Therefore the camlpaign
for the seat of Albert appears to have developed into something
of a personality leadership matter. Do you think that mig'It be
reflected in the ballor boxes. Do you hope it wii be?
PRIME MINISTER: Oh, I don't think the resul in Albert will
depend on the particular leaders alone, I suppose that has
some impact, naturally. But, I think it will turn on the member.
Bill Darcy has worked here, his wife has to, for very many years,
and he was a very well known sporting figure and public figure
before he was elected to the Parliament. He did very well, you'll
remember on the old boundaries at a bi-election in 1970, and he
got in at the last general election in-1972. And he's worked
very well for the electorate. I would have no doubt that we'll
retain Albert. His services deserve his return.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, could you tell us why Australia
voted to expell'South Africa from the United Nations?
PRIME MINISTER: Because, South Africa was incorrigible. South
-9-
Africa had defied the United Nations for years . ci she was
not in the least contrite and in those circ7umstncs, like
nearly everybody else, we voted in the Security Council as
we did. Your not quite correct to say that we voted for
expulsion, because that is not the Security Council's job,
but we did vote in the Security Council, for a recommendation
to the General Assembly which does it.
QUESTION: On that question, Sir, it looks now as though
South Africa is going to resign. It appears very likely. If
that happens and she's no longer a member of the United Nations
would your Government ( unclear) continue reciprocal trade at the
level at which it's been going on?
PRIME MINISTER: We willcarry on trade with South Africa on the
condition that the world itself accepts for that trade. We no
longer officially promote trade with South Africa, as you know,
but a very great number of other countries, significant countries,
still do. And of course it would therefore, be quite ineffective
for Australia, by herself, to just ban trade. But at any rate,
there are no international arrangements for banning trade with
South Africa We are urging companies with headquarters in
Australia, which have subsidiaries in South Africa, to improve
the condition of their African employees. We're following the
p:, actice there of the United States and Britain.
QUESTION: When can we expect pensions to reach 25% of average
weekly earnings and how will yon thienhold th: t re ( unclear)?
PRIME MINISTER: I would expect it to reach that nex-. t yea-, itvery
nearly did when they were put up, I think it was about
24 at the time when they were put up in July, wasn't it.. and i
took effect from August; wasn't it, and they will he main-. ained
there in accordance with the undertaking I gave on behalf of the
Party when it was elected to Government, at six monthly intervals.
Every Spring and Autumn.
QUESTION: Will this be by Government decision or by ( unclear)
indexation, Sir?
PRIME MINISTER: I'm not sure. / 1O
QUESTION: Prime Minister, this area has one of the highest
registered levels of unemployment. Do you believe that there
is still a need for further measures to support those recently
announced to reactivate the economy?
PRIME MINISTER: Let me see how these are working. Did you
notice the full-page advertisement by General Motors-Holden
today. I think that is typical of the attitude which business
will now take Get on with the job. I commend it to you.
QUESTION: Mr. Whitlam, there was a report in this morning's
paper by an opposition spokesman that there will be 350,000
unemployed by next February. What's your comments on that?
PRIME MINISTER: I wouldn't comment on that.
QUESTION: Yesterday you said you used every Constitutional power..
PRIME MINISTER: It takes a few months for anything that you do
to have its full effect. We have acted in the ways in which we
think will have, the quickest effect, but there's no doubt that
the general period December, January, February, are those when
traditionally unemployment figures, the number of people seeking
jobs, is greatest.
QUESTION: Sir, does that mean that you should have acted a few
. months earlier?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't think anybody knew the figures would be
so bad as they were revealed on Friday week. Nobody.
QUESTION: Not' even Mr. Cameron who says that he was predicting
it at the beginning of this year?
PRIME MINISTER: There were no figures to justify what Mr.
Cameron was saying at that time.
QUESTION: What's going to happen if there is 350,000 unemployed
people... PRIME MINISTER: Well, look let's see... 71l
-11-
QUESTION: Mr. Whitlam, Sir, last-week Mr. Hawke said the whole
world was heading for tremendous economicrecession. Everyone
is~ entitled to their own view. Do you believe that Australia
with its unrivalved natural resources, in fact Australia, to
coin a phrase, could in fact be the ' white Arabs', but won't
adopt the same tactics, as you've made quite clear. Do you
believe that this continent and this country could well pull
out of any difficulties faster than most countries in the world?
PRIME MINISTER: We're going through a terribly difficult period.
All the countries like us. The most difficult period for forty
years. For more than forty years. And while it's true, as you
say, that Australia has very great natural resources, Australia
is still a very great trading country. It's no-use having all
the cattle and minerals we have if-we can't sell them. And
-you just can't, no trading country can isolate itself, there's very
few countries, there's no developed country whi~ ch is a bigger
trading country than Australia. And accordingly, it's impossible
for us to isolate ourselves from what's happening with the
three great groups with which we have most of our trade,'-Japan,
Unites States and Western Europe. Three-quarters of our trade
is with those three big blocks and they've all got the same
troubles as we-have.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, This may be an unpolitical
question... ( unclear)
PRIME MINISTER: In the event which you speculate abou~ t,
I would be optimistic that the vote in Queensland for the Australian
Labor Party Will be such as to make even MrX. Bjelke-Petersen
realise that there's nothing to be gained by continued
obstruction. That he might as well get into step with all the
Premiers.. I'm not saying that the Liberal Premiers are very fond
of the Australian Government, but at least they are prepared to
co-operate on the basic things which we've initiated. There's
been no trouble, well., there was some delay, but nevertheless,
you now have the necessary framework-of co-operation with the
other Premiers. Take this area where we're meeting n. ow, the
Morton distrc-. When we came in, we said to the Queensland
Government that we were anxious to co-operate with them in
-12-
developing three regional areas: the Moreton recaion, theritr
region, you know, Capricorn from Rockhampton and so on, and the
Townsville region. We've been unable to make arrangements with
Queensland on any of those three regions. In every other State
we are already far advanced with arrangements, and in many cases,
Albury-Wodonga being the outstanding one, the arrangements have
been put in legislation by the three Parliaments concerned.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, could you tell me if it's a fact
that Commonwealth Police recently had to investigate a note from
the boys of the Southport School which contained a threat to your
life? PRIME MINISTER: I didn't know about it.
QUESTION: Your secretary does.
PRIME MINISTER: Well, he hadn't told me. There-are two things.
Anybody in my position must be getting such threats. I don't
see them. And the other thing is, nobody publicises those
things because it, somebody else will get the bright idea.
Nobody in my position publicises these things.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, there was a demonstration on . Saturday
at. your meeting by unemployed people, and there's another one
outside today. I understand from reports that you can expect the
same tonight. Are these demonstrations helping to ( uncl~ ear) your
mind on questions of unemployment?
PRIME MINISTER: They are very helpful indeed. They came, the
ones up in Brisbane had driven up in buses from the South Co,. st,
the same bus is outside now About unemployment, of cours(',
the amazing thing is that the State Government usced to pay
unemployment benefits. I think there was provision for two and
a half million wasn't there. Now, they've cut them out.
QUESTION: Mr. PriJme Minister, your laughter doesn't indicate
your laughing at unemployment.. your laughing-. at the demonstrators...
PRIME MINISTER: Of course not. I have nothing but contempt
for those people that exploit these particularly where supporters
of a Premier whose discontinued arrangements for unemployment ./ 13
-13-
benefits which ha-e been made by his State for vcory many years,
as far hack as one can remember. At this tinmc!, of all timies,
he goes and discontinues the arrangements,~ 1 think that'--
contemptible. QUESTION: Prime Minister, this is probably the first timo in
some months that you've mixed so much with ordinarv electors
-iat's riet.: the iaif; ion fiom t'le rt~
h side, ilvitsl o. rJ.. I sed by the d f P9ri. ties. Yu1r
t-. iks to t;, Pc puk;, ic thoughr?
PRIME MINI, ; iER: Well, I just can't copj with tlh,-hospitality
that's be~~ thrust upon me in the places. No, I, as always
I get a veiv cordial reception in Queenslanil, atter all ther s
no Southern politician who knows it so well. Ne-er has en
and I would think that I would be better receivt.-.-1 all ovte. r
Queensland than Mr. rDjelke-Petersen or Sir Gordon Chalk in
some places, either might get a more cordial recoption than I
would. But on average, I'd beat them hands down.