PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT 4 JUNE 1979
PRIME MINISTER INTERVIEWED: RADIO STATION 2EA, SYDNE-Y z-
( SPECIAL BROADCASTING SERVICE)
Question-I'm sure you realise it is an honour for the Special Broadcasting
Service to have the Prime Minister of Australia to interview
and of course it is a great pleasure for me personally.
No doubt the world is going through a period of hardship and
economic crisis. Each country more and more comes to the point of
view that something more is needed a vision, a philosophy.
A country without an ideal is surely stranded. President Roosevelt
gave the Americans a New Deal in the Twenties to take them out
of their crisis. Kennedy ushered in the New Frontier. What
does today's Australia have?
Prime Minister
I think Australia is looking forward to the 1980' s now, with a
very great deal of confidence. We went through a period where
people felt that Governments could do everything; that you only
had to ask and Government could provide. I think we now know that
that is not really true, because what we have in Australia is
what we all you and I and everyone else makes of it. Therefore,
it is a question of defining what Governments ought to do and
what people ought to do for themselves. Quite clearly, for those
who are disadvantaged,' in special need, Governments have a
responsibility, but communities often do too. I think in Australia
we have, in a sense, a working out of what Government can do,
must do, and then what the community ought to do, what
individuals ought to expect to do for themselves. I think this
lies behind, in my view, a vision of Australia where people are
independent; they go their own way; where we are building a
different and a better society as a result of the great
migration of the post-war era. Australia can never return to
the sort of country it was in the 1930' s. I don't think we would
want it to, because then it maybe a somewhat narrow, somewhat
insular, Anglo-Saxon society. Now we are certainly not that.
Our culture has been enormously broadened. Our material
well-being has been greatly strengthened by tens, indeed hundreds
of thousands, of people who have come to us from Greece and from
Italy and nearly every country around the world. I think the
vision for Australia is a determination by all of us to make
this a good country,% a better country to bring up a family, but
to make it above all an example to the world of what a free
people can achieve.
Question Australia suffers from the tyranny of the distance. Isolation
is a major handicap in everything, from importing new ideas
to exporting Australia, whether it is ideas or products.
Shouldn't the Government revard air transport as a community
service that should be subsidised in some way? / 2
2EA 2-
Prime Minister
I don't really think so. We are, of course negotiating, and
have been very successfully, to get cheap air fares especially
in the off-peak periods between Australia and a number of ports
overseas. I think this is especially important, again, for
a number of new settlers who have their friends and relatives
in countries in Europe. I'm glad to see that the cheap airfare
policy is becoming widely accepted. It is certainly
attracting a great number of adherents tens of thousands of
people are buying their tickets and I think it will do a very
great deal to enable family reunions to take place and for people
to meet their old friends. This is really bringing international
travel within the reach of all Australians but it is doing it in
a way that is still commercial. It's giving us the advantages
of cheap air fares but doing it in a way that isn't subsidised.
When you say ' shouldn't the Government do something about this'.
you are not really asking the Government to do it, they asking
us to take some funds from all taxpayers to get them to do it,
because if we say we are going to fund something we have to take
the funds from your taxes and everyone else's taxes. I think we
need to use greater discretion in the way Governments spend
taxpayer's dollars than sometimes we have in the past.
Question The same effects of distance and isolation apply internally
as well.
Prime Minister
Oh yes, they do.
Question Fares and costs are going up and isolating Australians from
each other and now it's cheaper to fly excursion. from Sydney to
London than to Perth.
Prime Minister
I don't know about the excursion rates, but that wouldn't apply
for other rates. took out some comparisons of fares across
the United States the other day, and say, from London to Moscow,
and the internal fares have all been much higher not just in
Australia also in other places than the international fares.
Part of this is the responsibility on domestic airlines to
country towns, small centres,. places where you don't
get much traffic but where-the service is terribly important.
I think to an extent therefore, that the airlines probably
equalise out--the general charges--but they do recognise a very
real responsibility not just to service Melbourne and Sydney
and Sydney and Perth, but also to service the country areas.
I think your question recognises the importance of that. It is
expensive, but on the other hand I think people are now travelling
around Australia more than they ever have. only this morning
I had 30 children to breakfast at the Lodge and they came from
Ingham, from Townsville, from Perth and Darwin, from Alice Springs,
/ 3
2-E-3 -
Prime Minister ( continued)
Tasmania, Sydney, Kirribilli, they came from all over.
years ago I don't think anyone lthis was something as
part of the International Year of the Child but 20 years
ago people would have just said ' it's too difficult, travel
takes too much time, air transport is too unreliable' and
it wouldn't have happened. Now people are moving around,
I think much much more than they ever have, and I think it is
a good thing that they do.
Question The recent mini-budget abolished the 40 percent Commonwealth
subsidy for medical charges and increased hospital charges.
Do you agree with the general opinion that the new system
inevitably hits people on the lower income scales, particularly
migrants? Prime Minister
No, I don't think so, not at all, because the average hospital
charge in State hospitals now is about $ 150 a day and the charge
is going to be much less than that. It's in many cases won't
be over half the actual cost, again, to the taxpayer. It's a
question therefore how much of the health charge should come out
of your own pocket or from insurance and how much should come
from taxpayer's funds generally. Now, it ought to be noted I think
that pensioners are protected through bulk-billing arrangements
and disadvantaged people are also protected through bulk-billing
arrangements that have been specially made with the medical
profession. If it wasn't for those two protections I would have
agreed with you that lower income people would be hit, but those
two things protect lower income people. As for the rest, we've
basically said in relation to the taking 40 percent off, people
can pay the smaller bills themselves or insure. It's their
choice, your choice and mine, but for the large bills, the
calamatous bills that could destroy the financial capacity of
a person or of a family, there is the complete protection there
for each procedure no charge will be more than $ 20 because
anything above that, whether it $ 1,000 or whatever, the Government
will pay. One of the things I think it is around about
percent of everyone is insured in one sense. I would like
once befor-e in earlier times the percentage insured was over
percent. I hope that what we've done will encourage more
people to insure because I think when you do this it helps people
to be aware of what the cost of services are and in some parts
of the medical profession in pathology and hospital not in
the treatment given . patients so much but in the way the hospitals
are run there has been enormous extravagance and waste. There
are many hospitals in Australia that have only got a 60 percent or
percent bed occupancy but they are manned for 100 percent.
Again, we've got to make sure that everyone has the best health
care which we can devise but I think we've also got a responsibility
to do it in a way which protects the revenue and which is
economical. People also want lower taxes. I've heard a bit about
that over the last few days. We certainly aren't going to / 4
2EA
2EA -4-
Prime Minister ( continued)
be able to meet that sort of wish for lower taxes unless
the Government funds we spend, whether it is on education or
hospitals, is spent efficiently and economically. I think that
is what we are after.
Question It has been repeatedly claimed that the present method of
selecting migrants stresses three main factors: ability to
speak English, the profession of professional qualifications
recognised in Australia and the need to have capital. In other
words, a new concept of immigration that discrimates against
traditional immigration, the policy of open door for poor people,
unwanted, oppressed and so on. What is your view on this?
Prime Minister-
I don't think the new policy is designed to do this. Certainly,
of course, we place very high priority on family reunion, which
w asn't really mentioned amongst the three criteria and personally
I would place a higher priority on that because I think it is
almost than anything else. I think it is very difficult if
people have got their families partly here and partly half way
' run the world. But at the moment, as you know, we do face
employment problems and it would be difficult to sustain the kind
of open door policy we might have had in the 1950s and
without achieving a better employment position in Australia. If
we tried to have an open door policy now, with a significant number
of people in Australia unemployed, I think that we would get a
lot of opposition from the trade union movement and basically
the thrust of Australia's immigration policy has had support from
all political parties. I want to make sure it stays that way.
We are trying to increase the number coming in a bit and we want
to go on doing that. I think one of the tragedies was winding
down the migration programme when other things were running down,
and that tended to make people contract and I think it contributed
to the recession. But, building it up slowly, maintaining support,
giving high priority to family reunion, then I think those other
areas are given weight at the moment largely because of the
economic circumstances in Australia. Nothing will suit me more
when we get bac k . to the position in which there can be a freer
flow of miaratioi to this country once again.
Question The Ga-lbally Re port recommended that the. Committee on Overseas
Professional Qualifications-should also investigate and advise
on the sub-professional and technical qualifications. This is an
area that applies to thousands of old migrants. Has the
Galbally recommendation been implemented?
Prime Minister
We've been doing a good deal of work through, in, the industrial
relations arena because this gets into the question of trade
union acceptance of overseas qualifications quite apart from the
fact of whether the training is adequate, because if the trade
2EA Prime Minister ( continued)
and training arrangements that have been introduced overseas
the Government can accept them but if the trade union doesn't
then there is going to be industrial trouble all around the place.
There has been a great deal of patient work going on, not only
since Galbally, but on a continuous basis, and Tony Street's
Department has been very much involved in this and Employment
and Youth Affairs is also involved. We are trying to get to a
situation where there can be greater acceptance of overseas
qualifications. But it is not just a question of a Government
decision, it is not just a question of coming to a decision by
Government~ that a particular trade qualification is adequate, it is
also a question of bringing the trade union movement along with us.
Therefore, we have been working through tripartite groups involving
employers, employees and Government. I think the process and
the progress in these areas is often much too slow, but I think that
also appreciating the number of these areas where particular
trade groups have a position which has been built up over the years,
they are concerned that it is not going to be too much or too
rapidly broken down. They feel an obligation to preserve the
position of their existing members, people who have gained their
skills in Australia. That attitude has to be broken down. I think
progress is being made but again, not as much as the Government
would like.
Ques-tion
It's a general situation.
Prime Minister
It is a question of bringing people along in agreement because
if we brought in people who have'skilled trades from Europe and
then we find that the local trade union movement won't accept those
skills, or for that matter the employers won't accept, then they
won't be able to apply their skills in Australia or if they try
to, it could lead to significant industrial dispute. So that is
not really the way to go about it.
Question Another recommendation on the Galbally Report is the one to
give all migrants equal voting rights. What action has the
Fra=-= er Government taken so far in this regard?
Prime Minister
The Government is looking at this now, and I know the Minister for
Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has given a great deal of attention
to it. It is a difficult and a sensitive issue because, as you
would understand, even though Australia has changed very greatly
the earlier links with the United Kingdom are obviously much
closer than links with other countries. That was so for many
Australians and that is a fact of life. The question really is
as to whether any residual element of that ought to remain in the
recognition in relation to voting rights, whether all people should
be put on an equal footing. It is possible, because of Australia's
historic development, to have a legitimate argument both ways I think,
/ 6
2EA -6-
Prime Minister ( continued)
but the Minister for Immigration has been giving a lot of
attention to it and the matter will be before the Government
fairly shortly.
Question Normally we say that we can vote for local Governments because
we are taxpayers. Shouldn't the same principle apply at State
and Federal level, being a taxpayer?
Prime Minister-
I think a good deal can be said for people being citizens in
the full sense. Being an Australian citizen and being able to
vote in State and Federal elections I don't know that it comes
merely as a right because somebody lives in Australia. I think
if a person does want to live here and if they want to participate
in our own democratic processes, if they really want to contribute
to Australia, then it is fair enough to take out Australian
citizenship and to -become an Australian in the full sense of the
term and really embrace this country. So I am not really in favour
of something which just gives a person the vote just because they
happen to be in Australia. I think a demonstration is needed
on the part of the citizen that they are taking their living in
Australia seriously, that this is really where they want to live.
You could take an absurd position with somebody who is a traveller
around the world and if you did it really on residence, and let's
say there was a residential qualification of 12 months or something,
he could one election be voting in Australia, another election voting
in Canada, another election voting in Europe, but having no real
home anywhere. That just demonstrates part of the difficulty
I have with residential qualifications.
Question Do you think the refugees flow should be totally absorbed by
the ' Lew traditional countries of immigration which are obviously
underpopulated and richer in terms of economic resources, like
Australia, or should the whole Western world accept the
responsibility? Prime Minister
I think for a major refugee problem, the whole world has got
a responsibility. We've been trying to internationalise the
refugee problem from South East Asia. It is very difficult because
apa-rt from America, Canada, Australia, and France, maybe one or
two others, there are very few countries that are showing any
interest at all. They are saying ' look, this is a problem remote
from us, we are not really involved in it so we are not going to
contribute to its solution'. Now, that makes it difficult because
Vietnam has been actively promoting the export of its own
citizens. There are some signs that on a Government basis they
are again moving forward to encourage people to leave, to pay
the Vietnamese Government for the privilege and therefore the
/ 7
7-
Prime Minister ( continued)
numbers could be very large. Generally in a refugee situation
governments have tried to prevent people leaving. We know the
great exodus from Eastern Europe to the West and across to Berlin
and the construction of the Berlin wall. Four million people or
more ( inaudible) to get but of Eastern Europe. But there people
East European countries Soviet Union was trying to prevent
the exodus. Vietnam has adopted a different approach and if
people don't like their regime well" go as quickly as you can fellow".
That carries the possibility of very very large numbers being
involved, which would obviously cause great difficulty for
Indonesia and South East Asia and for Australia. We are very
grateful for the assistance and help and the attitude being taken
by South East Asian countries. I think Indonesia in particular
has helped stop people landing unheralded and unannounced the way
the boat people on the northern coast. They don't stop all the
boats but they stop some of them, I think most. So in our own
region we have a good deal of cooperation but we don't have the
international concern which I believe the size of the problem
demands. Question
According to official figures in Australia, there are about
50,000 illegal migrants. It is practically impossible to deport
all of them I suppose. Wold' it be better to let them
legalise their position, after all they would become 50,000
taxpayers as well?
Prime Minister
For all I know, they might already be paying taxes. I hope some
of them are. But, there are two problems with this. It is not
a simple question. We had one amnesty and people could have come
forward. Quite a large number did; not as many as we had hoped.
If you are going to have another amnesty people will say " oh well,
there will be another amnesty and another and another" and
in a sense therefore illegal migration would be encouraged. Now,
secondly, if illegal migrants are going to be enabled to stay in
Australia by one means or another, that in my view acts against
the interests of * t hose who seek to migrate in the normal way; who
put their name down and within the system. They go on a waiting
list-because they recognise we can't have everyone at once. I think
we've got to protect the rights of those who want to do it the
normal way, because if you are going to accept all the illegal
migrants it will greatly reduce the number who could come in and
who do wait and go through the normal-processes. When people
come here on a visitor's visa wanting to try and stay and they
do it because " we can get to Australia quickly on a visitor's visa"
I know quite well that you get some difficult cases, in a sense
heartbreak cases by applying a policy rigidly but I think a
Government is in a dilemma. There is a policy. Those who are from
other countries who are sticking to the policy and wait their
turn to come here need to be protected. Their interests won't be
if we make it too easy for those who come here illegally. Again,
a lot of the problem I think gets back to economic circumstances.
If we had greater employment prospects well then we would be
/ 8
-8-
Prime Minister ( continued)
delighted for more people to come. The waiting lists would be
less and I suppose there wouldn't be the pressure on illegal
immigration.
Question A specific question on Radio Station 2EA. With the present set-up, th
41 different language groups we are covering for have not enough
broadcasting time and not everyone enjoys prime listening time.
The Federal Government has already made money available for
a new and more powerful transmitter which will start operating
as from July, the next. Also in July 2EA will have a different
frequency. Our problems could be solved, I suppose, retaining the
present frequency and transmitter together with the new one.
It has been estimated that the extra cost would be almost
irrelevant. Could we have some comment on this?
Prime Minister
I'm not sure that the Treasurer would say that the extra cost
would be irrelevant, but what you are really saying since there
is going to be a new and more powerful transmitter, can't you keep
the old one so you will have two transmitters, and there will be
two ethnic radios.
Question No actually. Just two frequencies which will give us more
time to distribute, to allocate, to these language groups we have,
particularly prime time, because some of them are suffering
from the sort of...
Prime Minister
I would be happy to take that up with the Minister for Post
and Telecommunications. There are already inquiries launched
about that because I was asked that same question at an ethnic
press conference that I had in Sydney a little while ago, but I
will make sure that I get an answer as quickly as possible.
Question Don't you find it is ironic that despite the fact that most
migrants come from Europe, Australia is having problems entering
into trade with the European Economic market?
Prime Minister-
I think it find it very odd indeed. If there are any ways in
which migrants can bring some pressure to bear on their
home governments within the European Economic Community I would
be delighted, because we have had a very difficult time. But a
few days ago we did initial an agreement with the European
Community on trade matters which doesn't give Australia great
access but it does open the door a little bit. We get better
provision for a number of commodities and a more secure provision.
Also, I believe, the cost of the Common Agricultural Policy is
9
A 4 -9-
Prime Minister ( continued)
going to break the European Community. It's almost unbelievable
that now they spend $ 25 billion a year on either export
subsidies or wage subsidies supporting particular industries.
That's almost an inconceivable amount in Australia's terms.
We've been arguing very vigorously for better access, as you know,
over the last three years. We do this because we were a
traditional supplier to Europe. It is a very large trading group.
We do have many economic and social links with Europe. It is
a very wealthy group of 200 million to 300 million people.
The markets are important to us. But we have made progress. There
is an initialled agreement. But at the same time, through your
own contacts with various European countries, I hope the point
will be made that some of the policies have not been very
reasonable. Que-stion
How can we argue our case for access to the Common Market when
our own levels of protection are so high.
Prime Minister
But they are not really you know. We've measured protection
in tariff terms or in qualitive restrictions and if you take all
protective devices in, I think Australia stands up pretty well.
it is really the level of access into a market that determines
whether it is protective or whether it isn't what people
ultimately end up by selling. Let's take the motor vehicle
industry. We reserve 20 percent of the local market for imports.
If you take France, they will allow imports in to about 7% or
8% at the most; Britain, 12% or 13%; Italy Germany is
more open door and one or two of the other countries are more
open door, but in spite of the European Community individual
countries have their own protective devices in the motor industry.
If you take employment sensitive areas like textiles, apparel
and footwear, Australia imports much more per capita than any
other developed country. If the ASEAN countries to our near
north had the same access to Europe and North America and Japan
as they did to Australia they would be exporting an extra
$ 1,000 million worth of goods a year. Their exports to us have
been growing at-between 30% and 40% a year. I know there is a
common view that Australia is a highly protected country, but
our tariffs are marginally higher than Europe's only marginally.
We don't have all the levies and protective devices, the new
techniques of protection which Europe has developed. We don't
have.-= the-w! a. g e subsidies. We don't have the export subsidies.
We can spend a lifetime developing a Tharket in South East Asia;
flour as we had in Sri Lanka, and then Europe came along and said
we would like that flour market in Sri Lanka, how much subsidy
would we need to push the Australians out of the market. That's
just the question they ask; how much subsidy? We don't enter into
that kind of competition. 14 million people cannot subsidise
their exports against 260 million people in Europe.
2EA 10
Prime Minister ( continued)
While there is protection in Australia very obviously, and
again during depressed economic circumstances you can't alter
that radically and Austral ' ian industry needs a certain level of
protection which we have indicated and made plain we will give it
by and large, I think Australia's reputation is much bet-ter
than a number of journals would indicate. We've got some free
trade newspapers in this country. They write editorials on
saying how protectionist we are, and they get quoted overseas
and then it gets picked up. I think when that happens that we
are arguing against Australia's own interests because on any
objective judgement there are many countries around the world
infinitely more protectionist than Australia.
Question The last question is for our younger listeners. We have a special
weekly programme in the English language for children. Would you
like to send them a special message.
Prime Minister-
Yes, I especially welcome that opportunity, because this is
the International Year of the Child and the future of any
country is very much dependent upon children. It's not your future
and mine, it is the children's future which is going to count
and really determine what sort of country this is going to be.
I would like to wish you all the very best of good fortune
wherever you may be. I hope you work hard at school and I hope
you enjoy it a bit because you've got to go through the process
anyway and it is much happier if you can do it and enjoy it at
the same time. It is very important because how well you do
at school and afterwards depends what you do when you leave;
what sort of job you can get. I would just like to wish you all
the best for whatever you want to do and to make the point tha~ t
whether it is going to be bricklaying or labouring or a lawyer
or an accountant or a doctor or a schoolteacher, it is important
to Pick 5, omething that you are going to enjoy doing. A job should be
noGre than just work and a means of getting a livelihood. I think it
is terribly important to at least be able to enjoy a fair part
of what you are doing and then it is much easier to put the effort
into it which is required if you are going to do it well.
Nothing is worth doing unless you do put some effort into it.
Gocod luck to you all, and especially for those who are leaving
school at the end of this year.
2EA