PRIME MINISTER TUESDAY, 16 OCTOBER 1979
From the Press Office
SUMMARY OF ABC'S
" PM" found itself in the middle of a heated debate today in
Federal Parliament over the Government's controversial
proposals to change the Conciliation and Arbitration Act.
Last Thursday they were first to reveal the details of a letter
which had been written by Mr. Justice Staples to his fellow
Commissioners criticising the amendments. The crucial issue
in the debate now seems to be who actually leaked the details
of the letter. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Hayden, accused
the Minister for Industrial Relations, Mr. Tony Street, of
leaking the letter to the press. However, Mr. Street, while
admitting that members of his staff distributed copies of the
letter to members of the Canberra Press Gallery said it was
only done after the " PM" broadcast on the grounds that it had
now become a matter of public record. Mr. Street and the
Opposition Spokesman on Industrial Relations, Mr. Mick Young,
in Canberra studio:
Question Mr. Street, how do you respond to allegations that your office
leaked that document?
Mr. Street
Well they didn't. My office checked with " PM" to ensure that
the document had in fact become public before I did anything
about it at all. It had been sent to me without comment,
incidentally, by Mr. Justice Staples, a couple of days before.
Question Mr. Street, if I can just put the record straight. " PM" did
cite a copy of that letter, but as you would no doubt would be
aware, we didn't use any specific quotes. We simply wanted to
mention that the letter existed.
Mr. Street
Yes I know. We checked with " PM" to find whether they had in
fact got the letter and they had.
Question But do you think in your office releasing copies of this letter
later to the press that you perhaps acted improperly?
Mr. Street
No I don't. I think that charge could have been laid if I had
been the first to make any comment or release of the document,
but I wasn't.
-2
Question But you do agree that your office did distribute copies
of the letter?
Mr. Street
After we checked that " PM" had had it, yes.
Question Well, Mr. Young, what is wrong with that?
Mr.. Young
I think if you look at the whole episode both of the Minister
releasing a document sent to him by Deputy President Staples,
and added to that that a senior officer of the Minister's
Department actually briefed a journalist from the Press Gallery,
I think it is absolutely outrageous behaviour by the Office of
the Minister, both by the Senior Officer who did it and by the
Minister's decision to release that document. I don't think there
could be any excuse for it. . As you said in your introduction,
" PM" admitted to citing the document. If you look at the
transcript of " PM" of last Thursday night, there are now quotes
from the letter and the Minister was bulldozed into making a
very, very bad decision, and it brings into question anybody
in future who wants to sent correspondence to this Minister, or
to other Ministers. Because recently we had the example of
Mr. Viner getting hold of a personal letter that was sent from
Dr. Everingham, the Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, to
Gulluwruy Yunupingu, and Mr. Viner produced that letter in
Parliament under privilege, which was a personal letter.
Question But Mr. Street has said of course that once it was revealed on
" PM" that the letter existed it was therefore a matter of public
record. Isn't that fair enough?
Mr. Young
If someone leaked the document to and they hadn't done
that " PM" said they had cited it, but didn't quote it, that
doesn't relieve the minister or release the Minister to any
unethical conduct, which is as I believe that's what it was in
the end, because the document had been sent to Mr. Street and
the originator of the document didn't have in mind that the
Minister was going to sit down and give it out to all the press
and then have a Senior officer of his Department actually brief
someone.
Question Mr. Street, how do you respond to that? / 3
-3
Mr. Street
Well, as I say, I never intended or thought of releasing it
to the press until it became a public document.
Question Mr. Young, if Mr. Street's actions are improper, what do you
want him to do. Should he resign?
Mr. Young
It's not so much Mr. Street, it's the whole Government. If you
have a look at all the scandals we have had in this Governmentand
they usually throw their hands up in the air and say " look,
we didn't know". The whole excuse for this Government when
they make a mess of anything, and at the moment the Government
is making a mess of industrial relations, is to plead ignorance.
Well nobody in Australia believes any longer that this
Government can plead ignornance when they make these mistakes.
The fact is Mr. Fraser has taken over industrial relations in
this country and he intends to make an unholy mess of it.
Question If I cou ' ld just come in there. Mr. Young, you mentioned earlier,
I don't think Mr. Street knows, that Mr. Young, just, before
he came to air, put out a statement in which he said that it
was understood, Mr. Street, that a senior officer of your
Department gave a detailed briefing on the Staples letter to
a newspaper journalist. Is that true?
Mr. Street
I wasn't aware of it. But as I say, if the document had by
then become a public one, I can see nothing wrong in that.
And as I say
Question There would be nothing ( inaudible)
Mr. Street
Not if it was a public document at the time.
Question Specifically, though, Mr. Young, what do you think should be
Mr. Young
I mean the Minister must obviously be joking. Firstly he says
he doesn't know whether the Senior Officer did this. But I mean
no-one can do anything in his Department surely, without the
Minister knowing and getting approval. I mean what are we
running here. We are not running a cakeshop. You can't have
senior Ministers of the Department running around saying " look,
the Minister doesn't know, but I think I will hop up to the
Press Gallery and give someone a briefing about a confidential
document". I mean who else is going to write to the Minister
-4
Mr. Young ( continued)
for Industrial Relations. What happens if Sir John Moore,
the President of the Bench, writes to Mr. Street. Does a
senior officer go running up to the Press Gallery and say
I will give a further explanation of this because it is for
the benefit of the Government that I do it. I mean obviously
there has got to be confidence, and there has got to be
ethical conduct between the parties.
Question Do you concede that, Mr. Street though, that there does have
to be confidence between well, particularly in this case
senior Judges and a Minister like yourself.
M4r. Street
Of course, but this document was not prepared for me. It was,
as I understand.' it, prepared by Mr. Justice Staples for his
Conciliation and Arbitration Commission colleagues. It was
distributed to them and a copy came to me with a " with compliments"
slip. As: I say, * 1 wouldn't have intended to make it public
had it not become so by some other means.
Question
Mr. Street, if I could just look at the whole substance of
this legislation which has created, as you know, somewhat of
a storm. Last night on our programme, Mr. Hawke said that
the legislation itself is now opposed by the. ACTU, the Labor
Party, senior Judges, a former President of the Commission,
and indeed, some Senators within your own Party. Are you still
going to persist with the legislation?
Mr. Street
Yes we will, because for four reasons really: there is a
need to get the greatest degree of consistency internally in
the Commission in its wages decisions and the requirement
for Commissioners to consult it doesn't take away their right
to make an ultimate decision, but is designed to get greater
consistency; there is a need for the President to be able to
take over a dispute at any time, or any of the parties or the
Minister to seek a Full Bench--that need has been demonstrated
in recent days--not having it made a great deal of industrial
disruption; and there is finally, a need to protect the
public interest where the safety, health and welfare
of the community is involved. So, yes, we intend to go ahead
with it for all those reasons.
Question But given the resistance that has grown just in the last few
days for the legislation, does it now mean that there going to
be open warfare between you and the Commission?
Mr. Street
No I wouldn'It thiLnk so.
Question Could it be avoided?
Mr. Street
Yes, of course it can, because the institutions which are
set up by the Parliament and the legislation that they
operate under are required to operate in accordance with the
law, and that applies to a range of institutions, including
this one, so long as the constitutional requirements are met
and our advice is that they have been.
Question
Mr. Young, a final word from you. You, the Opposition, have
said much about the legislation. But do you see that it is
going to go through, that there is nothing that can be done?
Mr. Young
Well, the Opposition would have said a lot more except the
Government steamrolled the legislation through the House of
Reps. The gag was used continuously for two days so we couldn't
explain our point of view fully and we didn't get an explanation
or an interpretation from the Government. What Mr. Street
says on behalf of the Government is absolutely nonsense. We've
got 25 Commissioners for the first time in the history of the
Commission have got together and said: " look, we are concerned
about the operation of this Bill once the laws are implemented.
We don't know how it is going to interfere with the traditional
relationship between ourselves and the Government, the parties
that come before us, ourselves and the Presidential members."
There is a new de-registration order which can only be described
as Draconian, and it is just another example of a wholesale
mess as far as legislation is-concerned and a desire by the
Prime Minister of Australia to bring about a wholesale confrontation
with the trade union movement in order to win some political
advantage.. Everybody in Australia should understand that now
we have the most unpopular Prime Minister in the history of
Australia and that's the way he hopes to get out of the mess
that he has created for himself.
Mr.' Street
It is important to recognise that what the Government proposes
is to protect the public interest and the welfare of the
Australian community. If other parties care to oppose it,
well that is their business. We don't intend to abdicate
our responsibility of the Australian community.
( END INTERVIEWS)/ 6
-6-
In Western Australia the State Minister for Labour and
Industry foreshadowed tough new legislation to deal with
the trade unions in Western Australia. The Bill will be
introduced into the West Australian Parliament tonight.
Little was known about the Western Australian Government's
intentions until a rally was held outside Parliament this
afternoon. About 350 people attended the demonstration in
support of the Government organised by a group called
" People Against Union Dictatorship".
The Australian Opera Company is under criticism at the
moment for being too expensive, too elitist and plagued with
managerial infighting. It was reported at the weekend that
the Australia Council is preparing an inquiry into opera in
Australia, particularly into the Board of the Australian Opera
Company. Interview with George Dreyfus..
After several months of speculation, N. S. W. finally has a new
Police Conumissioner. The Premier announced today that Acting
Commissioner Lees has been appointed: interviewed.
Queensland Parliament came down to earth today from the more
spectacular heights of allegations of bribery and corruption
to the lowly and serious question of whether a lavatory door
should swing inwards or outwards. Interview with Mr. Lester,
Member forPink Downs 000---