nA
PRIME MINISTER
PRESS CONFERENCE ADELAIDE, 18 APRIL 1984 E. O. E. -Proof
PM: Afternoon everybody. Right, whose first. Only
PRESS: Does Australia have any intention of recognising
Indonesian sovereignty over East Timor? into
PM: Thats not a question-that we are rushing/ decisions
about. What I've made clear is that the ijnportafit
thing in relations between our countries is-that
we are able to deal with specific issues that are
of importance, like trade, involvement with them
through ASEAN and in whatever issues that we
need to talk about. Now theres been no problem
about our capacity to do that and we will continue
to-do that. The question of recognition in the
sense is not a matter that is on the
immediate agenda.
PRESS: Does it come into the negotiations though over
a seabed boundary?
PM: Well it hasn't so far.
PRESS: Without pre-empting the July conference Mr. Hawke
PM: You know I would never attempt to do that.
PRESS: What assurancescan you give Mr. Bannon about the
future of Roxby Downs?
PM: Well the Government has made a clear decision on
that. I have no reason to believe that the Government's
decision will not be sustained.
PRESS: Myr. Hawke, is the Government concerned about the
fact that there was a 19 hour delay between the
times the Canberra Times received a letter fromthe
bomber hoax and the federal Police were inforliLed
and they carried out a check on Parliament House
yesterday.
PMI: Well its not a matter which has excited my mind. I
have confidence in the general abilities and dedication
of our relevant police and security forces. I would
say this generally that there must be some matter
of concern about the security of Parliament House
and as I said on our programme this morning that we
have got to balance the desire fundamental to the
people of Australia to be able to have access to their
Parliament House with concern about security and ' I
think there will be a review of the situation and
I hope it can work out in a way which is not going
to limit the opportunities for Australians to visii:
the Parliament House and yet to say watch the
security considerations. .4 0 1 4 I t-J
A.. PRESS: Are you concerned that your popularity has only
risen to 751 this time?
PM:. Oh well, in life in all the areas of activity there
is always room for improvement.
PRESS: At what stage are the submarine negotiations at
the moment.
PM: Well it is not really negotiations at this stage,
clearly the Federal Government is looking at the
question of building submarines in Australia
and a number of States have indicated their interest.
None has put their case more vigorously that S. A.
through my friend and colleague John Bannon. Obv~ ously
its a submission which will carry considerable weiLght.
It will have to be considered with the others. ~ I
understand that what S. A. is saying and saying...,
is that youve had a a run down in your motor veh," cle
production industry and that maybe some sort of
continuing concern as the industry is restructured in
Australia. It is certainly something that any
responsible Government would have in its mind. Its
been said that you have a skilled and trained workforce
which could very easily and appropriately adapt-to
a submarine construction. Now that a telling argument
and it is one that will be taken into account by us
in coming to a decision.
PRESS: One of the main arguments or main concerns why people
have prepared the submission is that while we've
got the best case N. S. W has got more voters. ' I's
it likely that it is going to be a political decis; ion.
PM: This Government doesn't operate. that way.
PRESS: Mr. Hawke in light of the shooting incident involving
the Lybian Embassy in London are any checks being made
on bona fides of diplomats in Canberra representing
Lybia.
PM: Not that I'm aware of but if the responsible
authorities were making some checks I wouldn't
necessarily know immediately, I mean not all the
agencies of Government have to get a prior clearance
from me before they can move,
PRESS: I understand that you haven't actually spelt out
or detailed what you believe is the pattern of bias
in the ABC publicly.
PM: No, and I'm not going to do it here. I have indicated
that if the ABC would like to talk to me about it then
I'll talk to them and I think I'm going to have some
discussions in'the near future with the Manager of the
ABC at managelen1t request, the matter may arise
then. Don't lets get this thing out of perspective.
I know the medias finding it difficult to find anything
to criticse the Government on and I'm very pleased about
that, but I've simply said that independence doesn't
mean immunity from criticism, observations and I don't
intend to say anything more publicly about that.
.3/
PRESS: Mr. Myers says that he doesn't think that Mr. Whi ' tehead
will want to talk about that with you but you still
insist that you want to talk to Mr. Whitehead.
PM: No, you have a singular incapacity to listen or
understand what I say. If Mr. Whitehead wishes to
talk to me about it I will talk to him about it. f\
I understand that he is a competent, capable an
independent person and I guess be will be making-his
own mind up and I wouldn't think that Mr. Myer will
be determining Mr. Whitehead's mind anymore than I
will be determing Mr. Whitehead's mind.
PRESS: Would it be fair though to spell out your concerns
in public
PM: I haven't been inundated with questions or letters
or representations about it.
PRESS: Getting back to the submarines Prime Minister
is the S. A. submission likely to be viewed more
favourably in view of the fact that we lost the
Alice Springs to Darwin Railway?
PM: No it has no relationship to the Alice Springs to
Darwin Railway, you don't make decision on that
sort of basis because you perhaps upset someone
with one decision therefore you make a decision which
is going to unupset them arnd if you start running
Government's like that you'll. quickly go out of
business.
PRESS: So you don't do deals like that in Government?
PM: I don't and on the evidence I don't.
PRESS; In the light of that Alice Springs to Darwin Railway
decision, will there be a speeding up of the Stua: ct
Highway?
PM: Yes, we made it clear in our discussions earlier
with Mr. Bannon and Mr. Everingham and may I say
that in all these discussions that Mr. Bannon has
taken a significantly more responsbile and reasonable
line than Mr. Everingham, I made it clear that we
thought the interests of S. A. and the Territory would
be better served by the upgrading of the Highway and
now that the question of the railways being disposed
of, well then of course we will be moving more urgently
in that area.
PRESS: Mr. Bannon, are you satisfied with that sort of
guarantee from the Prime Minister?
MR. BANNON: Well, I've accepted the reality of the Government's
Federal Government's decision. We don't agree with
it, but its their right to make that decision and
theyve made it. Now I believe we concentrate on the
upgrading of the road, the acceldration of that.
The Prime Minister has indicated he is happy to talk
about that and we can get something done and so I
.4/ think that is the productive way to approach this
and it will be in South Australia's interest to do so.
PRESS: Mr. Hawke can you name any good aspects you see of
Mr. Peacock's industrial policy.
PM: I have enormous reserves with charity as is well
known but it even stretches my reserves to be
able to find any sensible qualities in it, It is
essentially promising, of course this is hyporthetical
because he is not going-to get the opportunity;
but what he would be promising would be a return
to the chaos of 1981, 82 which saw a wages explosion
which brought about a recession in this country. ' I[ t
60out of the mouth of the spokesman Mr.
Mc -Phee who said he's an honest sort of chap
and he said in response to a question, yes, of course,
if this were to come in we would have. an increase in
industrial strife. Now that is an absurdity, what
you have to understand about wages policy and I think
I'm probably able to speak with more authority in this
area than just about anyone in Australia, that if
you are in a recessed economic condition in a sense
you don't need a wages policy because the awfulness
of a recession does the job, it holds wages down.
The time when you need an effective wages . policy is
in the period of recovery and growth which is what
this Government has bought this country to. Now we
have got a situation with the trade union movement
and the employers have accepted the concept of respo:-isibility
of not making excessive claims and that is going -to
mean that now in the twelve months following the
recent decision this country is looking at wage
increases -of I would think of no
more than 21 and that in a period of recovery when
profits will be burgeoning, now that is what this
economy needs. Whats happened now is that unit costs
in this country are steadily reducing by the end
of this year it is my judgement that real unit labour
costs will be down to the same level as they were
in the base period 1966-67 to 72 73 which will be
a better performance than virtually any other of
our comnpetitor countries. Now thats what we're doing,
thats what the business community needs, to become
more efficient, more competitive, rather than this
promise of return to the chaos and explosiveness of
81/ 82. I want to assure you that there is no truth
in the rumour that we've got a mole in the liberal
national party opposition writing their policies for
them.
PRESS: What about your promises of good times ahead though,
is that fragile?
PM: It's not fragile the promise has already been delivered
and it will continue to be delivered Just remind you
of basic statistics in the 12 months from April to March
210,000 new jobs created in the previous 12 months
nearly 12,000 jobs disappeared. Inflation down
significantly, interest rates down, growth up to the
position where Australia now has the highest rate of
economic growth in 1984 of any of the OECD countries.
If you are not satisfied-with that you are very hard
5/ to satisfied.
PRESS; Why are you in a hurry to have an early election
then.
PM: Do you think that is rather a clever question to you.
I'm very genuinely relaxed these days, and I refuse
to be upset by such a silly question and I will--
generously respond to it. I would also I will
make'the assumption that you have been out of the
country and haven't had the oppoxtunity of-reading
the many explanations that have been given. not
that you don't understand whats been said. I'll
put to you so that you will have the opportunity
of understanding it now start quietly-and slowlythat
there must be under the constitution an
election for half the Senate before the middle of
next year because the new Senators hiave to take their
place by July of next year. So there must be an7
election and it is much better for Australia that
we get back into the situation of having our elections
in the kilter rather than a continuation of
disruptions caused by the previous conservative
government, so we consider that there be an election
for the House of Representatives at the same time as
the necessary election for the half Senate. Thats
whats happened 22 times before in the histo'Yy of
this country. The point I'm trying to make is that
at the same time as we do that we will have a
referendum put to the people of Australia for the
position to be changed so that we will have the
synchronisation of elections with the Senate and
the House of Representatives so that never again
will we have the situation where conservative
governments can play around with this issue of
elections. Now they are all the reasons, they are
reasons which have clearly have recommended themselves
to the majority of the Australian people. Thats
what we'll do.