E. -PROOF ONLY
TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCEr BRISBANE, 26 JUNE 1985
PH: Just before we are open for questions, ~ I thought I
might help you today by an opening statement. I have had
the opportunity of meeting with my colleagues of the
Queensland State Parliament and in that meeting I indicated
. to them that.. we had been-drawing-. atentlaon-. in.ñ he -Federal
Parliament and would continue to be doing so to the grosg
economic incompetence of the Premier of Queensland and of
his Government. As I pointed out to them, the evidence is
overwhelming and it goes a considerable way, I believe, to
explaining the pathetic diversionary attempts that the
Premier is increasingly engaging in. But those attempts
to attack the trade unions or to attack Canberra or to
attack journalists for non-existent interviews that he
didn't give and some phantom Premier gave, those things are
not going to divert attention from the facts. And the
facts are overwhelming that Queensland is the worst
managed economy of all the State economies ang has the worst
results and that the very fine people of Queensland are now
increasingly paying a very heavy price for the incompahtence
of Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen and his Government. Just let me
go to some of the relevant statistics. Employment, of course,
is a very important area. They have the worst. unemployment
rate here of any State in Australia 9.9% against the
national average of 8.4. Now that is a very significant
difference. Where employment is rising in the rest of
Australia, here in Queensland employment has actually fallen.
If you look at inflation it has one of the worst ratos in
Australia. Over the last year the Australian average 4.4.
increase. Queensland If you look at the registrations
of new motor vehicles -always taken as a significant
indicator of what is happening in the level of econoydic
performance the health of an economy over the past year
the Australian growth in the registration of new motor vehicles
18.3% 7 Queensland lO. t. The building industry again a
very significant-indicator of what is happening in the economy.
As far as Australia is concerned there have been significant
increases, but here, measured in the last quarter, the March
quarter, whereas for Australia as a whole in regard to the
number of dwellings approved in Australia -0.9t increase.
Almost a 20% decline in Queenslanxd 19.8t decline.
So it doesn't matter what you look at employment,
unemployment, prices, registrations of newainotor vehicles,
dwelling industry Australia is doing very well. Queensland
is doing worst of the States generally speaking and certainly
much worse than the Australian average. As I say, these are
the reasons why this Premier and this Government seek to
divert attention from their own incompetence.
The second thing briefly that I would like to go to is to
share with you my amusement at the latest offering of this
poor: Federal Leader of the Opposition whose contribution to
the tax debate has been to this stage so irrelevant and
pathetic. His latest contribution is to say that Mr H~ awke
did not get a mandate from the Australian people for option
C. Well what a magnificent irrelevancy because I never claimed
that we and the Government got a mandate from-the Australian
people for Option C. What I have been saying is that we got
a clear unequivocal mandate from the Australian people to
undertake the task of tax reform. And it would be much
better if the Leader of the Opposition could get his own act
together and make some comments which are relevant to the great
debate which is properly taking place in Australia today.
Over to you. I
JOURNALIST: Given what you have said then, Prime Minister,
and the level of concern expressed at today's meeting about
Sir Joh's tacking, is it now fair to suggest that the ALP
has pinpointed the Queensland Premier as its biggest political
foe. Given that you often claim that Mr Peacock is
politically'irrelevant. PM: Oh I don't regard him as my biggest political foe, but
as far as Queensland is concerned, he has become a danger.
Not to the ALP, he has become a danger to the people of
Queensland. I mean, I think it is evident from the amount of
time I spent over the years coming to Queensland, not only to
Brisbane but particularly to the north of Queensland, that I
have a very soft spot for Queensland and its people. And I
think it is becoming an increasing tragedy that Sir Joh is
becoming the enemy of Queensland. There is no reason,
looking at the resources of this State, and comparing them
with the resources of the other States, as to why their
economic performance should be so bad. Queensland is blessed
with resource endowments ' at-least as good as those of the
other States of Ai1dtralia better than most. Why is it
therefore that you have such an abysmally bad economic
performance compared with the rest of Australia. Nowi he can't
have it both ways. Hie can't say that the quality of economic
management has got something to do with the parties in power
and then have the evidence showing. within your own State you
are doing worse than everyone else in all the major indicatoro.
There is only one conclusion that can be drawn. And that is
that the very fine people of Queensland are paying a very
heavy price for the Government and the Premiership of Sir Joh
Ejelke-Petersen. So, he's not my foe. He is increasingly
becoming a very heavy price that the-people of Queensland are
paying. JOURNALIMT Yesterday the Premier indicated that when the
Tax Sumimit took place next week he would be taking a proposal
to a single rate of tax. Have you a response to that?
PM: Well yes. It is not surprising that he will because he
has been talking that sort of nonsense for a very long
period of time. And it is consistent with the position of
the sort of people that he represents because it would be
massively inequitable. It would impose a relatively very very
much greater burden on the poorer people of the conmmunity and
represent.. a very distinct advantage to the more privileged in
the community. So it is no surprise that that would be the
extent of his contribution.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, were you able to offer any advice to
the Queensland Labor Party about their failure to. get into
government over the past few
PM: Well, I don't put it in those terms, but I did say that
I believed that there should be a concentration upon the
exposure of the sorts of things that I have been talking about.
After all, what people are concerned about in politics is
basic economic performance. You can talk about all the other
things, but in the end, people are concerned about jobs, about
prices, about housing and about their capacity to improve their
standard of living. And of course registration of new motor
vehicles is an-indication of that sort of thing. Now,, what
I am saying to them is what they should concentrate on is
those issues. And once the people of Queensland come
understand that they are being, and have been taken for an
enormous ride by this Government and this Premier, they~ will
start to draw the right political conclusions. I repreat, there.
is no reason why the people of Queensland should be getting
such a rough deal compared with what is happening to the people
of the other States of this country.
JOURNALIST: Back on the tax* will you let Mr Ejelke-Petersen
put his views on single rate tax at the Summit?
pM: of course I Vill. And I will even allow him his knighthood-
Sir Joh. I will not only allow him to put his views, I will
welcome the putting of his views. I am glad he is coming.
At least you can say. that much in his favour'compared with the
Federal opposition. He is coming.
JOURNALIST: Yesterday the ACTU Secretary, Mr Keltyo indica,;,-ithat
the union movement wouldn't be stampeded into an early
d'ecision on the consumption tax issue. He says there might be
a special unions conference called as late as September. I
aWnido~ ring. given the importance of the ACTI decision to
Government plans, whether thoc Government xs prepuxiud wcilt
unti]. September to make a decision, and if it isn't, is it
prepared to make a decision before the ACTU finalises its own
nosition.
4.
PM4: Very fair question. I noticed the report in one of
the papers today that Mr Kelty had mnade the observation
that the members of the trade union movement and their
dependents would have to live with the tax decision for very
many years to come. And that therefore they won't going to
be stampeded. That seems-. to me to be a perfectly reasonableobservation
for Ur Kelty to make on behalf of the trade union
movement. obviously, we have a responsibility to come to
our decision as quickly as possible so that we can move to
get the appropriate legislation into the Parliament and
carried and the work done to make the changes which we regard
as appropriate. We are not going to be demanding an
immediate response from the ACTU, but I don't know that there
are any questions about waiting until September. I think
that may be too long. But obviously it is appropriate that
the trade union movement representing so many millions of
Australians does have the opportunity properly to consider
this matter. I don't think it should take until September.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, President Reagan has called for a
world-wide reaction campaign against terrorism. Given that
one group has targetted Australia as a possible target, have
you directed your mind to this subject yet, as to what part
Australia will play?
PM4: Yes, I have. I understand that Vice President Bush
is visiting some countries to discuss these matters with
them. He won't be coming here and I think that that's probably
a reflection of the fact that the United States Adminstration
makes the judgement that we are probably better placed than
most in regard to the arrangements that we have for security.
And. I think that's a judgemnent that is well placed. However,
Secretary of State Shultz will be coming here in July and I
will be talking about these matters with him then. It is
appropriate that President Reagan should be expressing concern
about these issues. I think the world is increasingly coming
to the conclusion that we cannot tolerate the increasing use
of this tactic of terror as an instrument to try and achieve
desired political results. ITis has got an increased poignancy,
if you like, for Australia because of the tragedy of the death
of those two children in the Frankfurt tragedy and attrocity.
And so, I say this on behalf of the Government and I am sure
the people of Australia, that we will be totally co-operative
in any approach which seeks to eliminate from the affairs of
men . and women in this world the use of this tactic of terror
which is so indiscriminate in its impact. It is Of itself
intrinsically obje~ ztionable and it becomes more objectionable
when you see innocent children paying a price for the mindless
stupidities and bastardry of terror groups.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, the White House is talking about
economic sanctions against Lebanon. How do you feel about that?
PM: Not of economic sanctions against Lebanon. I mean,
I would want to obviously look at any proposals that were
put. I don't dismiss proposals just out of hand without
seeing them, but let me say this, that when you are talking
about Lebanon you are talking about a country which in many
respects can be regarded as the most tragic in the world
because you have there the two sets of considerations. You
have the interconfessional rivalries which have a degree of
bitterness which is almost incomprehensible. And in
addition to that you have the fact that external forces are
using Lebanon as . a-.. ground for the playing out of their own
intense and bitter rivalries. And the upshot of those two
considerations is that the people of Lebanon, particularly
the women and children of Lebanon, are paying a massively
disturbing price for those things. And one couldn't easily
contemplate sanctions which would add.. to the burden of those
women and children of Lebanon.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke you indicated yesterday that you
expected the Summit to discuss the distribution of the tax cuts
through the incomes scales.
PM: Yes I would think that would be one thing they want to
talk about.
JOURNALIST: How much flexibility is there there though
and you also said yesterday that you believed that the
distribution proposed by the Government was the highly
desirable one. Could you elaborate on why you think
( inaudible).
PM.* Let me say this, you say how desirable is it. I mean
you can't put a measure on these things, but it is clearly
appropriate that that be talked about because after all if
you are talking about tax reform, in the end you are talking
about how people at different levels are going to benefit
from whatever package is adopted. And that to a considerable
extent, almost overwhelmingly, be reflected in what happens to
the changes in the tax scales. So inevitably for that reason
there would be a considerable amiount of discussion about that.
As to the second part of your question, how much room is there
for change. Well, we have come to that prima facie position
and the preferred option that that seems to be the way to do it.
As we have in regard to A and B . said, well those seem to
be appropriate ways of changing the tax scales if the amount
of revenue available is what it is at Option A which is 1.8,
3.3 million at dption B and about 6.7 at Option C. With
that level of revenue available that change in the tax scale
seems the most appropriate. But we will listen closely to what
is said and if we could be persuaded that somte other sort of
change in the tax scales was on the balance of consideration
better, well we will take that into account. As to that part
of your question which says how much room is there for change,
I think it should be remembered that the change in thc tax
benef its which occurred in the tax cuts last year were very
significantly skewed towards the bottom levels. And so that's
not ~ Rnyn-hini; that you can continue to do indefinitely. But
having said that, I will listen carefully to whatever argume~ nts
are put forward for some different sort of distribution ofC
b enef its.-
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, still on tax how significantly
have the mobilisation of farmers in recent days in rallies
that were claiming tax been in convincing you that they
have a genuine case for some economic relief.
PM: As I said to the rural representatives who met me yesterday,
the rallies haven't changed my thinking at all. I have
welcomed the rallies, however. As I said to the representatives
yesterday, over some months now I have spent very very many
hours with the representatives of the rural community through
the National Farmers' Federation and then again yesterday at
a regional level. And itathat sort of putting of submissions
and arguments which I find impressive. And I am not being
my thinking is not being formed by the rallies but nevertheless
I welcome them. And I welcome them for these reasons.-that
this is a democratic society within which different groups
historically have regarded the form of rallies as a legitimate
way of bringing to the community's attention the concerns of
those involved in the rally. And there is absolutely no reason
why the farmers shouldn't themselves use this perfectly
appropriate mechanism within our democratic society. And the
second point is that on the evidence so far the farmers have
been very responsible in the way they have conducted themselves.
They have now had these rallies in Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne.
And all the evidence suggests that they have conducted
themselves sensibly and responsibly and have tried peacably to
bring to the attention of the community and governments their
concerns. And that is to be welcomed. If thats all they were
doing it would be rather futile but as I say, they are backing
up that sort of form of activity with very detailed submissions
being put to Government. And I respect them for that. And,
as I have said, I believe that they have got some legitimate
concern in the area of farm costs. Let me use this forum to
repeat what I have said elsewhere. The economics of farming
are very straightforward in terms of the outcome for them
that counts what is their net income position. It is an
interaction of what happens to their prices and what happens
to their costs. And what concerns the farmers of Australia
and what concerns me is that they are amongst the most
efficient producers in the world and yet their price level
their products are going into an international pricing
mechanism w,, hich has been increasingly distorted by the operations
of the Europeans. So that the fact that they are amongst the
world's most efficient producers is not being reflected in their
capacity to obtain markets and-reasonable prices. And it is
inevitable in that situation when their prices are being
distorted in that way and they are being discriminated against
that they will be concerned even more on Lhe sight of what
happens to their cost inputs. And they have, as I say,
legitimate cause for concern and that's why the Government will
be paying serious 4ttention to what they are saying in that area.
JOURNALIST: low against the American dollar and there
is no sign do you think its fairly inevitable that the
unions will have to accept discounted wages national wage
case. PM: Well, what I've said is that I believe on the evidence so
far that's most appropriate in regard to the September hearing
that the normal processes go ahead. Once that is done then
the Government and the trade unions and the business community
are going to have to do a lot of serious talking about what
happens in the control of the economy generally, because as far
as the Government is concerned we are not going to dissipate
the great benefits of growth that have occurred since we came
to office. We now are going into our third year of growth in
non farm GDP of over We are not going to dissipate that
by movements in the area of wages and salaries which could have
counter-productive results. And I believe that in discussions
with the trade union movement and with the business community
both outside and within the Commission we will be able to
achieve a result which will be in the best interests of this
country. And I believe that the trade unions will be
responsive tc what we've got to say. And the final point I make
is this that if the comununity is going to be making judgements
in this area about what's best for the conununity, they have got
to contrast the capacity that this Government has within a
centralised wage fixing system to get some appropriate
relationship between wage movements and other economic
variables as compared with the chaos that would exist if the
Opposition had its way. And that is that they would abolish
the centralised wage fixing and leave the level of wage
movements to the free play of market forces. That is an
undiluted recipe for chaos. And we, having established
appropriate mechanisms will see tJhat those mechanisms are used
in a way which benefits the Australian community.
JOURNALIST: A number of State Labor politicians have expressed
concern that they could suffer electorally if the Federal
Goverruent decides to introduce its consunption tax at the same
time as the State election next year. Was this discussed today
and is this a legitimate claim.
PM-The point was raised about the timing of any introduction
of any changes, ycs. The basic point is this. The
Australian community, of which I have always regarded Queensland
as a part, has suffered grievously from the existing system.
And they will continue to suffer more if this existing system
is not. ch-anged. And that is thie case simply because those
who pay taxes ordinary wage and salary earners will have a
greaLer burden imposed upon them. There will be more and more
of them who will go into the 46 cents bracket and more if
changes are not made. So therefore it should be regarded as a
plus not only in Queensland but anywhere else for a Party which
is bringing in a reform of the tax system which is going to make
the bulk of the taxpayers better off. And I believe the
situation will be that . in the post Summit situation wbn my
Government considers all tat is said at, the urnmit at thef
Summ: it and befor-e and makes its, dec: is ion will be makinq
a dIeCi; ion whicih unque.; tioriab. y wi. i] improve the lot of the
over-whelminq majority of Australians taxpayers and t. hose
dependent uponi them.
And that will be a context in which the Party here in Qu ensland
associated with the bringing in of those changes, will benefit.
I repeat here what I said in Rockham~ pton yesterday. I amn
certain that in the period ahead this tax issue and what is
done about it Will be a political plus for Labor and a
devastating minus~ for the conservatiLve coalition whose
responsibility the existing tax syStem'is. Blecause the first
question that has to be asked in this whole issue is this.
Why are we having tax reform now. Why is tax reform necessary
now. And the answer to that question is, the Australian
society has to have tax reform now because the conservative
coalition for thirty of the last thirty-five years has been
in power. The existing tax system is their-system. They are
responsible for the inequity, the unfairness, the economi-c
inefficiency and the lack of simplicity. And the Party,. that
is the Labor Party, which will be getting rid of the inequities
and unfairnesses and producing economic efficiency will be the
Party which gets the benefit of thie political1 judgemnents of
the Australian people.
JOURNALIST: Between the time of the Summuit, the time the
Government makes ' its decision and the time the decision
starts to take effect, are we likely to see any sort of large
scale public relations campaign launched by the Government
through television and the newspapers to try and explain these
things in more detail.
PM4: Yes indeed you will. it will b
but the responsibility of the Govern
are taken as to changes in the tax s
Australian people about those change
exercise that right but discharge th e, not only the right
ment when the decisions
ystem, to inform the
a. We will not only
at responsibility. T 1) -r R 14 7 i_