PROME MINISTER
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY EMBARGOED UNTIL DELIVERY
EXTRACT OF SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTER
AT THE SA STATE ALP CONFERENCE
ADELAIDE SUNDAY 8 JUNE 1986
Delegates,
We are at a watershed year in the history of our Government, our Party
and our nation.
our conduct in the challenging weeks and months to come, our conduct as a
Government, as a Party but, above all, as a people, the whole
Australian community will be crucial in shaping Australia's future fo. r
the rest of the century and beyond.
The nature of the task ahead may be different from our task in the past
three years.
But two fundamental things remain absolutely unchanged and unchangeable.
The first is our supreme objective : the basic objective of our
Government and out: Party to build a better, fairer and more rewarding
future for all Australians and to build a stronger, more secure
Au st ral1i a.
And the second thing that remains unalterable is our basic approach the
achievement of national reconstruction through national cooperation.
The hallmark of our Government since its election less than three and a
half years ago has been continuity of policy, consistency of approach and
the courage to take tough decisions vital to the nation's interests and
the welfare of the people.
And those qualities which stand in such marked contrast with the actio. is
of our predecessors throughout their seven disastrous years.
So often, our opponents knew the right thing to do. They knew the
urgent, necessary thing to do. They never had the courage to do it.
They would never front up and take the tough decisions.
That is why they're in Opposition, that is why they will stay in
Opposition, and that is why they lack any credibility and why they are
without credentials in the eyes of the Australian people, who know that
leadership in times of national difficulty comes only from Labor.
The Coalition's lack of courage in Government is matched only by their
lack of principle in opposition.
And I don't believe any aspirant for the highest office in memory has
demonstrated that lack of courage in office and lack of principle in
opposition as the present incumbent Honest John Howard.
As Treasurer, Howard did the work of looking at tp e tiuest ion
of bringing in foreign banks. He knew it was the rigb
thing to do to give the Australian people a more
copetitive banking system. They didn't have the courage to
do it. The same with the de-regulation of the financial
system. The same with the floating of the dollar.
And he certainly knew what was happening to Australia's tax
system. It was under Howard that tax avoidance and evasion became a
national scandal and a permanent disgrace to the coalition
which let it happen. When they had thrown the national
economy into its worst crisis for fifty years, the tax
avoidance industry was the fastest-growing industry in
Australia, as Commissioner Costigan said in his first report
in 1982.
Indeed, by then, with economic growth at zero, it was the
only growth industry in Australia.
Howard knew what had to be done. He moved to do it and
then buckled under.
He knew that reform of the tax system was urgent. He knew
what was happening. He knew that the average wage earners
were being pushed into the higher marginal tax brackets but
as PAYE taxpayers, they were bearing the burden of tax
avoidance devices available only to the wealthy.
Yet he has opposed and obstructed our tax reforms and, in
particular, the measures which are essential to our
undertaking for significant tax cuts this year.
He now says he would remove the legislation to tax fringe
benefits which of course is just another way of saying that
he is opposed to the tax cuts.
Because, delegates, the tax on fringe benefits cannot be
taken in isolation. It is part of our total package of tax
reform.
But delegates, what did Mr Howard have to say about fringe
benefits in 1985? He invoked his friend, Mr Valder, the
National President of the Liberal Party. Mr Valder had
said: ' of course they are right. of course Mr Keating is
right to be bringing them in. They have the courage to do
it; it is the right thing to do. We want them to do it and
if, perchance, the Australian people should not see the
merits of this, we will reap the benefit!' He was all in
favour of it.
And this is what Honest John Howard had to say: ' What Mr
Valder said on fringe benefits was not all that different
from what a number of us have said. If you are able to cut
the top marginal rate of personal income tax, then it is
fair in that context, and that context alone, to do
something about fringe benefits.'
So that's the Howard record on taxation. But-of course,
delegates, his record as Treasurer will never be forgotten
by the Australian people.
They will never forget that the Howard years culminated in
Australia's worst economic crisis for fifty years.
These were the worst of seven bad years.
Delegates, Just look at the record: the Fraser years, the Hawke years;
the Howard yea--s, the Keating years.
ECONOMIC GROWTH
Fraser years : annualised growth 2.6%
Our years to March 1985 annualised growth 4.2%
EMPLOYMENT In the seven Fraser years, 340,000 jobs.
Hawke to April 1986, annualised growth 3.5% per annum.
669,400 jobs
Under us, in less than half that time, double the jobs.
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
In their years, the average ' annual number days lost was 3.02
million. We have more than halved that, to 1.4 million.
Delegates, That's the record: That's the contrast.
The Liberal record; The Labor record. Treasurer Howard;
Treasurer Keating.
What a choice! What an alternative! Yet they now put
forward as their alternative the very policies, the same
approach which produced the disasters of pre-1983.
The economic and social vandalism they espouse would strike
at the foundations of all that has been achieved over the
past three years.
First and last they are the enemies of the Accord the
Prices and Incomes Accord which, not only through its
machinery and practical application, but, perhaps even more,
through the spirit of co-operation it represents, has been
the basis of recovery.
They propose no alternative except a return to the old days I
and to the old ways.
Yet what were the consequences of their approach? Failure
down the line, even on their own avowed objective of
containing wages.
The wage explosion they produced 1981 led to the worst
unemployment for 50 years. Average weekly earnings grew at
an average of 11.4 per cent in each of their seven years,
compared with an average of 6 per cent under the Accord.
Award wages rose 9.2 per cent, year on year, compard with
5.4 per cent under the Accord.
And of course those comparisons demonstrate something more
than the success of the Accord and of our approach, and 0
something more than the plain stupidity of the Liberal
alternative. They show in a striking way, the degree of restraint which
has been exercised by the union movement and by the parties,
to the Accord, now for three years and more.
It shows how the Labor movement will respond to responsible
leadership. It shows how the workers of this country are prepared to
sacrifice the shadow of short-term gains to achieve the
substance to forego the illusion of wage increases which
are destined only to be wiped out almost immediately by new
inflation. It shows that Australians in employment are prepared to
exercise restraint to help put their fellow Australians back
into employment and to give their kids a chance for jobs.
And it is on that basis of restraint and responsibility that
we have been able to create 670,000 new jobs in 3 years.
And the two essential elements in that achievement have been
leadership and understanding leadership for the whole
community, understanding by the whole community.
It has been achieved through the leadership provided by the
Labor Governments of Australia and the great leadership and
responsibility of the Australian Labor movement.
It has been achieved because the Australian community as a
whole has understood the problems and understood what is at
stake in solving them.
And now, those qualities leadership and understanding
are needed more than ever.
They have been the foundation for the successors of the past
three years. They will be the condition of our success in
the years ahead.
We have shown what can be achieved by this approach we
have shown what. can be achieved together.
Together, we won our way out of the worst economic crisis
for 50 years.
Together we created the strongest growing economy in the
industrial west.
Together we created 670,000 new jobs.
Now on the foundations we have laid together, from the
position of strength we have established, we shall take
Australia and the Australian economy through its present
difficulties.
As a result of the massive decline in the terms of trade, we
have had inflicted on us a reduction in Australia's economic
capcity to sustain standards. No single section of the
community, no one section of the economy, can be asked to
carry the burden alone.
The restraint we now call for is restraint all round. It
must be restraint and responsibility by all sections, by all
governments, by business as well as unions.
And let me emphasise, delegates, that these current
difficulties must be placed in the perspective of the
success and achievements of the past three years.
That is the basis for the confidence we can all have in our
capacity to surmount the problems.
And the most important element in that confidence is the
maturity the Australian community has so amply demonstrated
in those years the capacity to understand the problems,
the capacity to make a common commitment to their solution,
the capacity to respond to leadership, the capacity for
restraint and responsibility.
And let me emphasise, at this Labor Conference, another
important point indeed, the fundamental point for us as a
Labor Government, as a Labor Party, and as a Labor movement.
In setting out to achieve, as we have, sustained ' economic
growth, we have never lost sight of our goals and
objectives.
We have never seen growth as an end in itself, but, always,
as the necessary means through which we can achieve our
great social aims in building a better, fairer society.
For us, the creation of jobs has not only been a central
objective of our economic policies, it is central to our
social objectives our objectives of greater equity, not
only f-or those able to take part in the productive processes
directly, but for those of our fellow Australians who depend
upon a compassionate society if they are to share equitably
in the fruits of growth.
And let there be no doubt about the depth and strength of
our continuing commitment to our wider social objectives.
We shall not be diverted from them.
On the contrary, it is precisely to protect the great social
advances of the past three years and to build for further
advance that we are determined to lend all our efforts in
the weeks and months ahead towards the protection of the
Australian economy.
Delegates, want to turn briefly to other mattirs because it would
be altogether to mistake the nature of our Govenment to
suppose its total pre-occupation was with economic matters,
crucially important as they are.
The Labor Government has restored a proper sense of
independence, self-respect and concerned, constructive
endeavour to the conduct of Australia's foreign policy.
In the time available to me, I will discuss two matters
which illustrate our achievement and our approach.
It is appropriate that, at the end of a week in which the
Foreign Minister, Bill Hayden, introduced into Parliament
legislation designed to give effect to Australia's
obligations as a party to the South Pacific Nuclear Free
Free Zone Treaty, I should refer to the Labor Government's
policies on nuclear issues..
That Treaty itself is one of our major initiatives and
achievements. Under it, Australian associates itself with
the common aspirations of South Pacific countries to prevent
the testing, acquisition, production and stationing of
nuclear weapons and the dumping of nuclear waste in our
region. our aim now is to achieve the support of the five
nuclear weapons states for this significant arms control
measure which will strengthen security in the South Pacific.
The long-term objective of Labor policies is a world without
nuclear weapons. At present, however, in a world where such
weapons exist, the main concern must be the avoidance of
nuclear war. We are firmly of the view that a stable
deterrent relationship between the United States and the
Soviet Union is the best means currently available of
ensuring nuclear restraint and of providing the necessary
confidence to engage in negotiations to reduce, and
eventually eliminate, the nuclear arsenals. The Government
believes that Australia has an important contribution to
make to the achievement of these objectives. That
contribution is evident in our support for effective stable
deterrence through our hosting of the joint facilities, our
port access policy and other arrangements and in our active
arms control and disarmament policy.
our commitment to encouraging effective arms control derives
from the catastrophic potential of war in the nuclear age
and our firm belief that the nuclear weapon states do not
have the exclusive right to determine issues relevant to
arms control and international security. Every nation has
the right and responsibility to be heard on these issues and
the Australian Government is determined to continue to
exercise the right to the full.
The Government has maintained a close and constructive
dialogue with the United States on arms cortrol issues. I
recently wrote to President Reagan to express Australia's
concern at the announcement by the U. S. Administration of
its intention to breach the arms limitations set out in the
SALT II Treaty.
We attach great importance to compliance with the terms of
the SALT II Treaty by both the United States and the Soviet
Union. Its numerical limits provide an important measure of
predictability as to the strategic nuclear balance. Despite
its imperfections, the existing arms control regime is the
only available basis from which to proceed, if agreements
for significant reductions in the arsenals of the
super-powers are to be negotiated.
Moreover, whatever the basis in fact, the Government sees a
risk of a perception developing in Australia, as a result of
the U. S. decision, that it is Washington rather than Moscow
which is taking the initiative to break out of existing
agreed constraints.
We understand United States concerns about Soviet
compliance. indeed I had earlier written to General
Secretary Gorbachev, informing him of Australia's view that
the Soviet union has a case to answer on specific issues of
compliance and urging the USSR in the strongest terms to
demonstrate full compliance with existing agreements and, if
necessary, to go out of its way to do so.
But for the reasons I have outlined above, we would be very
concerned if the United States goes ahead to allow its
forces to exceed the SALT II limits and future decisions
regarding United States strategic forces were made without
reference to the SALT constraints.
Our nuclear policies also attach the highest importance to
the major nuclear arms control treaty in existence, the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and its system of
verification, including International Atomic Energy Agency
safeguards. In a letter to Mr Gorbachev of 13 May, I drew attention to
Australian proposals for international action on nuclear
safety in the wake of the Chernobyl tragedy. These
proposals were essentially for an interim early warning
mechanism, an international convention on information
exchange and mutual assistance in the event of nuclear
incidents, and international efforts to improve nuclear
safety standards.
On 4 June, I received a message from the General Secretary
which endorsed in broad terms the Australian proposals
which, in the meantime, had also been the subject of
discussion by the IAEA Board of Governors.
A special meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors on 21 May,
convened to discuss international nuclear safety, adopted a
decision compatible with the main elements of the approach
Australia is promoting.
It is encouraging that the Soviet Union is now playing a
constructive role on this issue.
I contrast our record of achievement on these issues wit4
that of our opponents who, among other things, have
denounced the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone, uncritically
endorsed and promised Australian pacticipation in the
Strategic Defence Initiative and, when last in Government,
broke off all sensible communication with the USSR.
I would also like to refer to the Government's policies on
South Africa, an issue of great importance to our Party and
our country.
The Australian Labor Party will not compromise with
institutionalised racism. We will not take the role of
passive spectators, while a monstrously immoral system is
imposed by an armed and ruthless state apparatus on a
largely defenceless black majority, which continues to be
denied the most elementary human rights.
Make no mistake, the violence which grows worse daily in
South Africa is a direct consequence of the apartheid
system. The only hope now for a peaceful solution to the proolems of
South Africa is for the regime to indicate by actions, not
cleverly calculated, deliberately ambiguous words, that it
is genuinely prepared to dismantle the apartheid system and
to negotiate honestly with the black opposition.
To date, there is absolutely no sign of this. What we have
had, at one level, is a series of so-called reforms which
are clearly designed to delude world opinion that something
significant is occurring while in practice doing nothing to
change the essence of the inhuman apartheid system. At the
other level, we have had the use of naked violence and
police repression against blacks, and those few principled
whites who dare protest against the system and, three weeks
ago, the violation of the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of South Africa'a neighbours by totally
unjustified armed force.
Pretoria has most recently made another outragous attack
outside its borders, this time on Angola, is now planning
stringent measures to prohibit or deal with any
demonstration commemorating the tenth anniversary of the
deaths in Soweto on June 16 and is making irrational, false
attacks on the African National Congress.
The regime's refusal to permit freedom of expr ession and.
assembly to blacks and liberal whites stands in stark
contrast to its tolerance of the emergent Afrikaner Fascist
movement. The Labor Government can take pride in the position it has
taken on South Africa. We have toughened the measures taken
by previous Australian Governments. we have indicated that
we will support comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions
if the world community decides to apply them. We were among
the first to introduce economic measures of our own against
South Africa.
But we have not seen sanctions as an end in themselves.
AS Bill Hayden has said, we have sought to bring the South
Af rican Government to its senses not tbo its knees. At the
Commonwealth meeting at Nassau, it was an Australian
initiative to set up the Eminent Persons Group, whose task
was to find a way to bring the South Africa regime and the
opposition together, to negotiate the end of apartheid
peacefully. In launching this initiative, we had no illusions about the
difficulty of the task because we knew the nature of the
Botha regime. We were also aware of the suspicions which
black nationalists in South Africa would naturally feel
about a process which was open to misunderstanding.
In fact, the Group has performed its task with great
integrity, energy and skill. it succeeded in winning the
confidence of South Africa's black opposition and of the
front-line States. it established its credibility
internationally and created hope for peaceful change.
I Lnerc'iore dh: Cpl\' regret that as a result of Sc-,-th : Mricin
intransi~ je. ncc the efforts of' the Comnmomwealth Group to
o ncou rayq u negotiations have failcd. In its own words
in a message sent to myself and other Commonwealth leaders,
the Group has made the reluctant but unequivocal judgement
that further talks would not lead anywhere in the current
circumstances. The EPG represented a determined effort by the Commonwealth
to seek a basis for peaceful negotiation. The initiative
also represented a conscious decision to test the South
African Government's willingness to pursue genuine change
and to offer it an option other than South Africa being
relegated even more to international isolation and
opprobrium. The EPG had discussions with the South African Government
and with all other groups which must be involved in a
solution. The negiotiating concept produced by the EPG was
fair and reasonable. The South African Government responded
not by indicating support for the concept, but by raising
critical quoetions about central elements of it.
In these circumstances it is impossible to avoid the
conclusion that South Africa's response was motivated not by
a genuine commitment to negotiation but rather a desire to
string the exercise out for purely tactical purposes.
It gives us no joy whatsoever to reach the conclusion that
South Africa is basically unwilling to change its internal
or external behaviour. Australian interests, the interests
of the international community and the interests of all
South Africans would have been served by South Africa
responding to the EPG initiative to accomplish a real change
of course.
It is still our hope that the South Africa regime will
release unconditionally Nelson Mandela and all other
political prisoners; legalise the African National Congress
and give it and all other political * groups the right to
normal political activity; remove the troops from the
African townships, and negotiate the end of apartheid
without pre-conditions.
But the Labor Government must face the situation as it is.
Accordingly, unless there is dramatic change in the two
months remaining before Heads of Government of EPG countries
meet in London in early August, I expect to be taking into
that meeting the view that additional measures are
necessary. Cabinet will in due course be considering
concrete steps that Australia could take in this regard.
To those who argue against sanctions that they will
allegedly hurt the black community most, I say that I prefer
to believe black South African patriots like Desmond Tutu
when they say that the black community could not suffer more
than it already does under the apartheid system.
The Labor Government has been at the fore-front of the South
African issue. We will continue to be at the fore-front.
Our position on this once again stands in the starkest
contrast to that of our opponents. our party has every
reason to reject the divisive, unjust and failed policies of
the 1975-83 era. But on the issues of South Africa and
racism, Malcolm Fraser's credentials, in Government and
since, are impeccable. It is a disgraceful indictment of
his successors first Peacock and even more obviously
Howard that they have overturned, almost gleefully, one of
the few legacies of integrity of these seven years.
CONCLUSION Delegates, my friends,
Exactly a year ago, at this conference, I said I had come to
bring a three-fold message.
It was first a message of pride pride in what we had been
able to achieve together.
It was a message with a challenge the continuing challenge
of building a society and an economy of greater equity and
efficiency. It was above all a message of confidence confidence in the
capacity of our party, our movement, our Government and our
people to meet the challenge.
And my message today is exactly the same: the sense of
pride, the acceptance of challenge, the deep confidence.
We have shown over the past three yeas what we can do
together.
We have shown as an Australian community that we can beat
the rest of the world. I believe that with a continuation
of the responses and the approach, which made that
achievement possible, this Party, this Government, and this
great people of Australia will prove worthy of the
challenge.
Given that response, we can continue the reconstruction
which is the basis for continued growth.
We can continue to create more jobs for Australians.
We can continue to give greater hope to our young.
We can continue to give greater real benefits to those in
our community who depend, through the social welfare system,
on the sense of fairness and justice of the community as a
whole. Delegates, I thank you for your contribution since the beginning of
1983 to help your national Labor Government deliver the
goods in a way that was never believed possible by the
sceptics. And I know that in the weeks and the months and
the years of challenge ahead of us, you will play your part,
at the very. forefront of the nation, in the common effort we
must all make together, as once again Labor takes up its
historic task, as we have done in peace and war, to lead
this great nation to an even greater future.
I