PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF NEWS CONFERENCE, CABOOLATURE TAVERN, CABOOLTURE
27 APRIL 1989
E OE PROOF ONLY
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, can you tell us the results of
your trade talks with Vice-President Quayle yesterday?
PM: The Vice-President is now very well acquainted with
the facts of the adverse impact upon Australia of the
operation of the Export Enhancement Program. I think
he had the belief until he'd spoken to me that the Export
Enhancement Program was not adversely affecting Australia,
that is was something not targetted at us but particularly
at the Europeans. I repeated to him what I'd had cause
to say before and that is if a bullet hits you in the
head it hurts just as much if it was not aimed at you
as if it was aimed. I was able to give him the statistics
of the very adverse impact on our wheat trade of the
operation of the Export Enhancement Program. If you
look at seven countries, export markets that we have
which are EEP targetted, and those seven countries are
China, the Soviet Union, Egypt, Iraq, Mexico, Sri Lanka
and Yemen. Those seven countries have been targetted
by the EEP and in those seven we've suffered a very significant
loss of our exports. In the case of two of them, in
maJor areas, in the Soviet Union a 91% reduction in our
exports in the period of the REM and in the case of China
a 21% reduction in our exports. Now those sort of things
are not figments of imagination, they are cold, hard
and brutally hurtful economic statistics which have adversely
affected our farmers, our wheat farmers. I have given
those to Mlr Quayle, now he knows them.
JOURNALIST: Did the Vice-President give you any assurances
Prime Minister?
PM: He said well look I'm very interested in what you've
told me. taking it on, board and I think now that
we'll have a voice over there which is much better acquainted
than it was before with the adverse impact upon this
country, an ally of the United States. than that important
individual was before.
JOURNALIST: Do you think talking on that issue may
have won you a new trade aly in Mr Quayle?
PM: in terms of the negotiations that are going on under
the Uraguay Round I think we have a position as a result
of Australia's leadership of the Cairns Group that the
United States is going to be joining with us in the processes
which are calculated to bring about a reduction through
time of the subsidies and support systems which have
corrupted the international system. So I think we're
going to get that support but what we want to see is,
consistent with that action and argument which they will
produce in the international area, a consistency in what
they do in their own farm bill and in associated budget
pueasures. We will continue to put to them the need to
ao that.
0 JOURNALIST: raised with Vice-President Quayle and
raised? PM: of course that came up and the basic point of course
was that there was recommitment by myself on behalf of
Australia to ANZUS and whatever New Zealand may or may
not do following from that speech of Mr Lange's in the
United State. 1 our mutual comitment, that is of the United
States and Australia to the Treaty remains undiminshed.
One doesn't know as a matter of fact if anything additionally
will flow from Mr Lance's speech. I mean I'm not here
to intervene in New Zealand politics but one would have
to say there is a great degree of uncertainty as to whether
after the speech anything else happens.
JOURNALIST: Are you considering an election before January
of next year?
PM: That's off the agenda, that's been settled.
JOURNALIST: Is there any suggestion that you could act
as a broker between the US and New. Zealand on this question
of ANZUS?
PM: No, I've made it clear from the time that New Zealand
made the decision it did to exclude United States' vessels
that we disagreed with their position. New Zealand has
no doubt as to what our positionli. We've continued to
have bilateral defence exercises and relationships with
New Zealand, we'll continue to do that. So really nothings
been changed by the speech. It seems to be sitting out
there in a rather aberrant fashion. The speech had some
interesting thing. In it but no certainty that it means
anything in a sense of any additional action.
JOURNALIST: you stole the seat of Fisher in the
last election from the Opposition
PM: Stole?
JOURNALIST: Now you've goL IL, -can you keep it?
PM: How do you moan ' stoie') How do you steal a seat?
JOURNALIST: Most people would suggest that this should
be a National Party seat, it traditionally has been.
you've got it now. Can you keep it?
PM: It's not good looking at electoral politics in Queensland
in terms of history and in terms of previous predominance
of the National Party. The National Party is going to
be battling to survive anywhere. They are very very
much a diminished force. We had the good fortune in
Fisher of two things, a Government and a Prime Minister
with a very good record and secondly an outstanding candidate
in Michael Lavarch. Now, you talk about the next election.
You'll still have the outstanding Government and Prime
Minister, an even better record, but you'll have not
a new candid-ate, Michael Lavarch, but a man who will
have been a Member for one full ter%~ and who in that
period has proved himself an outs tarngly good and effective
Member. So as far as Fisher is concerned, bye bye Nat.
JOURNALIST: Senator Button said today that he believes
that the Government is walking a tightrope in regards
to interest rates and the deficit. Do you agree with
that? PM! There's nothing new about that being said, whether
it's by John or by anyone else. I mpan it's been said
many times by me anck by others, you're Walking thiat line
in which you have to have a level of interest rates,
a tightness of monet. ary policy calculated to gradually
bring down the high level of activity which is bringing
in an unsustainably high level of Imports, but not to
do that for such a period or with such intensity that
you move back towards a recessionary situation. So there's
nothing new in what John said. This is a question of
considered, calculated and tough policy management and
we've shown ourselves capable of doinig that in the past
and we'll continue to.
JOURNALIST: if an clecLion was held now that you'd
lose and if there's an election to be held some time
In the near future you'll have to come from behind.
PM: I don't accept your interpretation of it. I haven't
heard what he said and so I'm not going on any second
hand reports. But to talk about an election now is so
hypothetical as to be ridiculous.
JOURNALIST: Do you agree though you'll have to come
from behind?
PN: We would win an election at the present time on
the most recent polls.
JOURNALIST: Dick Woolcott has found overwhalming support
tar your proposal for ~. tuuamk1181t agi. 5nal deal. Do
you see the ministers of the relevant countries meeting
later this year?
PM: On all the evidence that's available to me from
the reports from Mr Woolcott which have been coming back
regularly, it is the case that there is very considerable
support for my initiative and it does look as though
we will be able to have a ministerial meeting before
the end of this year.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hiawke, are you concerned th~ at a Power's
trophy you're presenting this weekend is going to infuriate
liquor trade unions in Queensland and also flies in the
face of State ALP resolutions?
PM: i've seen some reference to that but I thought the
best comment that was made was by someone who said that
if I presented the Elders Cup it didn't mean that I'd
embrace John Elliott.
ends