PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Hawke, Robert

Period of Service: 11/03/1983 - 20/12/1991
Release Date:
12/09/1989
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
7737
Document:
00007737.pdf 5 Page(s)
Released by:
  • Hawke, Robert James Lee
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH ALLAN DICK, PACIFIC RADIO, NEW ZEALAND, 12 SEPTEMBER 1989

-rai
PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH ALLAN DICK, PACIFIC RADIO, NEW
ZEALAND, 12 SEPTEMBER 1989
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
DICK: We dithered a lot in this country over the purchase
of the two frigates. Are you pretty satisfied with what
we've done?
PM4: Yes, I am. It's the purchase of two with an option of
a further two. I'm pleased with that and I certainly want
to make it clear to your listeners there, Allan, that this
has not been a case of Australia standing over or attempting
to stand over New Zealand. What we've tried to do is to put
our case as to why we think, in terms of future
relationships and future capacities and future
inter-operabilities of our forces, that this was a sensible
decision. But, in the end, the New Zealand Government has
made a decision according to its assessment of what New
Zealand's best interests are. I'm very pleased with the
decision. DICK: Were you beginning to get a bi~ t impatient though with
all our dithering and chain dragging?
PM: Well, I suppose it's fair to say we would have liked to
have seen a decision earlier, but let me say quite
straightforwardly that I understand that within New Zealand,
both within the Labour Party and more generally, that there
are people of goodwill who had reservations about the wisdom
of this decision. I respect their integrity, but I am
certain that the decision that it's taken is the right one.
So if, in the result, we've got a decision which is better
understood within New Zealand so much the better.
DICK: One of these confidential business newsletters that
every country appears to have says that we now have aligned
ourselves with the Australian defence and that the
flexibility on the price was in fact based on the Australian
perceived fears of Indonesia some time in the next 20 years.
Do you think that would be incorrect?
PM: No, we haven't developed our defence policy on the
basis of perceived fears of any particular nation, but we
have developed our white paper, on defence and

-2-
ensuing policy decisions on the basis that we have to accept
a responsibility for any likely eventuality into the future.
We see the future, sensibly handled, as one where there
shouldn't be conflict. But no Government can responsibly
ignore that it must accept the necessity of taking decisions
which enable you to meet with any possible eventuality.
That's what we've done. But Australia, like New Zealand, is
a peace loving nation and if you are going to understand our
decision, not only in regard to frigates, but in regard to
the acquisition of other naval craft and aircraft, this has
to be seen in the context of the fact that I think no nation
has done more in the international councils of the world to
push the causes of peace and disarmament.
DICK: Have you noticed anything already in New Zealand's
attitude towards Australia now that we've got Geoffrey
Palmer as Prime Minister? Have you noticed any change at
all so far?
PM: No, I think that would be quite unfair to David Lange.
I mean, it's fair to say this, that although David and I had
a difference of view on the question of the ANZUS
relationship and ships visits a difference which was
conducted between us intelligently and civilly I must say
in fairness to David Lange that in all our meetings,
particularly in relevant international fora like the
Commonwealth Heads of Government and the Pacific Forum, he
was always very supportive of me and the positions which I
took because we had views which, apart from that major area
of difference, coincided. So, if I were to say that now
things are better with Geoffrey, that would be unfair to
David. But let me say this, I've always enjoyed very good
relations with Geoffrey including jus) L being able to pip him
on the golf course in New Zealand and-we respect one
another. I like him very much and what I see as a
continuation under Geoffrey Palmer of the warm relationships
that existed with his predecessor.
DICK: I showed the good judgement to go to Australia for a
holiday last year and while I was there I read a Sydney
newspaper. One of the things that was being said by
manufacturers, I think it was a manufacturing group, was
this. Now that we've got CER in place, don't overlook the
New Zealand market. It might be small but after all it has
got the population of Sydney. As I put the brakes on the
car I thought ' well, we really are pretty small aren't we?'
PM: well, Sydney's pretty big of course too. That's the
other way of looking at it and you ought to try driving
through it. But let me say this, the CER agreement between
our two countries has been enormously successful. There's
been a very, very significant growth in two-way Trans Tasman
trade since we negotiated the agreement in 1983. In fact,
, the ave-rage growth in that Trans Tasman trade since 1983 has
been 14-percent per annum. So this has been good for both
countries.

DICK: New Zealanders continue to flood to Australia, even
though every day across here we hear more bad news about the
Australian economic scene
PM: You haven't been reading all the right news then.
DICK: Perhaps not. Can you understand what it is that's
dragging New Zealanders in their tens of thousands to
Australia? PM: We're a very attractive country. Well, let me say,
that relatively the employment position in Australia has
been more attractive than New Zealand. I mean, I can give
you some idea of the dimension of employment growth since
we've been in Government. We've had an employment growth
since we've been in office which is about half your
population. In other words, we've had over one and a half
million new jobs created in Australia since we came to
office in March of 1983. That increase in employment has
been across a wide range of industries, particularly in the
tourist industry and a lot of that has been in areas which
are very congenial. So, where you've had a greater problem
in regard to employment than we have, I suppose people have
made the judgement over there that they've got a relatively
better chance of employment and in relatively congenial
environments here.
DICK: There's always been a pretty strong spirit of
competition between Australia and New Zealand.
PM: There sure has.
DICK: Do you think it's perhaps stronger from our point of
view than the Australian?
PM: I guess so and I guess that's understandable. I mean,
I don't take gloat in the fact but it is the fact that we
are relatively very much bigger, I mean, in both the size of
our country and the size of our population, we're about 17
million which is five or so times your size. It's
inevitable in circumstances like that, that the relatively
smaller country is going to be the one which is relatively
more aggressive in its attitude. I think that's perfectly
natural and understandable. Without making an exact
parallel, I suppose you'd think of the position of Canada
and the United States where the same sort of phenomenon
exists.

DICK: We continue, I'm talking about New Zealand continues
to be at logger heads with the USA primarily because of our
anti-nuclear stance, the Australians aren't. Is that a
problem for you?
PM: Well let me put the position this way. We have made it
quite clear from 1984 when this Government came to office in
New Zealand that we didn't agree with their nuclear ships
policy. We took the view and maintain the view that you
can't have a defence alliance relationship, which is what
ANZUS is, and say to you " hello I'm sorry your ships can't
come to our port". That to us is a claytons policy. A
claytons defence alliance relationship policy. Now we say
that with no sense of aggression or superiority. That's our
view. You have a different view. But the fact of the
difference meant that we weren't able to have as an
effective defence interrelationship between the United
States, Australia and New Zealand as existed before. There
was some limitations on the exchange of intelligence
information, but with the full understanding of our American
friends in that situation. We tended to increase the
bilateral defence relationship between Australia and New
Zealand because that made a lot of sense because we have
shared responsibilities in regard to the South Pacific. So
it has been a case of saying well you have your view, we
have ours, we think we're right, we know you think your
right, but don't let that stop, in any way, the relationship
between the two of us.
DICK: $ 64 billion question. There is not a great deal of
difference in attitudes between Australia and New Zealand
and it is not going to happen in your'. life time or mine, but
political amalgamation, 100 years away?
PM: It is silly to put any time table on it Allan. I'd
simply say this, that it is not, as far as we are concerned,
a pressing issue, and I wouldn't understand that it is in
New Zealand, but if you look at the whole span of human
history with things that at one stage didn't seem possible,
( they) changed. And all I can say is that if that is ever
going to eventuate, it will only eventuate if the peoples of
the two countries come mutually to a perception that it
would be in their respective self interest for it to happen.
So I think that this is a slow evolution, it may occur, but
it won't occur in my political life time. If at some time
during the life of my children or their children, our
dependants here and in New Zealand just make the decision
that a full political integration would be in their best
interests, then it will happen.

DICK: How about a common unit of currency though?
PM: Well, I was talking earlier about the CER. We are in
this situation, if I can look at the steps that occurred.
By July of next year virtually all impediments in the way of
trades and good and services will have been removed and that
will be five years ahead of the schedule that was
contemplated when it was signed in 1983. What we're into
now is the sort of next stages of discussing the issues of
an investment agreement and harmonisation of business law
and cooperation in customs and quarantine areas. So we are
well ahead of the schedule that was set. The next major
review of the . CER is set to take place in 1992 and in that
there will obviously be some fairly difficult issues
involved. Now whether, with the accelerated pace of dealing
with issues that marked the way it has operated so far,
whether we will get to that stage in the foreseeable future
I can't say. But obviously, while posing some advantages,
also has difficulties. I mean in terms of the fixing of
exchange rates and so on.
DICK: Final question Mr Hawke. You have already indicated
that you going to stand again. When do you see yourself
retiring? PM: What I have said is that I will lead the party in this
coming election and the next one. I think probably after
that it will be time to think about it. But I am nearly
now, I will be 60 in December. I think it is generally
considered that I am a pretty fit and healthy and alert near
and that sort of schedule would have me up into the mid
and then I think there is plenty-of time for life after
politics then.
DICK: Prime Minister, Mr Bob Hawke. It has been a
pleasure. Thank you for your time Sir.
PM: Thank you very much indeed Allan.
DICK: Thank you very much indeed Sir.
ends

7737