TRANSCRIPT OF JOINT NEWS CONFERENCE WITH THE RT HON
GEOFFREY PALMER, PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND,
GOVERNMENT HOUSE, AUCKLAND, 2 FEBRUARY 1990
E & 0 E PROOF ONLY
PALMER: Ladies and gentlemen, the Australian Prime
minister and myself have just concluded a very fruitful
round of talks and one of the results of those talks, and
indeed of previous Australian and New Zealand cooperation
on this important issue of driftnet fishing is that the
Australian Prime Minister is going to sign the Driftnet
Fishing Convention on behalf of the Government of
Australia right now.
Can I say a word or two about the discussions we had on
driftnetting? ' There's a great deal of anger and
resentment in the South West Pacific about this practice.
Mr Hawke., arnd I have decided to take some significant
steps towards increasing our cooperation to stamp out
this practice. We are going to develop a program of
surveillance by our aircraft both of the RAAF and the
RNZAF over the Tasman Sea for driftnetting in the
1990/ 1991 season. We're going to intensify our
surveillance in the high seas, we're going to target
driftnet activities within the South West Pacific
economic zones of the Forum island qountries in
consultation with those countries of course and we're
going to give the fullest support to the Forum Fisheries
Agency in the design of a program for this surveillance.
I think this will be a practical measure that will assist
those steps which really began with the Tarawa
Declaration and I am very encouraged at the response to
the Convention and I am also very encouraged that
Australia and New Zealand are going to be able to work to
work very closely together on this issue. I'd like to
hand over to Bob to say a few words on that issue and
some other very significant things that he discussed with
me. HAWKE: Thanks Geoffrey. Well, I take very little time
to add to what Geoffrey has said about the driftnet
fishing issue. As you know, at the last Forum we were
involved in making( sure that this was picked up and it
-2-
resulted in the Tarawa Declaration. We're very indebted
to New Zealand for the follow-up activities in which
they've been involved arnd I think that together, as being
the two major powers in this South Pacific region, the
decisions that we've taken today in regard to increased
surveillance will give weight to the commitment that
we've expressed before as to our abhorrence about this
practice. We hope that, as a result of the actions that
together we've initiated, the world will come to a
situation that this wall of death practice will be
eliminated in our region in the relatively near future.
The next thing I would really like to refer to is that I
had come here to New Zealand with some ideas about how we
would like Geoffrey to make Australia's contribution to
the important events that you celebrate, the 150th
anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.
I'm very pleased that the Prime Minister of New Zealand
has responded positively to the suggestions we've made.
The gifts that Australia will be making are in two
0categories. Firstly, we are going to fund the
establishment of a South Pacific oral history archive to
commemuorate this year. There'll be a fund established,
of the order of $ NZl million and that will fund the
Australian awards in New Zealand oral history. That
grant will establish a trust and will be named the
Australian Trust for Promotion of Oral History in New
Zealand and the South Pacific. The selection of the
awards will be made by a board with representations from
Maori and Pacific island groups and professional
historians, practitioners of oral history and archivists.
Copies of all the material collected will be deposited in
the National Library of New Zealand and, as I understand,
administration will be supplied by the Historical Branch
of the Department of Internal Affairs which will provide
the monitoring and the technical assistance to the
grantees. so in this way we are going to try and ensure
that what has been part of the tradition of New Zealand
and the Pacific islands where the history of the peoples
has traditionally been handed down by word of mouth, that
the most modern techniques that are now available will be
provided for under this scheme to ensure that for future
generations there shall be retained the best possible
statements of the evolution of affairs in this region.
We think that this is a very practical, meaningful sort
of way to express * the depth of the relationship between
our two countries.
The second category of gift that we are making is to
recognise that in the great range of relationships we
have between Australia and New Zealand, the sporting
rivalry is not, not the least significant.
PALMER: This is true.
HAWKE: So what we are doing is to provide cups in
perpetuity for a contest between the two countries in the
two areas of rugby league we'll provide what is called
the Australasian Trophy for Rugby League and it would be
played for in August during the rugby league test being
organised to take place at the same time as the Bledisloe
Cup is being played for in rugby union and to show the
impeccability of our gender credentials, on the one hand
will be the rugby league and on the other hand there'll
be a Sou. thern Cross Cup for women's test cricket.
PALMER: Which is on now.
HAWKE: Which is on now and the women's cricket bodies in
both countries that had expressed the hope that it can be
played for in the current series. The the cup is
here. PAILHER: Yes, that's right.
HAWKE: There you are, that's it. That will now be
how about if I'll infect you, there you are.
PALMER: Thank you very much. That's very nice Bob.
Very heavy, substantial and hotly contested cup it will
be. HAWKE: Yes, it will the third and deciding match is
pretty evenly poised I believe at the moment. So quite
seriously, my friends, we in Australia-deeply value,
Geoffrey, the relationship between our two countries. I
think it's in great shape, both at the personal level,
the people level, the organisations level and this will
be seen, these two gifts will be seen in the area, the
oral archive and the cups . fo r rugby league and women's
cricket, will be seen as a tangible expression of the
deep affection that the people of Australia have for New
Zealand.
PALMER: Well, I think I should say, Bob, on behalf of
all New Zealaniders that we, we really are very grateful
for this great gesture on the occasion of our 150th.
It's a great way of marking this occasion. It's also,
it'll continue to be brought to the-attention of the New
Zealand public every year without fail. I think it's
fair to say that the sporting rivalries between Australia
and New Zealand have done a great deal which is positive.
for the relationship. This is just another indication of
that and I think that the oral history project as well
will be very important for the furtherance and
preservation of the particular unique culture of New
Zealand. We are very grateful to the Australian
Government afld to yourself for your generosity and we
thank you for it.
HAWKE: Pleasure. Now what about the other matters we
talked about? Do you want to
PALMER; well, we had pretty wide ranging discussions on
a whole range of issues. We discussed driftnetting. Mr
Hawke was good enough to give me a rundown on the
-4-
situation in Bougainville which, of course, is a
situation of considerable concern. We talked about the
developing situation in Eastern Europe. We had some
discussions about Antarctica, Cambodia. I briefed the
Australian Prime Minister on the New Zealand Government's
review of its Pacific policy. I pointed out what we were
doing to look at our relationships with the Pacific
island countries and we will make sure that the
Australian Government is kept in close touch with the
development of our thinking on that. We looked briefly
at the situation in Fiji. I think that there's a,
there's a similarity of approach over the questions of
Fiji and there haven't been any developments I think
there that cause us, either of us, to -change our present
policy stances. I think the most important things that
we discuss really always are the relationship between
Australia and. New Zealand. The relationship between
Australia and New Zealand has been mostly characterised
in recent years by the acronym CER. CER has been a
tremendous success' from New Zealand's point of view,
there's been a dynamic development in our trade
relations. we are going to be reviewing it in 1992, it
may be useful to bring forward that review we'll look
at that but on July 1, free trade and goods this year
between New Zealand and Australia will be complete. That
is a most significant development. I expressed to the
Australian Prime Minister that my view that we should
start now looking ahead to how the relationship will
develop post-CER. What sort of relations do we want to
have, how do we want to have those expressed in
institutional ways? Now we haven't made any decisions on
any of that, but what we have decided to do is to do some
long range think * ing about how relations between Australia
and New Zealand will develop. I think thtat there are no
two countries that have closer relations than Australia
and New Zealand.. The depth of those relations is quite
extraordinary. I looked at the list of Ministerial
contacts between Australian Government Ministers and New
Zealand Ministers. They meet, in one range or another,
just about on a weekly basis throughout the year
depending on what portfolio area they are in. We have a
habit of picking up the telephone and talking to our
opposite niubers which must make the life of diplomats
very difficult to keep in touch with actually how the
relationship's developing. -So I just think that the
relationship's in great shape and as a result of these
talks it'll get better.
HAWKE: I just want to very, very briefly confirm what
the Prime Minister of New Zealand has said, both as to
the range of matters covered, the usefulness of the
discussions and to confirm, as I say, as he has the
relationship between our two countries is in great shape
and I think that not only our Governments, but
organisations, people are entitled to be proud of the way
in which that relationship has developed. Now I think we
can be open to questions.
PALMER: Sure.
JOURNALIST: Mr Palmer, considering the depth of the
relationship, would you like to see Australia plead your
cause in Washington or improve official contact with the
United States?
PALMER: I don't think there's any need for any action to
be taken in that connection. I've had discussions with
Gareth Evans in the past about that. The Australian
Government's position is clear about that. in fact that
is not a matter that Bob and I even discussed today
because there's nothing on the agenda in relation to
that.
JOURNALIST: Mr Palmer, you've state before you'* d like to
see or perhaps or you can foresee New Zealand and
Australia having the same currency. Is that still
something you're looking at?
PALMER: s That's not something that we had any discussions
about. What we had discussions about was the nature of
how the relationship might develop and rather than
backing into some sort of evolution that takes place, we
ought to do some hard thinking about what shape we want
to give the relationship.
JOURNALIST: Mr Palmer, is the vessel which has attracted
some Greenpeace attention in Auckland Harbour, is that
supplying driftnet fishing fleets in the Tasman?
PALMER: The allegation is that that vessel was. The New
Zealand Government investigated those allegations, wasn't
able to obtain proof, but as a result of pressure brought
by the Greenpeace organisation and by the trade unions in
New Zealand, the vessel decided it was not going to
refuel here and is going to proceed elsewhere.
JOURNALIST: So there'* s every possibility the vessels
involved in driftnet fishing, either directly or
indirectly, could be bunkering in New Zealand waters?
PALMER: No, I don't think there is that possibility
because, under the Sovereign rights that we have, we can
stop that when it comes to our attention.* But the
JOURNALIST: you don't know.
PALMER: Well, of course that is one of the problems. If
you are going to use your legal powers you've got to have
some proof. You've got to have the facts at your
fingertips. The facts are not always easy to ascertain
in respect of intentions of that sort.
JOURNALIST: Is that good enough do you think?
PALMER: Well, as a result of the Driftnet Fishing
tonvention coming into forcei New Zealand legislation is
going to have to be changed and the changes that we can
make can encompass explicitly this sort of risk. We have
taken very, very drastic measures against driftnetters in
our own internal law. Anyone who brings driftnet
equipment into New Zealand's economic zone is for the
high jump. Now we can tighten it still further as a
result of the measures in this Convention.
JOURNALIST: What about the servicing of driftnet fleets?
PALMER: We can, we can make that covered, but it is not
a simple thing because there are international
arrangements about third party flag Vessels. This vessel
is not flagged by the driftnetting nations.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, will the Australasian rugby league
trophy be played on a nation of origin basis or a
national representative basis?
HAWKE: That's going to be a matter for the sporting
bodies concerned. I must say that my inclination in
these matters from Australian experience is the origin
concept. JOURNALIST: Itts going to rip the guts out of the Sydney
side.
HAWKE: Well, we're a very adaptable nation in all
respects. We're an adaptable nation.
JOURNALIST: -Mr Hawke, have you been able to negotiate an
export licence for the precious metal our team will be
taking back from Auckland?
HAWKE: Not I must say the people of New Zealand and its
Government have been extraordinarily generous in their
attitude on these matters.
PALMER: Anid on a per capita basis we're doing pretty
well ourselves.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, are you going to grab another gold
for Australia when you play Mr Palmer at golf?
HAWKE: Well, let me very briefly recap the history of
this important sporting contest. And you will imagine
properly, correctly, that I only recap the history
because I'm just marginally in front. our first meeting
was two years ago here and I don't know Whether it was
because of his generosity as host, but I won the first
one, our second meeting was our game in KL which he won
and then we had another one up at the retreat which I
won. So it stands at two/ one now and I hear from our
intelligence service which has been deployed on these
matters that he has been practicing vigorously over the
Christmas/ New Year period to the extent that some of.
hspolitic], idyviqers. 1ihave. kpjn. questioning whibtheiT he's
got his priorities right or not, so I'm looking forward
to a very tough-match.
-7
J0URNALISTs Mr Hawke, on the development of free trade and
goods between New Zealand and Australia: regarding the
report currently before the Australian Government talks to
remove tariff rates by the year 2000. Can you tell us what
your personal views are in relation to that please?
HAWKE: I've indicated when the Garnaut report came down
that I had a personal predeliction, which is nothing new. In
the days when I was trade union leader and since I've been
in Parliament I've made it clear that by inclination I am a
free trader rather than protectionist. Because I am a
student of history and if you look at history the causes,
not just of economic conflict, of political conflict and
wars has been the increasing economic under which
people and nations operate under the delusion that they can
put walls around themselves and have -this trading posture
of keeping others out and subsidising their own to hurt
others elsewhere. That always seems to me to be a recipe
for potential disaster. That's why New Zealan : d and
Australia have in a sense given a lead to the rest of the
world and shown that co-operation is the way, that you
shouldn't be afraid of competition. Competition can be
something that is initially uncomfortable, but ultimately
it will make for greater efficiency. We are, in the
international field, putting action where our mouths are.
We are out there leading in the Cairns group in moving
towards firming up a liberalisation of the international
trading system and so in our consideration of the Garnaut
report recommendation it will be within the framework of a
philosophical approach towards the elimination of tariffs.
We've got to make sure that we do that within an
understanding; that we do it within a negotiating framework
of this year of the Uraguay Round. And I don't
know whether you appreciate this, but the processes that are
flow involved in this final ten months of the Uraguay round
of negotiations involve a series of bilateral and
multilateralnegotiations about tariff positions and tariff
findings. Now you don't maximise your capacity to extract
sensible positions from others if you just now say
we're really just going to eliminate everything. I mean
we've got to make sure that you put, . yourself in the best
bargaining position in this final stage of the Uraguay
Round. But we'll be doing that within the framework of a
philosphical and economic commitment to a free trade
position. JOURNALIST: ( inaudible)
HAWKE: It doesn't follow. I gave an answer the other day.
When we received the Garnaut report what I did immediately
was to convene the relevant committee which is the
Structural Adjustment Committee and we now have groups of
officials and of Ministers examining all the relevant
-8
recommendations of Garnaut including this. Now the time at
which I will make decisions, through our government
processes is a matter which will depend upon the reception
of their reports. If that one comes before I call the
election, it will, anid if it doesn't then it will be
considered by the fourth H-awke government.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister do you support the
unconditional position?
HAWKE: There is no one who in this interdependent world
says that you approach these matters by simply saying to the
world we are going to abolish all our tariff and non-tariff
measures. No one. Not a single nation. But what you have
to do, in our judgement, is what my government has done and
certainly with the support of the New Zealand government and
others in t he Cairns group, is to state your position and
that is: the world will be better off with a liberalised
trading machine. To put it into historical and contemporary
terms and, in any sensible analysis of the future, to point
out that the world has expanded in the post-war period
within a situation which has encouraged trade between the
nations and that the most recent period where there have
been signs of increasing tariff and non tariff measures as
impediments to trade is precisely the period where
difficulties have been created.
And not only for nations like our own which are relatively
prosperous but very particularly for those third world
countries which depend so overwhelmingly upon a freedom of
access to the markets of the developed economics for what is
often a mono economic bait with just one commodity or one
or two commodities. So that what you do is to establish the
philosophical position. Of course in Australia's case we
have put our money where our mouth is, if you like, by
the very significant tariff reduction processes which we
initiated in 1988 at 30 per cent.
JOURNALIST: Given the importance of the micro economic
debate in the coming campaign do you think its reasonable
for people to expect that even if you haven't made detailed
decisions on Garnaut you will have a position in principle
on the key recommendations..
HAWKE: I have just stated the position in principle,
weren't you listening?
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, can I ask you what do you think
should be done to back up the doping scandals that we have
had in the Commonwealth Games? Bearing in mind that one
of the problems at the Games has been a limited budget for
doping tests, is. Australia willing to put more money up
for doping tests both in the Games and
HAWKE: Well we will certainly be prepared to play our part
in any international approach on this issue. I think that
9-
the exposure of this issue again can only be helpful and we
within Australia have adopted a very stringent approach, as
you will appreciate and Australia will be prepared to play
its part, in co-operation with others to try and stamp it
out. It's a blot upon the sport and very unfortunately the
good namne of the overwhelming majority of sports and of
sportsmen and women have been tarnished by a few and I
think we should all co-operate to try stamp this practice
out and play our part.
JOURNALIST: But is bearing in mind that
Australia is one of the wealthiest nations in the
Commuonwealth could perhaps put in more money well if
you've put alot of money into winning medals I mean
HAWKE: And put more money than any other nation
other than the United Kingdom and Canada into the
Commonwealt We put more money, if I can use this per
capita concept so clearly beloved by my friendi Geoffrey,
we've put infinitely more money into the
Commonwealth in all its activities probably than anyone
else and we will continue to do so and if in this particular
area the Commonwealth decides that money is required to
have an effective programme then as we do in every other
area we will continue to be economically supportive.
JOURNALIST: Mr H-awke, just coming back it seems to me
that you have two positions on the table: on the one hand
you said that you agreed the Garnaut recommendations to the
unilateral move, you're attracted to it and on the other
hand of the negotiations can you just clarify that?
HAWKE: Yes, well I also said this means we'll have a total
recap. I said' that we had already moved. I mean what we
have done in terms of the decision in 1988, the 30 per cent
reduction in fact brings us towards a
position which has been predicated by many of those that
are negotiating what should be the final outcome of the
Round. Now we are not satisfied that there shouldn't be
further progress than that. Now what we have done is to, in
the area of most the concern, but while not exclusively
concentrating on agriculture we have been leading via the
Cairns group the pressure on the two major groups, the
European community and the United States, -to have
substantial changes in that area of concern. But we have
also been very much involved in the discussions and
negotiations in the other areas which are covered by the
Uraguay Round. Now what we are making clear is that we take
into the Round a position of already made decisions, which
are much more than what most other countries have done. But
we are saying, not merely in response to the Garnaut report
but as a general philosophical position, which has been the
basis of our approach in the Cairns group, that the world
should be moving towards a greater freeing up of trade. As
10
far as Australia is concerned there is no basis upon which
it should be seen that what we did in 1988 is the end of our
commitment it is not. The processes of moving beyond the
very substantial reductions that we have already made
will involve not merely a unilateral decision in response
to Garnaut and other matters. But by definition when in
1990 you are in the final months of the Uraguay Round I'm
saying it must by definition, the decision to take must be
related to the negotiations you will have in that Round.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke do you see any irony in you coming to
New Zealand to celebrate the anniversary of the Treaty of
Waitangi when Australia is still own indigenous people?
11
HAWK( E: No, I don't, I don't feel any problem about that.
The simple position is that we will proceed with the
concept of a treaty within Australia. I am to have
further discussions with the Minister about, Gerry Hand,
about this. What we want to see is Gerry of course has
had time overwhelmingly taken up with getting the ATSIC
legislation through the Parliament. Now that that's
done, he's going to be able to give more time to this
issue,' but what I want to see is a process settled upon
whereby we can accelerate the consideration of these
issues. We will want within the Aboriginal community to
be quite sure that we've got a process whereby we can get
the feelings and the attitude of the Aboriginal people
and now that ATSIC is is established, the legislation
is through, I think via ATSIC we're going to have a
better way of getting the views of the Aboriginal
community. on the other hand we also want to-now get
going the process of education, if you like, of the
community generally. in the non-Aboriginal community,
about the importance of this issue. I can assure you
that in the fourth term that these things will be
processed, the resources will be made available because I
do believe that the total Australian community
Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal is going to be well
served by the achievement of that treaty. It's not
something that's imposed, but something tha t emerges from
as far as possible a coalescence of the wishes, the
aspirations of the Aboriginal people and a recognition of
the non-Aboriginal community of the appropriateness of
such an outcome.
JOURNALIST: Mr Palmer, given the historical nexus of the
election of Labor Governments on both sides of the
Tasman, would you personally prefer an Australian
election earlier rather than later this year?
PALMER: I don't think it makes any difference. From the
New Zealand Government point of view, when the Australian
election occurs is a question for the Australian Prime
Minister, not for me.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, there's still some progress to be
made on trade services under CERHAWKE:
Yes.
JOURNALIST: One area that's been quite controversial has
been greater access in air services between the two
countries. HAWKE: Yes.
JOURNALIST: Was that discussed today..
HAWK( E: Yeo, Geoffrey and I did have some discussion
about that and it's recognised that this is an area of
Lmportance. You'll appreciate that in Australia, as a
result of the decision taken by my Government, we are now
12
abolishing the two airline agreement and that happens
this year. And within our consideration of the impact of
that, that decision later this year I mean, it comes
into effect in the second half of this year we will be
looking at the impact of that decision, what developments
take place in terms of new enterprises that may set up,
and so on. within the framework of that consideration
we'll certainly be considering the trans-Tasman aspect of
that. it's quite clear we need to take account of the
aspiration of Air New Zealand. We've got to ask
ourselves questions about the relationships between
Qantas, Australian and s0 on, and we've agreed that
within the framework, as I say, of the deregulated
Australian situation following the abolition of ' the two
airline agreement that this is one of the matters that
will be taken into account. We tend to think that having
accelerated so much the freeing-up of trade goods
because, as you recall, that under the original timetable
there wasn't to be complete freedom of trade in goods
until 1995. Now, we've brought that forward five years.
Now we think it's appropriate to accelerate our
consideration of trade in services.
JOURNALIST: so it's possible Air New Zealand wiill be
given domestic rights into Australia.
HAWKE: Well, that's one of the things Air New Ze-Aland
would like to have. It's legitimate for it to be on the
table. JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, a number of Australian companies
have caught New Zealand disease
HAWKE: What's the New Zealand disease?
JOURNALIST: Going into liquidation.
HAWKE: Is it? I see.
JOURNALIST: Are you expecting a recession in Australia
this year and if so what impact could it have on New
Zealand.
HAWKE. No. There is no exipectation of a recession in
Australia. There will not be a recession in Australia.-
No-one who is acquainted with the Australian economic
scene expects a recession. No-one.
JOURNALIST: yesterday's trade figures show, confirm
the trend of a * slowing economy and may give rise to a
further easing of monetary policy?
HAWKE: Well, like you, I've ' read what the Treasurer said
about this. He'* s put it correctly. I don't really have
anything to add to what Paul has had to say because what
he said reinforced what I'd said myself. And that is we
refuse to be rushedi into a change in monetary policy when
in conjunction with the Reserve Bank we made the steps we
13
did, which Paul properly described as a limited initial
step. It was on the basis of a range of economic
information available to us which gave us the feeling
that the stance of policy which had been in place had
produced the results that we wanted, was producing it
that is a slowing down of the economy. Now We said at
the time, when some cynics or relatively ill informed
people said why don't you wait for the, the balance of
payments figures. We've said that that reflected earlier
positions rather than the current. But it's interesting
that that reflection of the earlier position, orders made
and so on, some six months or more ago, confirms the
assessment that we made about the slowing down of the
economy. It's not something that comes as a surprise in
the light of the range of other statistics and to the
extent that our assessment has been confirmed, that means
that at an appropriate time there can be a further
consideration of easing. We will not be rushing into
that as the Treasurer said.
JOURNALIST: Mr Palmer, what conclusions did you and Mr
Hawke reach about the current situation on Bougainvill~ e?
PALMER: Well, our primary interest for New Zealand is
the safety of our citizens who are there. There were
substantial numbers of New Zealanders in Bougainville.
We've advised them to leave and a lot of them have and
our discussions really revolved around the mechanics of
ensuring that our citizens could safely be evacuated from
Bougainville in the event of a deterioration. The
numbers there now are many, many fewer than they were
just a few weeks ago. obviously the whole situation in
Bougainville is a matter of concern, not just in New
Zealand and ' Australia, but throughout the Pacific.
JOURNALIST: What chance is there of New Zealand or
Australian intervention in some form?
PALMER: I would think no chance from New Zealand'* s point
of view of intervening. our only concern is to keep our
nationals safe and get them out of there in the event
that it's necessary to do so.
H{ AWKE: Let me make it quite clear that I've said in
Australia, and'I take the opportunity of repeating it
here, there will be no Australian military intervention
in Papua New Guinea in regard to the dispute. Not on
under any circumstances. All that can happen which would
involve Australian military forces is as a result of an
understanding which I initiated now a couple of months
ago with the Government of Papua New Guinea, if a
circumstance were to arise of danger to Australian
nationals where their safety required our intervention
for the purpose of rescuing them, evacuating them, then
we would do that and that would be done with the
understanding of the Government of Papua New Guinea.
under no other circumstances would Australian military
forces intervene.
-14
JOURNALIST; Are there any contingency plans for a joint
Australian and New Zealand action?
HAWKE: Well, it follows what I've said, no. That
there's no
JOURNALIST: Not necessarily military,, but
HAWKE: We are prepared in the present circumstances to,
when we've got our forces standing by in a contingency
situation and we are prepared to look after New Zealand
people as well as our own.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, were you giving us another
tantalising tip yesterday when restating your intention
to go to Gallipoli? Does this mean early April rather
than HAWKE: Good question.
PALMER: No answer.
JOURNALIST: What's your answer?
ends