PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Transcript 7963

TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH DOUG AITON, 3LO, MELBOURNE 15 MARCH 1990

Photo of Hawke, Robert

Hawke, Robert

Period of Service: 11/03/1983 to 20/12/1991

More information about Hawke, Robert on The National Archive website.

Release Date: 15/03/1990

Release Type: Interview

Transcript ID: 7963

PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH DOUG AITON, 3L0, MELBOURNE,
1S MARCH, 1990. PROOF ONLY
AITON: Good to See you again. How are you feeling with, what is
it, ten days to go I suppose?
PM: I feel very well thanks Doug.
AITON: Has it been one of the tough ones for you?
PM: Well it's a very important election and I'm not being
complacent about It# but in terms of impact upon me, it's
probably been easier than most because we haven't had so many
night functions and they're pretty draining things, you know, you
have hundreds of people there and I try and shake hands with them
all, a lot of autographs, and there hasn't been so many of those.
It's been easier in that respect.
AXTON: I can't understand why you say it is the most important
election since 1949, 1 think you have articulated this, but I
would've thought 1972 was far more important for the direction of
this country. Not because Labor won but because it was a
watershed year.
PM: Well yes, I've been making a point in this sense Doug, that
I think it will determine the sort of Australia we take into the
twenty-first century and I think it's terribly important. I
mean obviously you can argue about other elections but I really
do believe it's important because we're going to determine, for
instance, If you look at the area of how we tax ourselves, it'.
going to be whether we continue to have a country in which the
rich do pay tax or whether we go back to the country that was
talked about before by Professor Matthews where he said it was
.4ust a matter of choice whether the rich paid tax. The
-' abolition of the capital gains tax would mean it would be a
matter of choice and I think that's terribly important because
we've got to have the billions of dollars that come from making
sure that people who can afford to pay do pay so that we can
upend on the aorts of things we need to make this a better
country. And environmentally too I think it's terribly important
because if you look at all the important decisions that I've / 2

-2-
taken with my colleagues in Government, all those important ones
were opposed by an Opposition, which you've got to remember is
nlot just the Liberal Party but the National Party, and they are
environmental vandals.
AITON: If you lose this election, which seems possible, I mean
I think it's going to be close, moot people think it's going to
be close, do you not?
PH, I'm not cocky or complacent about it. X think we'll win but
I'll be fighting right down to midnight on Friday night.
AITON: Well certainly the opinion polls at the moment would have
you drawing away, you and the Government drawing away, but if you
do lose, I would imagine it will be basically because, if we take
from 1983 from which time you've been Prime Minister, people are
hurting now most of all.
PM1 Some people have been hurt, that's right, by the tight
monetary policy that we've had to have, because if I hadn't had a
tight monetary policy the economy would've absolutely collapsed.
We couldn't afford to keep sucking in the level of imports that
we were, that high level of activity, and that would've destroyed
the economy. So I concede that some people have obviously been
hurt Doug, by those high interest policies, but I think they
understand. Hawke's been around in public life now thirty years
and I think they know that I'm not a mug. I mean I wouldn't do
it to hurt myself and I certainly wouldn't do it to hurt ordinary
Australians. It's been necessary to slow things down and it's
because we've been successful now in gradually slowing down the
level of activity that I'm confident that interest rates can come
down and importantly the banking industry is saying that. So I
think that they're going to put these things in the perspective.
AXTON: I think the nature of being an Australian has changed
during the 1980'., and rightly or wrongly you'll be blamed, your
Government will be blamed for the fact that young people can no
longer assume that if they get out there, leave school, get a job
and work, they can got a house.
PM: But let's go back one step. I'll be remembered an the, in
respect of young people, as the bloke who inherited a country
whej" after seven years of conservative government there'd be no
change in the rate at which kids stayed on in school. It went
from thirty four percent to thirty six percent in their seven
years. One in three of our kids stayed on in school. After
seven years of Hawke there's nearly two in three of our kids
staying on in school now. There couldn't be anything more / 3

-3-
fundamental in terms of the importance of the future of our
children that we have them staying on in school. Not only have
them staying on in school but a wide range of training and retraining
programs as well, and importantly, we've created jobs
for them. In the last twelve months before I became Prime
Minister, another quarter of a million people thrown onto the
unemployment scrap-heap, including most particularly our young
people. Now I've created job. five times faster than they were
created before, twice as fast as the rest of the world. So the
kids are a) being educated, b) trained , and c) have got jobs
available. RITONo But they're worried about buying houses still.
PM; Sure, but they take the view I believe that the most
important thing is that they be educated and that they get a job.
And of course, let's remember about houses. we've built houses
at a much higher rate than under our predecessors. We have built
houses, the commencement rate of houses over our period in office
has been ten percent per annum higher than under the
conservatives. AITONs There's on e other area, or a couple of other areas
concerning money that I think people are angry about. I do think
that young people are terribly angry about the fact that they
can't assume that thing about buying houses and this is what I
notice moving around talking to people away from this radio
station. And I notice the matter of income tax, specifically
income tax. Now I know that the Hawke Government has achieved
quite a lot as far as reforming the taxation system overall is
concerned. But I think it's fair to say that still the rich are
avoiding paying tax.
PMs Absolutely untrue, absolutely untrue.
AITON: Why? Why do you say that?
PM: Well for the very simple reason that we have brought in the
instruments to make sure that they do. But on the question of
the rich avoiding tax, let me just give you the quote Doug that
was made at the end of the Conservatives' period of office by
Pro~ geosor Matthews. Be said then, " the essential problem is to
Make the rich pay any income tax at all.' That's what he said
then. And do you know why the fundamental reason that we weren't
paying tax was the absence of a capital gains tax. They could
so arrange their affairs that they could channel their activities
into the accretion of capital assets which were then un-taxed.

-4-
Now I've donte these things. l've brought in the capital gains
tax, we've brought in the fringe benefits tax and we have brought
in the tax on entertainment where they could deduct their
entertainment allowances before. Now it's just recognised,
recognised by every tax expert in the country, that now, as a
result of those three things, and particularly the capital gains
tax, that the rich are now no longer in Australia in the position
that they were described by Matthews, it was a matter of choice
whether they paid tax.
AITON: There was one report, I think it was from the Social
Policy Research Centre at the University of Noew South Wales, it
doesn't really matter where it was from, but it said that the tax
system still discouraged saving by taxing interest on savings at
the full marginal rate without allowing for inflation. The
example they gave was therefore someone saving for a house gets
fourteen percent interest on the savings but because of seven
percent inflation they end up getting nothing.
PH: The whole question of inflation and interest has been
examined. Hr Peacock, you remember, dashed off on his mini
campaign last year saying that he was going to bring in a system
of allowing deductions. Of course when his people examine it as
I've had Treasury examine it, and you've got to look at both
sides, you're taking account of inflation and interest on both
the income side and the cost side, it is full of complexities and
the advice from all the independent sources are that it can't be
done. Now on the question of savings, the most important single
thing that we've done to encourage savings in this country is
what we've done in regard to superannuation. When we came into
office the superannuation funds were seventeen billion dollars.
They're now up to a hundred billion dollars and it'. estimated by
the end of this decade it'll be between six and seven hundred
billion. Now what we are doing in we've made, as distinct from
the situation when we came to office that superannuation was the
preserve of the minority, by making it an award provision now,
we've got employers paying for their employees fifteen dollars
every week now into superannuation for each employee, over the
next three years there'll be another fifteen dollars. Now that
will be thirty dollars a week being paid into superannuation.
Now that's going to accumulate a vast mass of savings, we've
given favourable taxation treatment for this, and that means that
not. 4. only will it be important from the point of view of
individuals but from the point of view of the country we're going
to be accumulating savings upon which industry can draw, rather
than having to borrow overseasa.
AITON: Are you saying that the rich people of this country are
now paying as much income tax as you, a Labor Prime Minister,
would like to see them paying?

I'm saying that yes, that we have made sure that they pay.
We have brought in a situation where we've brought down the top
rate, the top rate was sixty cents in the dollar when we came in.
The reason why the top rate was sixty cents in the dollar was
that all the ordinary mugs, the wage and salary earners were
paying their tax but the people with the greatest capacity
weren't paying because of the absence of a capital gains tax.
Having brought that in, and the fringe benefits tax, we've been
able to reduce the rates of tax from sixty down to forty seven
and the bottom rate from thirty to twenty one, which is much more
equitable. But what of course is being proposed by Hr Peacock
now, with him two-tier system which would cost 2.8 billion
dollars, is to give a tax break of twenty cento a week, twenty
cents a week, to the bloke on seventeen thousand, and the bloke
on seventy thousand , fifty eight dollars a week cut. That's the
sort of concept of equity in regard to income tax and at the same
time take ot'f capital gains tax so they'll put billions of
dollars back, out of the public revenue into the pockets of the
wealthiest loe than one percent of taxpayers.
AXTON: It you win this election on the other hand, I was saying
if you lose it it'll be because people are hurting more than they
ever have since you've been Prime Minister, if you win you're
going to actually overtake the Labor record set by a combination
of John Curtin and Ren Chifley from 1941-1949. 1 think you'll
overtake that next year. I suppose that's come into your
calculation. PM8 I believe Doug that I'm the best equipped to lead the Labor
Party now. If I didn't believe that I would've stood down. I
think I'm the best equipped to lead it and importantly, that's
not my judgement but more importantly it'. the judgement of the
Labor Party, I have the unanimous support of all my colleagues
as distinct from the bitterness and hatred on the other side of
politics. I wonder whether r could just share are we allowed
to swap radio programs?
AITON: Sure.
PHI I just came across the transcript of something that happened
earlier this week on.. can I mention A rival?
AXTON: Yes.
PM: On Chippy's program.
AITON: On 3AK. 0 ./ 6

6-
PM: Yes, and he had John Howard on. Can I just read you this
very, very interesting Proposition. He said, this is Chippy: " my
research shows that the Prime Minister told you in the Houce
three Weeks before the Peacock coup that he the Prime Minister
had been informed of the plot against you, but at that stage Mr
Peacock had thirty-four votes and was rising." Well I did do
that. " Now given your committment", said Chippy to John Rowardo
given your committment to spurn humbug which you already said
and for which people admired you, I ask you simply this question.
Do you still believe", this is a question to John Howard, " do you
still believe, in view of the Prime Minister's knowledge three
weeks before the coup, do you still believe Mr Peacock when he
continues to assert that he only knew of the move a couple of
days in advance of when he was drafted?" And John Howard's
immortal reply, " Well Don, again, I'll spurn humbug and say that
the beat thing I can do for the Liberal Party in an election
Campaign is to refuse to answer questions on that subject".
Which Don gave the obvious observation, there's only one
inference you can draw from the reply John". g o I make the
point, I've got the unanimous support of my colleagues for the
leadership and here in this second last week of the campaign you
have John Howard virtually saying that he doesn't believe that
Andrew Peacock is telling the truth about the processes by which
he John Howard warn kicked out of the leadership of the Liberal
Party.
AITON: We'll go to some callers in a moment. A lot of people
are hanging on hoping to talk to you. I ' vs got a couple of other
questions. I reckon it might be won or lost in Victoria.
PM8 Yes but that assumes that the rest of Australia doesn't
matter, that nobody else
AITON: No I'm not saying it doesn't matter.
PM: But I wasn't trying to be pernickity7 in saying that. I
mean you're quite right Doug in saying that Victoria's important,
and I'm not denying the fact that we've probably got, in respect
of some of our seats, our hardest fight in Victoria. But the
point I'm making to you is that we are I think going to win seats
in Queensland and Tasmania, could do also in New South Wales, I
th~ k we're going to hold all our seats in Western Australia. So
let me assume that we might have difficulty in holding a couple
of our seats. I think we'll hold them here in Victoria but I do
concede it's a bit more difficult here. But I'm simply saying to
you that the other things that are happening around Australia can
offset, and more than offset, if you take the worst case scenario
in Victoria about losing some seats. / 7

-7-
AXTON! Well what I was going to may in that if the crunch is
going to be felt in Victoria, it seems odd to me that the
Coalition seems to have a better campaign going in Victoria at
the moment. Their advertising seems to be slicker than that of
the Labor Party.
PMs: That's not what's been said to me, anid may Z say, we've
heard some stories from inside the opposition camp which
indicates a lot of unhappiness there. But can I make this more
fundamental point Doug, that the proposition that's being put,
and it was argued in Western Australia too and I argued against
it there, it seems to involve the proposition that Victorians
will kick themselves in the backside to register some sort of
protest about a state situation here. I mean on the 24th of
March they are going to have to decide which Federal Government
is going to be in charge of education, health, environment at the
Federal level, and taxcation. Are they going to say, well look we
think on those things the Labor Party's much better than the
Opposition but because we ' re a bit unhappy with some of the
things that happened in the Victorian State Government we're
going to vote against them. I don't think they're going to do
that. AITON; No they're not, but I just think that these are going to
be the tightest seats, that's all, and that we'll be looking at
these ueats to decide the winner of the election.
PX1 I believe that Victorian seats are important, I'm not
arguing, it'd be silly to argue that they're not important. I'.
simply saying in the totality of things, I think we're going to
win. AITON: At a time like this when things are tight, when people
are feeling the pinch, when it's close, that's when people tend
to want to change their vote I reckon, and also statistically
you're not in good shape. That's not your fault of course but to
be returned a fourth time as a Labor Prime Minister, that's four
in a row, would be the first time in history wouldn't it, in
Australia. PM: Yen.
AIZONt Those things are making it look statistically fairly
tou gh for you. / 8

-a-
PHI No but you've then got to get back to the question, what
Judgement are you making about the intelligence of the
electorate. They've got to make a choice on the 24th of March
whether Bob Hawke's going to be Prime Minister or Andrew Peacock.
And they've got to make a Judgement whether you can have Hawke as
Prime mi~ nister or Andrew Peacock, and with the policies which
say we won't aboliuh the capital gains tax, we won't give
billions of dollars back to the wealthy loe than one percent,
we'll keep billions of dollars to be spent on education and so
on, a Government under Hawke which has an impeccable record, via
a vis the opposition on environmental matters, those are the
decisions. They're not going to be saying, oh well this is
Hawkie's fourth time up. it's a choice between Hawke and
Peacock. ArTON: I know, they've said that sort of thing before. You're
putting an enormous amount of faith in people deciding that your
policies are best.
PHI Yes, well I just happen to think that over the year.,
basically, the Australian electorate has tended to get things
right. I've said publicly that in all those years when we were
out of office the public made a decision, they saw the Labor
Party fighting and squabbling, and my God we were, and they said
look, if you mob can't govern yourself and you manifestly can't,
we're not going to allow you to attempt to govern the country.
Now you've got this situation amongs . t the Conservatives. I mean
they hate one another. John Howard, on the record, at the end of
last year in the Sydney Morning Herald, saying no trust between
Peacock and Howard. So you'ye got the deepest of hatreds and
divisions within the Liberal Party and you've got deep divisions
between the Liberal Party and the National Party, and I believe
that quite apart from an assessment of the policy issues, like on
health, are they going to say, oh look health's not important.
This mob which have got up and said publicly that our record in
health is no good, in government or in opposition, but that
doesn't matter people are going to say we'll let you control
our health, I just don't believe that's the way it operates.
AITONt You've got to catch a plane soon and you've got to leave
here at 5.40 on the dot so we're going to take ten minutes of
ca-Inju and we'll go to Jim. Are you there Jim? He's gone. Bello
Michael. MICHAEL: Mr Hawke, I'd like to ask you a rather simple
question. PH: I'm always wary of the simple ones Michael. .1s9

-9-
MICHAEL: Right. I'm one of Your middle-income wage and salary
earners and I have a small share portfolio. Shares Poet and pro-
September 1985. Now it'. not worth a lot of money but I have
received bonus shares, rights issues and so on. It's an
accounting nightmare to keep track of all these shares because of
your capital gains tax. Now I'm not going to make a lot of money
from selling my shares. Why don't you look after the small
person such as myself if you're so determined to attack the
wealthy people that live off capital gains? I'd like your
opinion please.
PM: The principle is the same Michael. That if people acquire
an income out of capital accretion, then I take the view,
interestingly that is shared by, may I say, Dr Howson. Can I
just quote to you Dr Howson ' s view on this matter when he was a
pure economist and before he became a captive of the Conservative
prejudices. MICHAEL: Mr Hawks, I'd prefer you to
PH: And I'm going to, because what Professor Howson has said is
my reasoning, in answer to your question. so I'm sorry
Michael, you may not like the fact that my reasoning is the same
as Hewoon's, but it's important to give you the answer, and this
is what Hewson said on the 3rd of August in the Age, 1987, when
he was asked about the question of capital gains and fringe
benefits, ifewson said, and I quote, " I'd go for near uniform
taxation of all forms of income" and I agree with Howsonl the
economist, and that is, if in fact you are deriving income from
accretion of values on your shares. I mean you buy shares and
out of a magnificent effort on your part Michael, of ringing your
stockbroker and saying sell, I mean a tremendous effort on your
part mate, you ring him up because the shares have appreciated
in value, you ring up your sharebroker and you get an increase in
value on your shares. I reckon you should pay tax on that
because the bloke that's working in that company in which you've
got shares, who through his labour has increased the value of
your shares, for every hour of his brain or muscle-work in that
company in which you have shares, he pays tax on his labour, of
hi. brain and his mind. You have the shares, you ring up your
stockbroker and say sell and you get a capital appreciation but
yo* think you pay no tax on it, Well mate, it was the absence of
the capital gains tax wh-ich led Professor Matthews to say what
I've just before on this program, that it was a matter of choice
as to whether the rich paid any tax, and it was also the absence
of a capital gains tax which led the Conservative's Royal
Commissioner, Frank Costigan, to say that tax avoidance was the
fastest growing industry in this country.

AITON: I'm going to have to move on. I'm morry Michael, I know
you wanted to argue back but I want to get some other callers on.
Have you ever owned any shares in your life?
PM: no.
AITON: Hello Terry.
TZRRYt Xr Hawke, Ifm one of eight children, I have seven
sisters. Two of my sisters have had babies out of marriage,
they've -had supporting boyfriends and they have both, one in
particular got a house on a special arrangement by the Government
because she wag an unmarried mother. She bought a house about
five years ago worth thirty thousand dollars, or she bought it
for thirty-five thousand dollars or something in Adelaide. it's
now worth about a hundred thousand. She's still not working,
neither her husband now not working. My other sister's the same.
She has had a baby out of marriage and she's been put on line to
get a cheap home loan. I've been working my butt off mince I was
sixteen, I'm not twenty-eight, for twelve years. I went out to
get a second job last year because I desperately want to put a
roof over my head that I call mine and I got taxed through the
bum. I mean because I want to go out and do two jobs it wasn't
worth my while because I was paying so much tax. How is it under
your Government that two girls, and they're just two examples,
there are a lot of girls that I know that are doing this, can go
out and get pregnant out of wedlock, get their boyfriends to
support them anyway and two dole cheques come into the house or
whatever, and they get a house over their head. I mean they're
sitting on a mortgage now that's worth a hundred thousand
dollars and I am working my butt off.
AITOW: Okay, we get the point of what you're saying. Yes Prime
Minister. PM# Let me say this, that it's under my Government that you'ye
had the most considerable tightening of the eligibility for
benefits that you've seen. Under our predecessors the number of
people on benefit. simply exploded. What we have done is to
bring about a situation more and more where people are going to
have to work if they are going to get benefits. That's why in
respect of single parents for instance, you've had a massive
ch~ qge under my Government, on the proportion of single parents
who are in fact working rather than receiving the benefits and
that's what'. happened in regard to unemployment as well an other
benefits, and that's why it's a matter of in fact recognition
within the welfare industry that this Government has taken those
sorts of steps. We do not want to have a society In which people 11

-11-
regard it as a right not to work and got a handout. That's why
we' 01ve had a massive increase in expenditure on training programs
like SkLilhare to increase the training and re-traLning
opportunities for people who either haven't been in the workforce
or who have been in it and want to get back. And what we are now
having in this country is a situation of that culmination of
decisions that we take which came earlier this year in the
February Statement, where people are out of work and they come to
the Department of Social security, they are going to have to be
prepared to undertake training or re-training programs if they
are going to get a benefit.
AXTON: Jim, hello.
P JIMt Hr Hawke, you keep on talking about what you inherited from
the previous government and you rightly point out that
superannuation funds have gone from seventeen billion to a
hundred billion. Our national debt's gone from loe than ten
billion to over one hundred and thirty billion
PZ~ s Well Jim the figure. are wrong..
JIMS ( inaudible) thirteen and a half percent to eighteen
percent... PM: Jim the figures are wrong. The figures.*..
JIM:. Oh are they?
PH: The figures are wrong. You said from ten to one hundred and
thirty. Let me give you the facts. They've gone from twenty
three to one hundred and eighteen. Those are the facts.
JIM: Right. So that's pretty similar to the seventeen to a
hundred in superannuation investments.
PM: It's a quite different figure.
JIM$ We've also got institutionalised inflation, @ tuck in a
groove at seven percent
PM: On the contrary Jim. We've brought inflation down Jim. The
inflation rate that I inherited was eleven percent, that warn the
inflation rate that I inherited and under my period of Government
it has never reached the eleven percent, we've brought it down.
/ 12

-12-
JIM-. Can you tell me what we'll be paying in housing inter-est
rates, irrespective of what's gone on in the past, and what our
inflation rate will be if you get re-elected, what will they be
at the end of your third term and what will the national debt be?
Just give me three numbers.
PM: Well I will nay these things to you, which are the only
answers I can give to you. I will agree with the statements that
have been made as recently as today by the banking industry, and
that is that interest rates will go down, it's been said by the
Commonwealth Bank today in the light of the employment statistics
and the December quarter balance of payments statistics, that
they expect interest rates to go down early. That's the
judgement of the banking industry on interest rates, so that's
interest rates. In regard to the debt, we have in place three
things which will move to bring the debt down. We have a firm
and predictable wages outcome which will increase the
competitive position of Australian industry so that manufacturing
industry is going to export more and more and be more import
replacing. secondly we have a budget surplus. I" Jim, have
been the only Prime Minister in the history of this country to
run a surplus. In the last three years, seventeen billion
dollars which I've used to pay off every cent, every cent of
Commonwealth Government overseas debt and we are now an
international creditor to the tune of 4.4 billion. We will
continue to have a surplus so that we can do that as against
which our Conservative opponents will blow the budget surplus by
their six to seven billion dollar hole and their intention to
give back billions of dollars from you to the richest people in
the country. And thirdly, in-regard to superannuation, we will
continue to have superannuation as an award prescription which
will increase the savings of this country so that industry in
Australia can draw upon domestic savings rather than being
international borrowers. Those are the answers to your
questions. AITONs Xr Hawke, I know the time's getting very short now. I'd
just like to draw your attention to something I meant to mention
earlier and that's the front page of today's Melbourne Herald.
PMt Thanks Doug.
AITONI Ford bombshell.
PM: Yes, Ford bombshell. / 13

-13-
AXTON: Ixciusive by Terry Nccrann. Australia's leading car
company, Ford Australia, has told the Federal Government it is
likely to quit full-scale local manufacturing production after
the Hutton car plan levels off in 1992. The noew chief of Ford in
Australia, Jack Masser, delivered the shock message to Industry
Minister, Senator John Button, in a private one-to-one meeting in
Melbourne etcetera. Do you want to comment on that?
PM1 Thank you very much Doug. That lord bombshell is a œ 4oCrann
bombshell. That bloke McCrann ought to look at himself in the
mirror and ask whether he's got the moral scruple to accept his
pay cheque. The story is one hundred percent false. And hie
could've found out that it was false. Let me give you the proof
of its falsity. Firstly, here is the statement by Senator
Button, and then I'll go to the statement by Ford, but this
Senator Button's statement from hospital today. The nature of
the discussions between Button and Ford'. Nasser, alleged by
journalist ) 4cCrann, totally Incorrect ways Button. Hie did meet
with Nasser. However the Herald article is incorrect in claiming
it was a one-on-one meeting. Mr Bill Dix, the former president
and now chairman of Ford was also present. Neither Mr Nasser nor
Mr Dix delivered any message or intimated in any way to Senator
Button that Ford would be closing down its Australian
manufacturing operations. On the contrary, part of the
discussions revolved around plans by Ford to invest a further 1.2
billion in its Australian operations. Statement from Ford, Ford
denies reports on its future. in specific terms, Mr Nasier
categorically denied he had told Senator Button that Ford was
likely to quit full-scale local manufacturing after 1992. The
topics were far-reaching, covering a wide range of subjects,
including Ford's already announced intention to Invest about 1.2
billion in Australia over the next five years, Mr Nasser said.
Our investment in the past and our plans to spend an average 250
million dollars a year over the next five years show Ford's
strong cOmmittinent to remaining a viable manufacturer In
Australia and a continuing development of export markets. This
Investment has been underpinned by strong profit performance. in
addition, Mr Nasser strongly denied the claim in a news report
that Ford wanted to become quote, more or less an assembler in
Australia. This is not an option that makes sense for Australia.
During recent years considerable progress in productivity and
quM4ity has been achieved. This McCrann, I don't know what he
gets paid, but my cod he ought to look at himself in the mirror
and say, what sort of a man am 1, All he had to do was to ring
up and find out but he's prepared to write and allow to be
published that sort of absolutely erroneous crap. ge ought to be
totally ashamed of himself. 14 I.

-14-
AITON: Mr Hawke, your time has run out, you've got to fly, Thank
you very much indeed for making youreelf available today.
PM2 We' been my pleasure Doug* Thank you to you and your
listeners.

Transcript 7963