PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW/ TALKBACK WITH PETER KENNEDY, ABC RADIO
31 JANUARY 1992
E AND OH PROOF ONLY
KENNEDY: Six weeks in the job* what's it like?
PM: I have been around this for a long time but it's a place
where the ultimate responsibility is and where the fashioning
Of Policy and the government message probably occurs first, so
it's an interesting# challenging job.
KENNEDYI You were Treasurer for 8 years and obviously a high
profile position but I just wonder is there a major difference
taking that step from being Treasurer, high profile to being
Prime Minister? I mean is it more of a fish bowl existence?
PM I think so it's more of that, it's definitely more of
that but the Treasury is a more specialised area but because
we were reforming so much of commonwealth policy in the
the Treasury portfolio had you virtually a finger in nearly
all the other pies. The prime ministership in different
because one has to think more in conceptual terms about the
place as a whole rather than the economy and I think it is
that part of it and plan all the-ceremonial things which one
didn't have to involve oneself as Treasurer does make the
thing different.
KENNEDY: Do you f ind that a bit of a chore being involved in
those extra ceremonial activities?
PM; No I find it a pleasure but it is a different sort of
Job. Some of the topics are similar and you are ranging over
often similar ground. It's just a wider responsibility.
KENNEDYs You have moved into the Lodge and as you said before
you have been around for some time but I wonder what ' is your
impression of the Lodge as a place for a family, a relatively
young family as yours is, what's it like to live in?
PKI It's a bit of an institution, I think it's become a bit
of an institution obviously. It vas originally made as a
private house for the PM. it's really no longer that, the
rooms which were the famil~ y rooms are now sort of public rooms.
' they are not public when there is no one else there obviously,
but they sort of can't be strewn with the family goods because
they have to be cleaned out quickly if someone arrive.. So
it'sa Sort of got a dual function now, a private house and a
sort of public house, much more public house than say in the
But it's got nice grounds and the kids like it.
KENNEDY: I wonder if it puts extra pressure on them, doesn't
it to keep the place tidy.
PM: That'. right but they get a bit of help as well you see,
There was none of that in the old place. My wife had to clean
it up basically at least now she can do a bit, as well she
gets a bit of a-hand.
KENNEDY: Let's look At the issues. I mentioned some of them
in the introduction, they are pretty awesome aren't they, some
of the challenges that you are facing?
PK: It is r think the challenge to get the economy Into
recovery phase is important and it is a challenge and that is
what we have been directing our attention to. I think we can
do it and the quicker we do it the better.
KENNEDY: Unemployment is the real problem, the real issue. I
mean the growth in jobs was the big plus of Labor the f irst
two terms of Labor in government and a huge number of job.
created but all that has been lost hasn't it over the last 18
months or 2 years?
PM: No it hasn't been lost there, for what it's worth I mean
in 1983 we had 10% unemployment and we have got
unemployment today, lot plus. But in 1983 we had a workforce
of 6 million today we have got a workforce of 7.5 million so
we have kept 1.5 million jobs we created in the 80s, in other
words the labour market is now 25% bigger in this very day
than it was in 1983 but we are not keeping up the growth in
employment, growth in the labour market so unemployment is
again 10 odd percent. But the labour market itself is. a
quarter bigger than it was in 1982/ 3 so in those years we
created 1.6 million jobs and in the recession we lost 300,000
so we have kept 1.5 million. So it's a more fully employed
society than it would have been without all that growth but
that is not enough, what we have got to do nov is make the
labour market expand so that we take up the school leaver. and
the new entrants to the workforce to get the unemployment rate
down. KEVNEDY: That's the key the unemployment rate I guess has
doubled in the last couple of years
PM, It's gone from about 6 and a bit to 10 and a bit.
KENNEDYs So how do you got that economic growth to ensure
that the economy is growing fast enough to absorb not only
those school leavers who you mentioned are coming onto the job
market but also absorb those people who have lost their jobs
in the last 12 or so months?
Mli It's basically called growth. You have just got to get
the economy growing again, get people investing again, get
spending happening, that is investment spending and consumer
spending moving again and that is a confidence Issue I think.
So the 80s was a great phase of spending and lending we have
never seen anything like it since the 1920s and it was like a
very big party and left a hangover and this in the hangover we
are going through and I think that coming out of that is more
than a glass of Alica Saltzer you know it's going to take
because it was such a long spin. The 80s, the great growth in
credit, the growth in Investment, the growth in the stock
market, the speculation, the rest, the hangover has been
longer than I think we would have expected. This has been
true of Canada, the USA and Britain for the same reasons and
we now have to get confidence going again here and In those
countries as well and that's what President Bush was trying to
do a day or so ago at his State of the Union message, that's
what we will be trying to do in the next few week.
KENNEDY: obviously one of the few plusses I suppose to come
out of the growth and unemployment has been the decline in the
inflation rate and that 1.5% national inflation rate obviously
provides you with something of a base to sort of bounce of f
with the recovery phase but it is important to keep inflation
down isn't it?
PM8 It is. It is because, look inflation is the most
pernicious of all the diseases, For the elderly who have a
stock of savings it tears it away and you take a lot of people
who are, they might have had a retirement lump sum in the
early 80s it's worth only a proportion of that today or the
709. But worse than that, it robs a country of
competitiveness it pushes up interest rates, it generally
retards your economic growth,, it makes you uncompetitive.
This government has broken the back of Australian inflation
for the first time in a quarter of a century and it's a great
achievement and we have got to keep it and do everything to
keep it and so that when we go through the 90s, see we came
out of the 82/ 3 recession with 10% inflation, we come out of
this recession with 1.5 to 3,
KENNEDYs Earlier this week you made reference to the fact
that workers could expect a real increase in wages this year I
think were your words and this of course caused enormous
debate. What is the position?
PM: It wasn't what I said. No, it was basically
misunderstood. What I said was, I was asked, well if you have
a Budget forecast that's the August 1991 Budget forecast, of 4
odd percent f or wage. growth but inf lation is only 1. 5% isn't
there a real increase in wages there. And I said, yes well
of course there is and I said success breeds success. That is
if you can get your inflation down the real income about
inflation will be present and in the August 91 Budget we had,,
I can't remember the exact forecast I think It was about
or 4.6 for wages it would come in about 1.5 or naybe an
underlying rate a little higher, there in still a real
increase there. That is not to say that the government in
1992 will necessarily be supporting an increase that it a
national wage case. That's a matter that has got to be
considered. KENNEDY: There has been speculation of course that a further
real increase could be looked at in 1992/ 93 but possibly
through the form of a tax cut.
P1( 3 That's been an option for us for a number of years and I
made the point the other day that it was the 89/ 90 tax cuts
which basically gave us the low inflation rate and it was the
platform we moved into recession with was a wages outcome of
around 6% 1. Without the 89/ 90 tax cuts that platform would
have been 12 or 13 so today instead of looking at
inflation we would have been looking at something 6. 5 or 7.
So the Accord with the trade unions has been a very usef ul
instrument and that is something which of course the
government can always consider. But there has been a view
about in the unions that they would rather take their chances
in the market place or with the commission. Well that's fine,
they can make their mind up about these things we are not
going to be pressing money on them obviously. But again, the
government would have to decide whether it would support a
national wage case in the commission and that would take a
careful judgement. But I mean some of the papers have gone
of f on the basis that you know, I have said we are going to
soupport a national wage increase, I didn't. What I was
referring to was the Budget forecast for wages of 1991. 1
heard Dr Hewson jumping up and down saying this is shocking
for inflation, crocodile tears, while he is walking around
with an inflation bomb called a goods and services tax which
is going to add 15% to everything. So I mean, in terms of the
inflation fighting we ought to forget him. I mean at least we
have brought inflation down. He was John Howard's adviser,
economic adviser, he left us in 1982/ 3 with an inflation rate
of 10% we are coming out of this recession with an inflation
of 1.5% so to all the hand wringers who have been putting
columns In the newspapers about this issue just let me say
this, that we have yet to decide what we do about wages in 92.
Yet to decide.
KENNEDY: But it's possible that workers will experience a
real wage increase in 1991/ 92 and that doesn't mean any
further
PH: The point I was making there is if people are wearing the
burden of the recession they are entitled to wear some of the
joy and some of the joy 18 the loy inf lation rate which means
lower interest rates. That's part of the joy and it means
higher real wage. by virtue of the fact that the inflation
rate has fallen sharply. Now what are we to say to people
it's now fallen sharply so we are going to grab another
off you that you thought you were getting this year, the
Budget was set up on a wage inflation trajectory of about 4%
in that order and it's come in at 1.5 and that's good news for
Australia, very good news.
KENNEDYt But looking ahead to 92/ 93 the possibility of real
wage increase but not necessarily through the tribunals,, not
necessarily through increase in the pay packets.
PH: The possibility of a wage increase, not necessarily a
real wage increase, a wage increase but again it has to be
considered by the government and the government is not
committed to supporting a national wage increase before the
commission in 1992.
KENNEDYs You mentioned earlier that those ceremonial
functions that the PH gets involved in is not always a chore
and of course we have just come out of Australia Day when
there has been a lot of debate and attention given to the
origins of the country and whore we are going and of course we
also had the launching of an alternative flag by former
arbitration chairmen Sir Richard Kirby. Just wondering what
your thoughts are on the flag and the possibility of changes?
Pill I think the f lag has to be the emblem of the united
country. iIs been that but I think there is probably some
ambivalence in our message as we go into the international
f orum. and the international marketplace draped in a somewhat
ambivalent garb with a f lag which has obviously the f lag of
another country in its corner and I should think that
Australians would think they were advantaged in the world, in
the international marketplace where kie are now trading much
more than we ever were in the past something which was the
emblem of a country which unambiguously has a flag which
represents it and nobody else.
KENNEDYt Do you see Canada providing something of a model on
this? They went for the maple leaf more than 20 years ago and
seemed to have survived.
PM Exactly, I think Canada probably is a model and exactly
they did survivethe place didn't fall apart, there wasn't any
expunging of their history, I think that is true they didn't
have into anarchy. It gets back to this question also about
the national anthem. We are not singing God Save the Queen
any more, we are singing Advance Australia Fair. it would be
almost strange now to go back to singing God Save the Queen
and I think those people who quite rightly are proud of the
PM: ( cont'd) f lag and have fought for it as they would have
years ago stood up and sang God Save the Queen don't feel
as though their view of history is offended by singing Advance
Australia Fair any more than I think their view of the f lag
would be of fended if we had a new one. Time Will tell, this
debate has come and gone at various stages and it's coming
again. KENNEDYt Do you see any time when a decision might be made on
the possible changed flag for the country?
PM: It doesn't surprise me this debate is around. I suppose
people around the world are entitled to say we look at your
flag you have got the flag of another country in the corner, I
mean are you a colony or are you a nation? They are entitled
to ask the question. The Canadians gave them an answer. They
said no, we are one country, we are ourselves. We are
independent and we look like we are. We represent ourselves
as an independent country.
KENNEDY: Is it a change you would like to see while you are
PM? PM: I think it is something which ought to come in its turn
as the community feels such a change is warranted then I think
that's when it will come, not necessarily when I am P. or
because I am PM.
KENNEDY: It's good morning to our first talkback caller.
CALLERs Not a lot of questions to ask you Paul I just wanted
to run a f ew things by you and give you a couple of jabs in
the rib to get going in the morning.
PM: I always need to be attacked my boy to get me on my form
so do your best.
CALLERr Alright Paul. Thanks to the ABC, these lines are a
great opportunity to speak out about what is going on but what
infuriates me Paul is that political people treat these access
lines like the Morgan 4wallop poll and that sort of thing and
try arnd ignore what is being said by the local people like
daylight savings etc and that sort of thing. Now the daylight
savings seemed to have got through how the comunity didn't
want it to and what I am wondering about is these boat people
that keep coming in on the WA coastline. Why don't you get a
boatload party of the Labor Party and send them under cover
over to Indonesia and see if they can emigrate over there and
see how well they are treated? I am sure they wouldn't be
treated like Australian people are treating the boat people
coming in over here.
KENNEDYs is that the question Ken.
CALLERs That will do.
7.
PM.: i think we try and have secure borders we don't always
succeed In that and we haven't obviously succeeded in this
case. That is not to say we should treat people indecently
when they arrive. We have to access them, people can be here
for all sorts of reasons, catastrophies as well as simply a
desire to come here for some reason and we have to assess
those reasons within the context of our immigration Act and
the administration of it.
KENNEDYt Prime Minister, It does raise the matter though of
the security of the coastline i suppose and the recent case
where 50 or so Chinese people were able to land on the
Kimberley coast apparently without surveillance.
PM: I think we do survey the coast and surveillance is
something which the government has focussed upon in the last
half dozen years. But I suppose to do it absolutely would be
a coat which would not be acceptable and it's a matter of
trying to balance the cost against the effectiveness have a
cost of fective surveillance system. Nov on this occasion
someone has got through it, but generally we think it's been
adequate and this will cause us to at least consider whether
it's adequate. But to go from the sublime to something else
where we actually have got very secure cover of every inch of
the coastline would probably cost more than it was worth.
CALLER: I am in small business and it's not so much of a
question it's more of a statement. Small business used to
employ 70% of the workforce in Australia back in the days when
Australia had a full workforce, small business was booming.
Labor in my opinion is the enemy of small business because in
the last 8 years they have stripped all the so called lurks
and perks from small businesses which are there to protect the
businesses from the bad times such as we are experiencing now,
a depression. I don't use the word recession, now the bad
times are here and small businesses are dropping of f like
f lies and they are taking all their jobs with it. All the
incentives have been stripped for small businesses, introduced
a killer tax for companies which is actually causing a lot of
you know marginal companies just throw their hands up in grief
PM But what killer tax are you talking about?
CALLER: The killer tax with the new company tax where it all
has to paid by December in a lump sum rather than split over
quarterly PM: Just remember this, when I became Treasurer the company
tax rate was 46%. it's now 39%. The rate of tax of
distributed income wasn 78 cents itfs now 47 cents so don't
talk about killer taxes it's not correct.
CALLERs about killer tax because I have to pay them you
don't.
PZ' 1 You are paying a lot leas than you used too. Can I just
make the point about small business. Small business , there has
never been a greater growth in the small business sector than
through the 1990a the growth in the economy, the economy is
growing 2.25 times faster than it was in the previous seven
year. and it's growth that small business basically lives from
and let me just make your point about the depression. In 1933
the USA and the world was in depression in that country its
GDP fell by 40% that year, this year in Australia it's fallen
by 3 so you can't call a recession a depression. Certainly
the recession is there and it's a pity that it is but small
business lives of f growth. This government has given more
growth to small business than any government in the post war
years and what we want to do now is go back to giving it more
growth again and that's the point of getting back to a
recovery. CALLERs I was just wondering if you give me your attitude or
ideas on the indebtedness we are now in as a nation. I know
it's easy to say that there is not much federal and all the
rest but I do believe a lot of the f ederal debt has been
of f loaded back to the state and a lot of the states are
running terrible debts. It concerns me that our indebtedness
since early in the 80s was very very low it's now quite high,
maybe you could tell us what the f igures are there. If that
continues what will happen to us as a nation?
PH: I think the number that matters, we have got about 100
billion on private on shore debt, in other words the debt we
owe abroad on the private sector is about 100 billion. But
importantly it is private sector debt it's not sovereign debt
and let me explain the difference. When the New York city
banks decided to lend furiously in the 1970s to lend to
countries, I think to South America, to various countries in
South America believing if you lent to a country you could
never be defaulted upon. Well the truth was they were
defaulted upon because that debt borrowed by governments was
not able to service itself it was debt for consumption and in
some cases for investment. The character of our debt is
largely private so it's borrowed against investments that
actually service themselves and let me make another point to
you. In the 808 we built up a substantial stock of debt as I
said there was about 100 billion of private debt but in the
same time we built up 63 billion of private assets offshore,
private assets in Europe and North America as Australian
companies went out opening Australia up have gone and invested
in Boral, largest brick and tile manufacturer in the USA,
Brambles runs one of the largest transport companies in Europe
etc* We have got 63 billion over there and 100 billion
onshore so in other words we are getting some balance into our
assets and our liabilities. But the main cause f or debt isa
the current account deficit because we don't produce enough
goods and services and that is why we have got to go back to
investment to produce more goods and that's the only way to
beat it.
CALLERt Would you be able to help us with the state debt
problem? Could YOU just elaborate what the
PM: I don't think the state debt problem is an acute one.
The states have always had soma debts but again a lot of those
have been borrowed on income producing businesses like the
electricity supply, like the ports and wharves authorities,
like the water authorities, in other words it has the
character of what is in many other countries private
investment. See electricity is provided privately in many
countries, water is provided privately. The fact that they
are government owned doesn't mean to say they are not
businesses and can't pay their way but it's always important
for state governments to keep an eye on their debt but the
commonwealth debt is very low. In fact the commonwealth has
net assets abroad we don't have net debts we have not assets.
CALLER I just think that it is a very serious problem if
we PM: It's a serious problem if it grows inordinately but by
and large the public sector has been repaying debt in the last
few years.
to.
CALLER: My question is totally different it's more a
personal one regarding Mr Keating's attitude to Israel.
KENNEDY: Well he's listening to your call.
CALLER: Mr Hawke was well known for supporting Israel, how
does Mr Keating stand?
PM: Well I don't think you could say of Bob that he had
an unbalanced view of the Middle East, I think he had a very
balanced view and was critical of Israel on occasions for
certain policies. But he thought Israel had the right to
exist as a nation, as I do, and he promulgated that view
quite vociferously in the 1970s but I think as Prime
Minister, as problems became apparent in the Middle East he
had, I think a balanced and appropriate view of the area and
I don't think it is true to say that it was sort of one eyed
pro-Israel view. I mean he kept the view that Israel was
entitled to exist as an entity, as a nation, and that drove
his view I think of that state but I've always found it to be
largely a very balanced view of which I have a similar view.
KENNEDY: Are you happy Ellen?
CALLER: Thank you.
KENNEDY: Mr Keating you mentioned Mr Hawke's name, there has
been speculation that he might be quitting Parliament as
early as February 24, has he spoken to you about that?
PM: No, it's only speculation as far as I know, I
haven't spoken to Bob about it.
KENNEDY: How would you react to a by-election in March?
PM: Well it's a matter for him, it's a matter for any
Member when they believe that their career has peaked or for
some reason they should contemplate leaving public office for
them to make their minds up. Bob may choose to stay, if he
does that is fine with me.
KENNEDY: Do you expect that he would consult with you about
his decision whatever it might be?
PM: Well he might, it is up to him. I mean it is
basically a matter of personal choice.
KENNEDY: And a test for the electors in March wouldn't be a
major problem?
PM: Well that is anticipating him leaving. I mean a
test for the electors shouldn't be ever a problem for a
democrat, and I'm one of them. You can'It always win but
giving the electorate a chance to make decisions has always
been something that I have, of course, found great favour
with. KENNEDY: Are you suggesting that the seat of Wills could
possibly change hand in the by-election?
PM: Well I'm not suggesting anything. You are
suggesting more than I am I think Peter.
KENNEDY: Talking about meetings with the electors, Tasmania
goes to the polls tomorrow. There is speculation that the
Field Labor Government might be defeated, in fact the
Australian editorilised this morning saying a Field victory
is unlikely but deserved. How do you think it will go?
PM: Well it is deserved. I don't know of any Premier
that inherited greater financial problems than Michael Field.
They are just unbelievable. I mean if you were the head of
that Government you wouldn't have known where to start and
yet by sheer doggedness he has actually brought the accounts
of the State of Tasmania to the point now where they can
actually pay their way and deal with their debt and
restructure their State finances and I think it would be a
great pity for somebody who has conscientiously taken that
sort of task on thanklessly, and earned a few problems in the
doing of it to then suffer a penalty for doing it.
KENNEDY: How do you think you will go?
PM: Well I think he will win because I think he
deserves to and that's sort of sure footedness, the
leadership he has shown and the conscientiousness of the last
couple of years, you know deserves him a victory.
KENNEDY: We will all be wiser tomorrow night. Bruce you
are through to the Prime Minister.
CALLER: Good morning Peter, I was just wondering you want
ideas for getting the economy going again
PM: Certainly.
CALLER: I have put an idea through to the Royal Commission
because of our trouble here over WA Inc and the projects
and all the rest of it, the troubles that have gone on here
and the idea was because of our vastness here in the West I
want to cut West Australia into three states.
KENNEDY: What do you think Mr Keating?
PM: That is too tough for me. I think you ought to put
that to Carmen. I think our constitutional arrangements and
our boundries have presented us enough problems to this stage
and we shouldn't be proliferating States in my view.
KENNEDY: Ok Bruce thanks very much. Morning to Owen.
CALLER: I want to talk about AUSTUDY. I'm a student and at
the moment I have just enrolled for TAFE and my book list is
about $ 160 which is relatively small compared to what some of
the university students had and on top of that we have got to
pay fees and everything else and I don't think students,
especially who happen to be living alone can afford that sort
of money.
KENNEDY: Prime Minister.
PM: Well do you recieve AUSTUDY?
CALLER: I do at the moment yes.
PM: Well we have over the course of the
dramatically improved AUSTUDY, particularly away-from-home
and any government can only make choices about the level of
subsidy for people on incomes within the income taper
arrangements to support them and no doubt some people will
find the levels to be insufficient. I can only say they are
much better than they used to be by a very large factor.
CALLER: Well that's little comfort to a whole lot of people
who I happen to know simply because it is as far as people in
the lower class goes it's better, it's more economic if you
like to go on the dole at the moment than it is to study.
PM: I doubt that because, that used to be true but when
we changed to what we call the Common Youth Allowance and
improved AUSTUDY away-from-home, what are you getting awayfrom-
home now?
CALLER: Well I'm not living away from home, my concern is
my father is probably going to end up losing his job in a
couple of months and I seriously doubt that I will be able to
support myself and my father certainly won't be able to and
I've talked to people who have lived away from home and apart
from being very difficult to get living-away-from-home
allowance it's really not enough.
PM: Well it's double, I think from memory, double what
it used to be and it was very sharply doubled. I can't
remember the numbers off-hand but that and AUSTUDY-at-home
was also increased substantially in the late 1980s. So
again, all governments can be asked for more support for
various categories of people in the community, we think by
increasing the retention rates in schools, remember when we
came to office only one-third of children went on to complete
years 11 and 12. That's now between 66 and 70% and then
funding extra places in universities and in TAFE and
increasing student allowances we have made education a great
priority in these years and successfully so, but again there
is only so much a government can do.
KENNEDY: Thanks Owen we will have to move on, last caller
for Mr Keating, Paul.
CALLER: How do you do Mr Prime Minister?
PM: How are you Paul? With a name like that you have
got to be a reasonable fellow.
CALLER: Right, I'm taking on something that you might like
to take on to try and generate cash flow for Australia, I see
a great gap. Too many Australian inventions go overseas.
PM: That's true.
CALLER: Suggestion particularly private investors, number
il.
one granting inventors tax exemptions on royalties income.
Every inventor to receive one-third share employment and
I could go on, giving f ive years moritoriun on tax of any
description for infant industries that is dependent on
inventions. Now we have spent over $ 50,000 on patents
overseas etc but we don't get the necessary help, we have had
no research grants and if it'Is good enough to give research
grants to big companies, it's good enough to give tax
exemptions to the individual.
KENNEDY: Ok Paul, in essense what you're asking is what's
the Prime Minister's attitude towards encouraging private
inventors?
PM: Well the flagship of the Government's policy was to
allow businesses who invest in research and development to
write-off 150% of the costs, now that means you've got to
have a taxable income to do it and some people who, I mean
that's for research and development which occurs in
bussiness, there will always be the people who are not yet in
business but have an idea and they may have other taxable
income, if they do they can certainly write those costs off.
The problem is always getting them to market. That's the big
problem and I think, you know, this is a difficulty for us,
it's a difficulty for other countries that we are not
exploiting a lot of the technological improvements which do
come our way.
KENNEDY: A lot of the inventions go overseas for development
don't they?
PM: A lot do, a lot stay too, but a lot do and that's
why the co-operative research centres which we set up in the
Budget of two years ago between universities and business * Is
trying to deal with that very thing, trying to apply research
to commercial activities and having business involved in the
doing of it. Now that will not, obviously, cover all people
and I think Paul who I was speaking to is probably not in
that category. He has got something which he's patented.
But it is a difficult issue. How you encourage them
commercially without the Government simply just writing
cheques for companies hoping something will come of it.
KENNEDY: Thank's Paul and thanks to everyone who called in
this morning with their questions to the Prime Minister and
apologies to those whose calls we were unable to take but we
are beaten by time. Prime Minister you're heading up the
Terrace to speak to the Premier, Dr Lawrence, and your also
meeting with the WA State Economic Strategies Council.
PM: I have intended to speak to each State Premier to
talk about their particular problems. We'd like to do things
which bring on a recovery but which at the same time is
structurally good for the economy, for the thing to have a
sort of productive focus. And the best way of getting a view
of a government about its problem is talk to them directly so
that's what I intend to do with Premier Lawrence this morning
and with the business community of each particular State to
try and get a feel of what they think is the problem, are the
problems, and how the Government can remedy them or help.
Now my colleagues John Dawkins and Kim Beazley met members of
the business community in Western Australia last week and
they had a successful round of meetings with them. I will be
meeting some different people today for lunch just to discuss
these subjects and put it in the context of what the Premier
says to me.
KENNEDY: And when will you be announcing your Economic
Statement? PM: Well the timing is not settled yet, I think for
Australia the earlier the better but I can't be firm at this
time, we have still got to put it together.
KENNEDY: Obviously there is a lot hinging on it both from
political point of view and an economic point of view.
PM: Well I found the consultation process very
encouraging, it is worth talking to people, they do say
things you don't expect them to say often, they come up with
ideas that you haven't thought of. We are working in a
framework obviously, the Government had a general idea of
where it's going, a clear idea in the broad, in the general,
about where it's going but in that matrix often things can be
fleshed out in these discussions which are very useful so
I've found them quite valuable.
KENNEDY: Well obviously the results of those talks and the
contents of the economic statement are going to be crucial
for a lot of people around Australia who want to get back
into work.
PM: Well we won't be letting them down Peter.
KENNEDY: Prime Minister I hope you're right. Thanks very
much for coming in and talking to 6WF and ABC regional radio.
PM: Thanks for having me.
ends