d7
CV)
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING, MP
INTERVIEW WITH PAUL LYNFHAM, 7.30 REPORT
NOVEMBER 1992
E& OE PROOF COiPY
PL: Prime Minister welcome again to the program.
PM: Good Paul.
PL: ' Unrepresentative swill', ' dcfamers', ' cowards', ' pansies', one could easily get
the impression you don't like the Senate.
PM: The Senate is always ovcr-stepping the mark. We have now got the
Democrats talking about messing around with bills for the income tax cuts,
your viewers would have sccn Senator Bishop pillory one of the bureaucrats
of a generation, Mr Boucher, and allege of him that he made an arrangement
with the Government to secure a position for himself.
PL: They would say they were just doing their job as representatives.
PM: The Senate is out of control and they have to be told that the Government is
made in the House of Representatives, that the Government's money bills
are sacrasonct and that it is in the House of Represcntatives Australia makes
it decisions, and not to try to usurp the powers of thc House of
Representatives in an unrepresentative chamber. That is, where we have the
same number of Senators for Tasmania as we do for NSW.
: 131
80/ 10d 9T0N 61: 81 Z6AON'S
PL: Yes, but I mean in the Rcps the Democrats can't get a guernsey and they get
a sizeable slice of the vote, they can at clast get a go in a Chamber like the
Senate.
PM: But people are drifting in there with 10 or 11 per cent of the vote. You have
got people sitting in the Senate with 10 or 11 per cent of the vote, that's all
they can get but they are still there. Al! right that is fine for their purpose,
but their purpose is not to defame people, to pillory people, but worse to
stand in the way of legitimate government of the Commonwealth in the
House of Representatives.
PL: But this is under the constitution one of the institutions of Australian
democracy, time honoured, and here is the Prime Minister looking like he is
giving it a good old kicking.
PM: It has been kicking institutions itself it was into the tax office last week, it
is into manipulating all sorts of Government legislation. It was set up, Paul,
as a States House to protect the smaller States from what they thought
would be the majority of the bigger States in the House of Representatives.
What is it now? It is such a party House that Mr Reith, the Deputy Leader
in the House of Representatives, put a press statement out yesterday saying
which Senators would sit on a Senate Committee from the Liberal Party.
PL: This is the one that has caused this rumpus, the one that is investigating the
so-called loans affair.
PM: In other words, it is so blatantly a party house that Senator Bishop who is
now going to serve on it, before she has heard any evidence about this
inquiry said today that it was a cover up. This is not even a pretence at
impartiality.
PL: Sure, but I could say here's Paul Keating trying to denigrate the Senate and
its Committee iin advance of its hearing to try to make sure that it is as
bruised and battered as possible before this inquiry gets under way.
PM: I think Senator Bishop's claim today that it was a cover up is like a judge
making a verdict before he or she had heard the case. This has become a
disgracefully had procedure.
PL: Who is going to nominate the Labor people to this Committee? Not John
Button I should imagine. :-131
90* ON 61: 81 Z6' AON'S
PM: They will be announced as appropriately by the managers of Government
business in the Senate.
PL: Yes, but the decisions will be made probably somewhere closer to your
office, won't they?
PM: It is a party House, so there should be no pretence it is a States House
having a legitimate review function on behalf of States. It is a party House
where nonsense is the order of the day a lot of the time, too much of the
time.
PL: But why don't you try to change it, or abolish it or something?
PM: It put our whole constitutional fabric at risk in 1975, they got so Boishie the
Liberal Party over there in 1975 they nearly took Australia to the edge of
civil strife. It was only for the good sense and the tolerance of the Labor
movement that it didn't happen.
PL: But as the next clection showed the people supported that.
PM: They are all at it again over there and the fact is that people swept into there
with 10 or 11 per cent of the vote have got no right to be in trying to tell the
Govcrnment and the H-ouse of Representatives what its principal program
should be.
PL: I gather then that you're not exactly broken-hearted or thinking of resigning
over the fact that today you became the first PM to he censured by the
Senate?
PM: No, here they are defaming people under privilege, calumny, detraction, all
sorts of things, and thcn when someone in the House of Representatives,
me, says look at this place, they say this is shocking, this is shocking, how
dare you talk about us like that I
PL: Tell us in the studio hcre about this pledge you have giveni about not
blocking the GST and what has prompted it?
PM: Well we want the battle for the GST to bc fought out in thc House of
Representatives. We are opposed to a OST, Dr [-ewson is in favour of one.
But the Libcral strategists are now saying, you can still vote for Hlewson and
not get the OST. : 131
le-n-A oTrVDOJ FT: RT Z6* AON* S
PL: Which strategists?
PM: The Liberal Party people.
PL: You know that for a fact?-
PM: Yes, they are saying, and they will say it more as time goes on, you can vote
for Hewson and still not get the OST because it will get held up in the
Senate. All I ami saying, in the unlikely and in the unhappy event of this
nation deciding to clect a Coalition Government with a OST as its centre
piece, then no Senate obstructionism would come from the Labor Party, to
that then Government presenting its program.
PL: So you will let it through?
PM: In other words we would honour the electorate's word, the electorate's
mandate and respect it.
PL: Even though the Democrats are hell-bent on stopping it at all costs?
PM: The Democrats want to say. they want to run around the country in an
election campaign vote for us and we will stop the GST when in fact
they could only stop it with the support of the Labor Party. And Dr
Hewson's crowd would run around saying, don't worry about voting for us
you mightn't get a GST anyway because it may be stopped in the Senate. I
am getting rid of all that nonsense. A vote for Hewson will he a vote for the
GST. A vote for Keating and the Labor Party will be a vote against the
GST.
PL: But they were always going to bring the GST in in the moncy bills, which
you have always pledged since ' 75 that you would never block. So this has
a bit of a stunt element to it doesn't it?
PM: I don't believe that it is legitimate for an Opposition and in the Senate to
deny the principle element of what is a clearly articulated mandate. I notice
George Bush yesterday talked about the ' majesty of democracy' in his very
eloquent speech where he accepted defeat and said he would cooperate in
handing over the mantle to President elect Clinton. Thiat sort of respect for
the democratic process is something my party has always had. Wc are not
the constitutional wrecke rs of this federation that we have left to the
Liberal Party. They arc the people who hold up supply, have Governor
80/ V70d 910' ON 61: 81 Z6' AON* G : 131-
Generals appoint Opposition Leaders as Prime Ministers, all that sort of
nonsense and risk is taken by them.
PL: You're a difficult character to get a handle on aren't you, because one minute
you sound like the very sober-sided statesman and the next minute you're
there with the big bucket over the Senate, using extraordinarily colourful
language, the real larrikin?
PM: You've got to do things to get your attention Paul.
PL: We're always listening.
PM: If I was speaking in the House of Representatives in dulcet tones
PL: You're not doing this for us, this comes very naturally doesn't it?
PM: and articulate as one would do at the bar an argument, not a word would
be reported.-
PL-It's all the media's fault?
PM: No, just that we have to always not only wrap things nicely for you, but put
a bow on top.
PL: And meanwhile, of course, we are not here talking about this so-called
loans affair are we? You've neatly takcn the spotlight off that.
PM: Why would we? It's a sham of an issue anyway.
PL: But if cveryone is so innocent, why not bowl up to the Committee?
Dawkins can look after himsclf can't he?
PM: What is the Senate's legitimate interest in thc operation of a piece of policy
which is principally almost exclusively the business of the executive
government and which this Govemmcnt alone has established. That is, we
were thc only party to establish control over States borrowings with thc socalled
global limits. When Mr Howard was Treasurer, only 25 per cent of
States borrowings were controlled by the Loan Council. In other words, he
is prcpared to let 75 per cent just hacmorrhagc away, but if one small
transaction in the now very tight structure this Government has imposed in a
disciplinary way over a decade, well then it's a crime. So we have a Senate
oniCn'A QTAO0N FAI: RI Z6* AONS .1311
Committee, but before it starts Senator Bishop says it's a cover up. It is just
a shambles and a joke.
PL: And what if voters say, when on earth are those people in Canberra going to
start talking about the fact that now one in four families has got no one in
work? When are we going to get onto some real issues?
PM: The real issue was Monday night when I met Mr Kennett and resolved
Victoria's debt position with him, resolved to look at the debt strategy which
they'll present to the Loan Council so that the Victorian rccovery and job
growth can continue and not have its financial accounting or thc settlement
of its monies held to ransom by this kind of debilitating and irresponsible
debate which has been promoted by Dr Hewson and Mr Rcith.
PL: Talking of money and uncertainties, are you awarc that people from the
money markets in Sydney and Melbourne have been phoning this building
all day with rumours and seeking confirmation that you are just about on
your way to see Bill Hayden?
PM: You've not been taking their calls I take it?
PL: I have been talking their calls and I've been telling them it's nonsense, but
there is a lot of uncertainty there isn't there?
PM: I don't know.
PL: You don't know? We assurc you Prime Minister there's enormous
uncertainty.
PM: Good on you Paul.
PL: Isn't there some point in trying to put some of this to rcest at least?
PM: I've told you before I think that the public cxpect valuc from thcse
Parliaments and they expect them to run their full course that is into, in
this case, 1993.
PL: So this rules out apre-Christmas poll does it?
PM: I never rule out anything. One of the happy prcrogativcs of a Prime
Minister in this system is to choose the date of the elcction, so I don't rule
things out.
80/ 90* d 910* ON 6T: 81 W6AON-S :-131
PL: Without seeking to put words into your mouth could we put it this way,
given that a Prime Minister will always go when he thinks he can really win
and he's always got his eye on thc chance, your main thinking now is to go
early next year?
PM: Yes.
PL: Thank you. Finally the subject of violence on tclevision. I heard you raise
this in relation to the v~ iolcnce against women at a press conference you
were at the other day, you've raised it again in the House today, it's
obviously something that has been on your mind. What's bothering you?
PM: I think in television feature films and tele-movies on television, too much
violence is creeping into them. I notice this particularly when my children
were watching television in the school holidays where kids do sit up after
8: 30pm, and in a survey done by the ABT, 53 per cent of children are stil1l
up after 8: 30pm. So what I'm saying is that the commercial free-to-air
broadcasters should make certain that the level of violence on tclevision
declines, and adult only movies should be tclecast no carlier than
9: 30pm of an evening, so that at ] cast children have got some chance of
being protected from it.
PL: Do you think this violence is coming through in our society?
PM: There was a very pithy dcmonstration of that in that program Ihe
Simpsons', George Bush mentioned The Simpsons' in the election
campaign, where the family campaign against violence in telcvision. It very
graphically illustrates the point I think, that the more the ambience, the
insensitivities, as people become more insensitiscd to violence the more
prevalent it is likely to be.
PL: And kids are taught that violence is a way of solving problems.
PM: I just don't think that ' children or young peoplc in particular, who haven't had
enough years to settle their thoughts about these subjects, who a majority of
have probably never seen a violent thing happen or a killing. To see it as it's
now being depicted as what you'd call an every day circumstance of the
depiction of modem television is too much for a culture to keep absorbing.
PL: Are the networks going to go along with the Prime Ministcr's request?
8O/ 2-. 0d 9100ON 61: 81 Z6* AON* S: 131
PM: I don't know, but I was making the point Paul, they've been treated very
fairly in the Government providing an opportunity for them to extend their
reach into pay television. It's not a case of everything for networks and
nothing for the rest of us, I think they've got national responsibilities.
PL: You almost make it sound like a bribe or a bit of a pay out, we look after
you, you do the right thing.
PM: I'm saying they've been treated properly in national policy where national
interests have bcen brought to bear, they should respond accordingly.
PL: And if they don't Prime Minister?
PM: We'll see, but I'm certainly going to writc to the ' Federation of Commercial
Television Stations saying that I think that AO movies ought to be
displayed after 9: 30pm and the classifications for films should be much
more clear. That parents in particular ought to have a better idea of
knowing what a classification means and what sort of depiction is likely in
the event of someone viewing it. I think the ABA is going to run a survey
and an invcstigation on this to dcvelop a ncw classification system and that
should help a great deal, but the greatest help will come from the self
restraint of the television networks themsclves. Chasing ratings with
violence I think has gone too far.
PL: Thank God for family shows like this.
PM: That's right.
PL: Thank you.
ENDS 131
80/ 80' d 9TO* ON 61: 81 Z6* AON* S