PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT qF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P. J. KEATING MP
RADIO OPR, HOWARD $ ATTLER 9 MARCH 1994
E AND OE PROOF ONLY
SATTLER; Prime Minister, welcome to the studio.
PM: Good Howard, good to be here.
SATTLER: First time since the election.
PM; I have been busy over there engineering a recovery in the economy
and trying to keep the general agenda that we set in the election campaIgn that you
just referred to on the tracks and things are running as we hoped and expected and
the recovery Is coming through strongly and as you know we are now seeing
145,000 Job growth In the last three months. We think we are going to grow
something like 4% In the coming year, which puts us up as fast as any western
country and I am hoping, the key thing Is I think, to make sure the recovery Is
enjoyed by everybody,
SATTLER: How much credit do you personally take for that?
PM; For the recovery?
SATTLER: Yap.
PM: Well the recovery is I think, been engineered by national economic
policy. That Is, ira come by virtue of the Budget policies of the lIst three-years by
-thle er inflation rate, by the lower Intereft--riin a more competitive exchanga
ruts mechanism In place. Al11of that I think is
SATTLER: But don't be so modest you were the architect of the economic policy
for most of the time weren't you?
PM: I was with the then treasurer John Dawkins, but I think we are seeing
as a consequence of Commonwealth Government policy and also the fact that
businessIW now rebalanced their balance sheets. As you know In the 80s we had
debt displacing equity. Now companies have had to build up profitability to
rebalance things to take the debt out and put equity back. that's happened and they
3. PM: Carmen is the kind of person you don't need to make promises to,
she takes her chances In the rough and tumble and opportunities ot public it. e. But I
think I would be very surprised If the Caucus of the Government didn't at some
opportunity, take some opportunity and give her a seat in the ministry.
SATTER: Does she need to got nominated?
PM: In our Caucus there Is none of those pretensions, You nominate
yourself. WMhen they call your name you stick your hand up.
SATTLER: Do you need a seconder?
PM: No you don't even need a seconder.
SATTLER: You just need the vote.
PM: Because years ago we used to have this sort of thing where people
say is there someone to nominate so and so. There would be a sort of momentary
pause and a hand would go up and so now we call a roll of Caucus members and if
you are Interested in a job you put your hand up.
BATTLER: Okay she will put her hand up, will she get your vote for a ministerial
position? PM: She would, she would.
BATTLER: Now if as expected she is elected to a ministerial position what have
you got in store for her? It seems obvious to a lot of us after Ros Kelly's resignation
and you just adding all those portfolios to poor old Graham Richardson who Is crook
with bronchitis by the way, you nave really saddled him with a bit. You have loaded
him up. now are you just going to transfer those portfolios to Carmen if she as
expected gets the nomination or is voted in?
PM: These things are a matter for the Caucus to make judgemonts about
and none of us
SATTLER: You are the bloke who allocates that.
PM-: No I got the job, the right Indeed as you say, to allocate the portfolios
but the stock of members who are part of the Government is decided by the broad
parliamentary Labor Party. Now that has got to happen first, now In the event of
that happening, well. I have some choices there as you say. But again were that to
be the case I would obviously have a conversation with Carmen before I ever
presumed to know what she would be interested In.
SATTLER: Are you sure you haven't already ao that conversation?
No I have had a general chat to her but not to that detail.
2. PM, ( cont'd) are now ready to sort of shuffle off and invest and I think all these
things coming together means that we have got a pretty robust, we have got on our
hands what we haven't had for 30 years, a robust low inflationary recovery.
SATTLER: Interest rates, are you concerned about what has been happening in
the USA and predictions that interest rates will rise In Australia before the and of the
year? PM: Not really, I think that the United States federal reserve bank has put
a very modest Increase in rates, deolmal. point or two
SATTLER: It still sent a shiver through our stock markets.
PM: What the fads so called Is doing Is keeping an eye on Inflation in
America. So are we here, but as you know our Inflation rate keeps coming out
below the pundit's expecttone-and our Inflation rate for the year In the last quarter
was So we have always got to be vigilant about Inflation, all of us but Its that
low inflation rate that gives you the low interest rates.
SATTLER: Are you confident Interest rates will remain at their current levels in
Australia until at least the end of the year?
PM: I think that I am confident that Australia's inflation performance will be
such that this will be a very strong and bull point for the maintenance of low Interest
rates. SATTLER: You are here to campaign for Dr Carmen Lawrence who I think Is a
lay down misers for the seat of Fremantle, god if you I-t-Frmantie-that would be a
nice old slap In the face wouldn't It?
PM: She is such a good candidate and she is going to, I think she is going
to, add to the stock of Western Australian people, members of Parliament who give
a particular and peculiar focus on Western Australian Interest In the Commonwealth
Parliament. I think having bean a premier and joining the Commonwealth
Government Western Australians Will have absolutely tip top representation
particularly in the seat of Fremantle but as you know you already now have Kim
Beazley as Minister for Finance, you have got Peter Cook as Minister for Industry,
George Gear as the Assistant Treasurer. Until recently John Dawkins was the
Treasurer, so Western Australian interests if you like are well and truly represented
there In the key policy portfolios.
SATTLER: Can we take it that she is not going to Canberra to be a back
bencher? PM: She would be the first to say she is not going to hide her light under a
bushel.
SATLER: What have you promised her? 7
4. SATTLER: But we can take it that Graham Richardson is not going to continue to
have all those portfolios surely?
PM: You think the flu might knock him over do you?
SATTLER: I think it already has and the other thing he has had It appears, a
difference of opinion withi you over a proposal to increase the Medicare levy. Now
you knocked that on the head yesterday In Adelaide but you have said yoU haven't
seen anything to that effect does that mean that there isn't anything or something
might just surface later on?
PMV: Medicare is a great national health system. We have got now other
governments around the World looking at it, but things change. We have seen
change in the relations between public and private systems, you see changes in the
technology and things like diagnostic Imaging and pathology and all systems need
to change With it. Whet Graham has had is the whole system under focus but at this
stage has been as we are, undecided about what we should do. Our primary foc-us
at the moment Is the Green Paper on unemployment because one of the things I did
say on that election night which you referred to ealer was that wa were not going to
leave the unemployed behind and these first couple of months of 1994 are building
on the Green Paper group who reported to us late lest year on how we are going to
deal with the long term unemployed, so that's the principle focus of our work.
SATTLER: Yeah, but there is a story running around this morning they are going
to take people off the Jobseareli allowance and the ACOSS people who supposedly
represent the unemployed are not too pleased about that prospect?
PM: There is no point in me trying to run through the threads of this. This
Is a very large change It Will be a White Paper which the Government Will introduce
In late April which I hope Will let us as a Government do something novel In world
terms. not just In Australian term., but In world terms about the long term
unemployed. See we have got three hundred odd thousand people who have been
unemployed 185 months or more. Now apart from the social Inequity of that, that is
they having carried the brunt of the recession, we are going to find ourselves even
With sort of 10% unemployment, skills bottlenecks in certain areas of the labour
market and that is largely because we have got a pool of people who are not being
retrained. SATTLER: Too many skilled people.
PMV: So what we have to do Is get those long term unemployed people
trained and back Into the labour market so that the recovery Is a recovery for
everybody, not lust the top end of town but those already who carried the largest
burden of the recesion, that is those who are unemployed.
SATTLER: Are you prepared to knock a JobsL levy on the head at this point
because that Is another one that has reared its head?
PMV: The jobs levy as it was an option proposed for consideration by the
Green Paper report, by the Green Paper group as a way of funding the programs
VC;:
PM: ( cont'd) which give these long term unemployed people a job subsidy and
training for a set period. Now I don't think that we necessarily need a jobs levy. I
think the general budgetary scene may be such that we eon do this without
resorting to such a levy. it remains am Option for us but its not one essentially
preferred by me or the treasurer.
SATTLER: So as far as you are concerned no jobs levy, no Medicare levy
Increase? PM: You only do things where in this respect where you have to and we
are In a recovery and we are starting to see a better performance by the Budget
What generally happens In recoveisS is that we invariably see a pick up In revenue
as we have seen a decline in revenue In the recession. The pick ups ore always
greater than we forecast and the declines are always greater, there is always
forecasting conservatism in the numbers. Now I think on this occasion, I mean If
you say to Australians do you think that the national budget should accommodate a
program that gets to the low@ who have been unemployed 18 months or more back
into the labour market, I think moat Australian& will answer that In the affirmative, as
I think they should.
SAiTLER: Unless they have to pay for it.
PM; Even so 1 think that there is the notion of social equity of the fair go in
Australia. When we talk about productivity In this countiieflip side of that coin is
a higher level of unemployment, that is productivity means getting more output from
fewer people. Those fewer people have bean Unemployed and if they are
unemployed over 18 months or a couple of years they lose their self esteem, they
lose their job readiness, they then can't actually get the jobs that then actually turn
up in the labour market, 3o 1 think we are under all of us, all Of US, a soCial obligation
to get them back Into work so that we do our best as a country, as, a society, as a
community to say that we ea not going to have a tail of three or four hundred
thousand people who are basically in labour market terms crippled by it.
SATTLER: But what I think you are saying underneath all of that is if we have a
job we should figure ourselves lucky and we should fork out a bit more for those
who are unfortunate and don't have a job.
PM*. What we e saying is. that the Budget should fork out a bit more, in
other words that the spending priorities of the Commonwealth change in favour of
those who have carred too much of the burden
SATTLER: What, go further into debt?
PM: No, every Budget there is new policy proposals, every Budget there
is always a stack of worthy new things which the Government may consider. It's a
matter of whats at the top of the pile and what I think should be at the top of the pile
is the long termn unemployed.
6. SATTLER: We look as though we are going to be roped in or the United States
are going to try and rope us In to their trade war with Japan and yourcollague,
trade minister Bob McMullan apparently has-been called in eatthe last minute to join
trade talks today with visiting US Secretary of State, Warren Christopher. I have to
say the United States-for an ally, for a good-friend has trea-ted us as faifas trade is
concerned with a bit of disdain in recent years. Why should we go Into bat with
them against Japan?
PM: The world has shrunk in terms of trade, the Inter relationships of trade
are now so Important and obvious to us all that we have to in a sense move on
fronts as they say in the trade, multi-laterally, that Is a number of countries together
not just two together but a number of countries together. The United. States, we
played a major role with the United States in the GATT round, that Is the trade talks
which took 7 years to open up trade opportunities around the world. So the US has
played a good role and the US is making a point with Japan that Japan should open
Its markets. I think where we have some misgivings about this Is the technique that
the US Is considering imposing In the doing of it That is in arguing that Japan
should open Its markets we say that Is fine, that Is good, it's going to be good for
world trade, good for the US, good for us. But imposing managed trade solutions
which is what Washington Is now talking about that Is where they use the thing
called the US federal law called the super 301 where they can actually double tariffs
if you like on particular commodities, It's the heavy handed sledge hammer number
to crack the nut
Now we think that's going to lead to a lot of bilateral trade tensions and that Is why I
think we see the body which I was involved in last year In establishing at head of
government level, this Is the APEC, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, this trade
argument between the US and Japan is a sitter for resolution within the APEC
framework. So It means that the 15 countries of APEC. Australia, Indonesia.
Malaysia, Singapore, China, Korea, Japan, the US etc can come to a set of multi
country solutions rather than a nasty little trade war between the US end Japan
which can then affect us because we sell so much product to Japan if those markets
of theirs have access problems in the US that affects us.
SATTLER: But what's in it for us to go Into bat with America against Japan? I
think we have got a trade surplus with Japan but America has got a trade surplus
with us, shouldn't we be getting some concessions there?
PM: We have got a very heavy trade surplus with Japan but US has a
very heavy trade surplus with us.
SATTLER: And is pinching more of our market.
PM: We are saying to the US. yes we agree that Japan having garnered
so much from the world's trading system should open Itself up so that everybody
has a chance to participate in the second strongest economy in the world. But there
is no doubt about the justice in the US case there, but we don't believe that
managed trade solutions are the best and the other thing that wrong foots the US
and makes It look as though they are not really committed to free trade when they
r C -rn nmr~ F~; qrr~ rp~ rr nl^ rrr~ nrr-r lrrr;~ i I; r~ e h c--c~ l
W. ny'wC.-W. tW...~ sr r fl. r . r lr. ttew. rA. t
7. PM: ( conrd) are. so this Is a potential to be a major stoush and like all of these
major things when people are lining each other up in a thing like this caution and
common sense ought to be the watchwords here and I think what Gareth Evens and
Bob McMullan have said to Secretary of State Christopher is look, yes, we agree
with you as trade objectives here but we don't agree with the solutions and why
don't you look at It more In a multi lateral context, kaap us involved, we are friends
of Japan and we are friends of the United States and we don't want an argument
running between two close friends.
SATTLER: So he is not going to get the answer he wants today?
PM: May be not, no.
SATTLER: I understand you are heading for South East Asia next week or the
week after to open a bridge that we have put $ 42 million of taxpayers money in and
we have had afew callsabout that you canexpect that and it comes at a time
when the Government is being heavily lobbied over issues like breast cancer
research where we give only $ 1.4 million annually to research there and it kills 2,500
Australian women a year. Can you understand that some Australians see some
rather misguided priorities in the allocation of all that money there end so little to a
disease which Is killing so many of Australia's women?
PM: Our budget is about $ 105 billion, its about $ 105,000 million so it has
social security spending. its got payments to the states, it's has a foreign aid
program, it has national health and medical research budget. So we don't have to
deny our aid program the sort of funding which is involved in this bridge to actually
do something on something like breast cancer for instance. Because I think, let me
just say about the bridge in the first place. This is the first time, this is a bridge
across the Mekong River which Australia has built and which the Australian
company, John Holland has actually done the civil-engineering on, and this is the
first road connection between Thailand and Laos, the first ever and this will now be
the main highway between Thailand and Beijing so Its called the Friendship Bridge
and Australia sits there and in terms of Australia's reputation in the area and our
interest in these countries like Thailand, a developing country, an Important market
for us, Laos, Vietnam, Australia's name Is very good In this area.
SATTLER: So the business people up there know we built it do they?
PM: Absolutely and I will be actually opening it, so you have got, if you
like. two nations focussing on the fact we are doing It and Its been done by a
company owned In Western Australia, John Holland. Could I just say though on the
other point, on breast cancer, the first thing to say about this, this is a dreadful
disease which is costing us the lives of too many Australian women, that is point
one. Point two what we need is a comprehensive national strategy to deal with it.
What often happens in these diseases., crtain institutes have particular branches of
research and they approach the Federal Government seeking support for this one
but not for that one saying this Institute is more worthy than that Institute and to try
and overcome these problems we have a thing called The National Health and
Medical Research Council which makes decisions about which particular areas of
research
PM: ( cont'd) are funded. There Is already breast cancer research but I don't think
there is a comprehensive strategy and next week In Perth or the week after next I
am sorry. Graham Richardson is meeting with the state health ministers to amongst
other things decide on a comprehensive national strategy to fight breast cancer and
they will be releasing a major statement for a comprehensive campaign against
breast cancer. This Is I think the way to tackle it. Now at the moment, as you know,
the Commonwealth Government runs a breast cancer screening program which Is
available to all women over 40
SATTLER: Yes but there are women under 40 dying from breast cancer?
PM: But its also available upon the reference of a GP for anyone who has
any symptoms of It, or has it in the family, to go and have a screening. But it's also
available just simply under Medicare. That is if your local GP refers a woman for a
breast cancer screening, Medicare picks It up and pays a rebate.
SATTLER: Can I throw In one for the blokes, what about prostate cancer? It's
killing about 2,000 men In Australia every year.
PM: There is generic research into cancers and the cancer's effect, breast
cancer, prostate cancer, bowel cancer, throat, all the other ones, lung cancer. That
is generic research Into cancers and there is a specialised research Into the various
things. There Is speoialised research into prostate cancer too but the numbers in
breast cancer are really quite profound and I think therefore in this area we do need
a comprehensive national strategy. In fact I am happy to say my wife is the first
patron of the Breast Cancer Day and she has been actively Involved in this issue.
SATTLER: So has she put a bit of pressure on you to do something about it?
PM: She has done a bit home lobbying on this subject.
SATTLER: Not a bad thing either surely?
PM: No, not a bad thing and I have taken the Issues up. But Graham
Richardson said, quite appropriately, that what we need here is a comprehensive
campaign and a comprehensive national strategy and I think thats what we are
going to do and the meeting will actually be here in Perth the week after next.
SATTLER: I want to play a short excerpt from an opponent of yours, the Premier
of Western Australia was sitting in this studio just the other day and this is a request
he made. " Paul Keating will be sitting In the seat which you occupy at this moment,
he will be here tomorrow morning, are you going to be meeting him while he is in
Western Australia.
COURT: I would certainly want the opportunity to meet with him and to discuss
Mabo. I mean the Prime Minister can't come to Western Australia and not address
this particular issue so I hope that he is prepared to put aside an hour or so, so that
we can try and have some proper discussions to resolve the
SATTLER; Have you made a request to see him?
COURT: Yes I have made a request on a number of occasions."
SATTLER: Alright we in Western Australia and I think people around Australia
don't want this thing to get to court, it's going to cost a fortune and we are not here
to make lawyers rich, be they Queens Counsel or whatever. Are you going to meet
with the Premier and try and resolve this out of court?
PM: I have seen Richard three times In the last week. I saw him in Hobar
at the Premiers' Conference, I saw him at the EPAC meeting last Friday in Canberra
and I saw him last night at the Notre Dame University.
SATTLER: You spoke with him last night?
PM: We had a chance to talk there, just to say hello, but a chance to chat
if he wanted a chat If I have to see him any more I will have to put an annex on at
The Lodge for him, may be a room out the side, promise him bed and breakfast, a
cup of tea In the morning, a bickie, MA .
SATTLER: Are you sick and tired ofAMl7 Are you sick and tired of trying to
resolve this?
PM: The truth is let's not mix words here. Western Australia had no
interest in talking to us when we were designing the legislation. I made the offer to
the Western Australian Government to send their bureaucrats to the multi state
Commonwealth bureaucrats meetings on the Mabo legislation and they were not
interested. We have now passed the Bill and he is challenging It in the High Court.
It's his challenge not ours.
SATTLER: And you have to defend it In the High Court don't you?
PM: We will have to defend it. What he is saying is the Commonwealth
Parliament doesn't have the right to pass laws in respect of title of land for
Aboriginal people.
SATTLER: What Is this going to cost us?
PM: The truth Is ask him because he shouldn't be doing it. See the
Commonwealth Parliament's legislated in an area where it has I believe sovereignty,
what we are doing is providing all the certainty, the mechanisms of certainty that let
all this be resolved. What Richard Court is doing to Western Australians is saying, I
will tell you what I will do, I will leave this a Jumble for you for the next four, five or six
years, I will throw it all into the uncertain basket. See remember this Howard, it is
the High Court which has said that Aboriginal people have a proprietary right to land
and had it from the time of European settlement in 1788. Now let's say the
Commonwealth Government, Labor Government didn't legislate to set up the
tribunals for Mabo, the awarding of title. All that would happen Is Aboriginal groups
~ h~ N rsl; T ~ wrmrrr m~ sTrr nlwm~ lrr~ un; l
PM: ( cont'd) would simply make a series of claims and lodge them in the High
Court. We would have Western Australian commercial interests in a hole, In chaos
for the next 20 years.
SATTLER: They are making claims now. Here is one today at Point Walter
reserve. PM; Can I just make this point We have now set up a federal court
stream and a state Supreme Court stream If Richard Court wants to be In It. It's his
state Supreme Court can be in It If he wishes to hear native title claims and resolve
them, orderly and to resolve them in a way which actually then doesn't impact on
the commercial Interests or developments of Western Australia. What he is saying
Is look I don't want to be in that, I think I have got a political issue on the line here. I
think I can screw all the political joy out of this I can. I will challenge this legislation,
when the Prime Minister made offers to meet me and bring our bureaucrats over I
rejected them and now what I will say is look, I will go over and this fellow ought to
be talking to me to stop me making my crazy challenge. I mean it's his challenge.
SATTLER: But what do you as the Prime Minister say to the Banell family who
have Just made a claim for part of Fremantle, the Point Walter reserve, there's the
map there?
PM: Simply this, that If there is any, what the High Court made very clear
In all this and legislation made it clear, is that native title Is subordinate to the Crown
and wherever there has been a Crown grant that Is an Interest In land given by a
State Government which is either freehold or leasehold, It will extinguish the native
title. So people can make claims but they are not worth the paper they are written
on. SATTLER: The Benell family should give up on this they don't even live In
Fremantle, they live at Armadale?
PM: Yeah well I haven't seen the matter but this is a process from here
Howard. The federal court of Australia is a place where a native title claim can be
lodged, it can then be heard and decided yea or nay. But generally what we are
talking about here, we are talking about title to land being given to Aboriginal people
who currently still live on land which is owned by the state.
SATTLER: That accounts for the Benell family.
PM: In other words land which is not awarded to anybody, that is not part
of a freehold title, It's not part of a lease, you are talking about land In the back
country In the main which belongs to the state, Crown land, unallocated,
unalienated Crown land on which Aboriginal people still live and really what the High
Court is saying is look, let's right a wrong admittedly 200 years late but better late
than never, let's say this land was always their land, they always had a title to it, but
if they are still living there let's say then can then apply for it.
SATTLER: So most Aboriginal people in Australia won't benefit at all will they
because they live in the suburbs?
T~ LZ~ 91CII~ OmI ~ BCRCb~ n~ AI* I~.;( IIYL' ~ 04> E -rPr~' ' rrl~' D-I( ';"' YOIT '~~ gLm( rpr~'
PM: A lot of Aboriginal people, this is right, a lot of Aboriginal people won't
benefit from native title and that is why we are now looking at the social justice
Component, the land fund component of Mabo this year so that those who can't
apply for native title because they are long pushed off the land can actually get
some access to land.
SATTLER: Okay you are off to Fremantle shortly but It seems that your wife has
taken the front running in the campaign. She has been accompanying Carmen
Lawrence around this morning, is that part of the strategy, is she more popular than
you over here?
PM: No, I am seeing Carmen, we are going to talk about employment and
employment strategies and programs at 11am this morning and I saw Carmen
yesterday for a good chat. But last night I did one function and she did another I
had the honour of speaking at the graduation of graduates from the Notre Dame
University In Fremantle while Carmen did another function and we spread the shot
so to speak.
SATTLER: Some people think you don't care too much about Western Australia
you rarely come here, what do you say to them?
PM: The whole of national economic policy in the last 10 years has
favoured Western Australia. That is Western Australia's great claim was being a
primary exporting stat-il irinerals and agriculture that It carried the tariff monkey on
its back. The changes of the 80s expressly benefited Western Australia and the
Western Australian recovery which is as strong as any in the country is there
because of the federal Labor Government.
SATTLER: Will you be back again soon?
PM: I will be back, sure.
SATTLER: Look forward to seeing you then.
PM: I will see you then, thank you Howard.
ENDS