PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING MP,
PRESS CONFERENCE, IMPERIAL HOTEL, TOKYO
8 SEPTEMBER 1994
E& OE PROOF COPY
J: Prime Minister, can we ask you some questions In relation to the
shooting overnight In Sydney first up, If you don't mind?
PM: Well, that's what I was going to say something about. Well, I was
very naturally I knew John Newman. I was very depressed about it
and, you know, somewhat at a loss for words, I think, about the sort of
impact of this on someone In public life who had served thie
community there very well. Of course, he was quite committed to the
community In Cabramatta and was involved in all facets of it. And as
you know, often quite fearlessly. So, it's a bad day for life in New
South Wales when this sort of thing happens.
We don't know what the motives are yet, of this, and we don't have
any details of what happened other than the sketchy ones. We know,
that Is, the circuImstances, but not any of the background, and the
Australian Federal Police will be co-operating with thie Now South
Wales police in the investigation.
J: Are you concerned that this may be a case of politically motivated
killing?
PM: Well, I would be concerned if it was politically motivated, yes. But it
may not be. One doesn't know, and I don't think it is really useful to
speculate about it.
J: Mr Newman has been campaigning for more police.. ( inaudible)., and
an Asian Taskforce, will you move to see if any of those things are
now put in place, given this shooting?
PM-Well, it's not a matter of me moving. This is a matter for New South
Wales government, and the New South Wales Police force, and it's
their Investigation it's essentially their matter. But we will certainly
co-operate with them.
J: He was also campaigning for tougher deportation laws, Mr Keating,
do you think that's something that...
PM: All that begs the question about the crime being a political one, and I
just don't think one should add any credence to that at this point.
J: Do you sympathise, though, with his arguments that there was a
great...
PM: Well, there's no point in speculating I'm not speculating about it at
all.
J: Have you communicated with Premier Fahey today?
PM: No, I haven't, no.
J: There's some report going around back home that you have been In
contact with the police in New South Wales...
PM: No, no. Bul the AFP have identified liaison officers in Sydney to cooperate
as a conduit for the NSW investigations, and of course,
naturally any Intelligence holdings which the AFP have, which may be
useful to the NSW police, they are welcome to.
J: Are you at all concerned that there might be a backlash against the
Vietnamese community?
PM: No, I think this is a very mature society in Australia, and I think
Australians will see this killing for what it is that is an unacceptable
act of criminal violence, whatever it's motivations.
Well as you know I've still got a day of meetings to go, but I was very
pleased with discussions I had yesterday with Prime Minister
Murayama and his colleagues. They covered issues of Importance to
Australia-Japan relations, such as changes in the Japanese political
system, social policy in each country, resource issues in the South
Pacific, and Japan's global role, including membership of the ( UN)
Security Council. But the main focus was on regional development,
especially on APEC
I was able to explain to the Prime Minister why I thought APEC was
so important to Australia, and we think the rest of the region,
including Japan It was a very encouraging conversation in all.
Japan is a great supporter of both APEC and trade liberalisation in
the region, so I'm sure this will help our discussions will help in the
run up to Bogor. It will for me to know the Prime Minister, to have run
across these issues with him so that when I soe him in Bogor of
course, we'll know one another and have some solid background in
the issues before us. I think I'll leave it at that and invite questions.
J: Prime Minister, last night we were told that you were pleased to see
that the Japanese Prime Minister was committed to a " good outcome"
in Bogor can you explain what that means? What's a good
outcome?
PM: Well, I think they want to see a commitment to trade liberalisation in
the region. But, I didn't have a technical discussion with the Prime
Minister, I mean, I have been in and out of the APEC issue now for
so long and all the little nuances and eddy currents and the rest, one
can't expect a Prime Minister just appointed to have an Infrastructure
of knowledge meetings past and all the events and the nuances of it,
and I didn't press him on it. Just the general political Issues I mean,
what we're looking for in Bogor Is political authority there are
enough people particularly after the Uruguay Round experience just
behind them there are enough people now quite expert In trade
matters and in trade liberalisation mnatters. As always, as in Uruguay,
the problem was political authority anid it was that which I was
speaking of, and seeking, rather than an~ y other, if you like, detailed
response.
J: Did you hear anything from the Japanese Prime Minister that might
discourage you from pursuing any agenda that you have in mind for
Bogor?
PM: No. no. I mean, I think that the Prime Minister was quite remarkably
cross all the principle issues. I say quite remarkably, I mean, with a
fair degree of sophistication.
J: Did hie put the traditional Japanese position for preference for some
sort of MFN process?
PM: No. The acronym MFN was never mentioned.
J: Were timetables mentioned, Prime Minister?
PM: No.
J: So did you seek in any way to get some sort of commitment from him
to a specific date?
PM: No.
J: Without debating the actual date?
PM: No. No, because these things are all about starts, they're not about
finishes. They're all about starts, and it's like our own tariff changes
in Australia, I mean, we started the tariff reduction program in 1988
and we put the second phase in 1991 and 1997.. but by 1991,
everyone understood what the game was. And most people have
adjusted to it much earlier than 1997.
J: Did he Indicate he's prepared to look at an earlier start than perhaps
the EPG group...
PM: I didn't press him on those sorts of details. I mean, I had the chance
to go to those sort of details with other people.
J: Mr Keating, APEC has been described as a potential catalyst for a
fresh round of International trade negotiations did you get any sense
of the Prime Minister of Japan's..( inaudible)... arguments?
PM: Oh, I think that the Japanese see... I mean, remember this that the
Prime Minister was at the Naples Summit the G-7 the open
markets 2000 initiative didn't travel so well there, and I think he
understood right up close what the trade liberalisation international
discussion is like. I'm sure Japan understands very clearly that
APEC is half the world's production and half the world's population.
So, what APEC does matters simply because of its size.
J: Did he indicate that the Japanese have preference for negotiating tho
details of how free trade will continue before committing to a date of
some sort?
PM: I don't think so. Japan is worldly wise about this stuff. I mean, they
have been in the Uruguay debate now for years, and they see, I think,
the value of APEC. The G-7 is very much an elite thing, trying to sort
of, you know, kick off or direct some sort of trade liberalisation
beyond the GATT, whereas APEC is a broadly based bottom-up
thing. I mean, it's something where the countries all understand the
debate, they all talk to one another, you get that sense of a
community view being brought to it. Which is not the case with the G-
7, and I think Japan understands that well.
J: Are there any countries In APEC that you feel might be... not want to
join any consensus on moving it forward?
PM: Not that I know of.
J: Are you confident that you can win China's support to some sort of
specific timetable?
PM: Well, the Chinese are pragmatists. I mean, there was always some
doubt that they would come to Seattle. There was no doubt in my
mind that they would come. I mean, they are pragmatic, and they do
see the value, I think, in opening up markets in the Asia-Pacific for
their products.
J-On the domestic side, are you confident that you could win support
for an export tariff regime in Australia by the year 2000, for example?
PMV: Well, we're almost there ourselves. That's the point. I mean, one of
the things in the EPG report about staggering the stuff Is for the
developing countries first, and the developed countries later, Is that
we will be down to a level of 5% of general manufacturing protection
by 1997, and the plant areas are around 15% in terms of tariffs but
this is going to be more than about tariffs. It's going to be about nontariff
barriers, and it's going to be about services. I mean, It's going to
about trade in the broader sense, not simply tariffs.
J: For example, on the auto makers have they been consulted at all onl
this question of bringing their 15% tariff further down?
PM: No, but we haven't said either that it would necessarily come below
that. See again, what happens in any of these rounds is that
countries give offers you remember the Uruguay Round offers
people try and look at ( heir sectors which are difficult for them and
they provide offers. They have got to be acceptable in the general
round and we're a long way from any of that.
J: Did the Prime Minister last night outline what Japan actually wants
from the Bogor meetings? Any specific outcomes?
PM: No, only in the sense in agreeing with me that it's a great opportunity
to advance the velocity of trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific,
and it shouldn't be missed.
J: Mr Keating, on security did the Prime Minister outline Japan's
current thinking on UN Security Council seats there seems to havo
been a bit of movement on that recently?
PM: Well yes. I said Australia maintains the position we have had that we
thought it was an anachronism that Japan the second largest
economy in the world, a large nation of 130 million people were not
represented in the Security Council, and you couldn't adequately
reflect on world opinion without that being represented, and I put the
view to him that I thought there was a consistency between Security
Council membership and, well certainly, let me put it in the negative
no inconsistency in Security Council membership and Japan needing
to play a military role. I didn't think these things one necessarily
followed the other, and that Japan could play a role in this world body
because it's consulted always on major issues even if it isn't part of
the security council.
J: What was his view?
PM: Well, I think hie was probably a bit more interested in my view at the
tirne and thei-e has obviously been a difference of view in Japan
about this, obviously coming from it's long constitutional history, and
the impediments to military engagement, and military involvement.
But I think Japan is sorting Its way through this, I mean, it's a very
great change going on in Japan at the moment I mean, you can see
that with the changes at the last election, and the Hosakawa
Government, the rise of Shinselto these things are, I think, straws In
the wind of a greater change, and that change has been about Japan
playing a role commensurate with its size. This is just another
manifestation of that debate.
J: Did he give any indication of his assessment of security issues on the
Korean peninsula?
PM: No.
J_ Just one last question what did he say about the South Pacific
issues?
PM: Well, I raised these issues with him. I said that I thought that, as
Chairman of the South Pacific Forum, I should tell the Prime Minister
what had transpired. I thanked him for Japan's continuing interest In
the Forum, and where Vice Minister Yanagisawa came, and for It's
aid to the region, but said there were specific difficulties In forestry
and fisheries, and particularly In fisheries where the Pacific fishery is
the principal source of fish stocks to Japan, that it had an interest in
seeing that the fishery was well conducted, that there was adequate
research about replenishment and that the member states were
assisted, at least, in the first instance by getting an adequate return,
and the returns historically have been low And that in everyone's
long-term interests, we should try and make the fishery a viable thing,
over a long period of time, and that Australia would play its role in
fisheries research and I look forward to Japan playing a collaborative
role with us.
J: Finally Prime Minister, would you clarify there's been some
confusion back in Australia in regards to your comments yesterday
about an early election?
PM: I gave you the answer. I gave it as soon as I was asked, so if you're
confused, you're easily confused.
J: Is an early election on the timetable?
PM: No. No. With a capital ' n and a big nought behind It.
ends. TflTOI P ta