KXPRIME
MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING MP
DOORSTOP, VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST TEMPLE, LANSDALE, WA
17 FEBRUARY 1995
E& OE PROOF COPY
PM: While I have been in Western Australia, we have had some political
reshaping going on in the east, with Mr Howard trying to do the political
chameleon number and almost vanish against any background the
budget paper, society, his history, his past, his old policies and I now
notice with a round of print interviews yesterday, they again reek of
the opportunism which he displayed all last week in trying to say; " isn't
it a dreadful thing that the Government has got spending cuts", yet he
in fact favoured them. You will have noticed that with the slightest bit
of pressure, which I applied to him last week a little bit of the
blowtorch on the belly and straight away he is now saying that he
only tried the spending cuts racket on the Government as a way of
putting pressure on the Government, and today he is backing off he
says: " he's got to be realistic, and revise his position about big
spending cuts". So he's out there last week saying " isn't it shocking
all these spending cuts", and I say to him " there he is being the same
opportunist about this that he was about all of those things in the
1980s his views on migration, his stand on various other policies",
and straight away he is out there dropping it. But, in these interviews
today, what we can't find if you dredge through the tonnes of wasted
newsprint just from the Howard interviews there is not one single
idea. What I think we can only deduce from all this all of these interviews
is the only plan is to hide his policies. His interviews are dominated by
backflips, indecision, policy weakness and a lack of vision, and as
Geoff Kitney in the Sydney Morning Herald said, " John Howard
remade may be unrecognisable", and then we actually have the
Courier Mail saying " vague is best" " vague is best". So John Howard
thinks he can win a national election by standing for nothing, and by
being as vague as he possibly can. As I said, he keeps trying to
remake himself I described him last week as the Ronald Biggs of the
Liberal Party, that he didn't have a past and now he is trying to
remake himself again this week. He says he is now going after the
blue-collar vote, but who can forget the contempt in which workers
were held with his " JobsBack Policy"? Or who can forget the recent
trouncina of his candidate which w as suffered in the Communication
Workers Union election? I mean, this was only a few months ago. So,
he expects I don't know whether he thinks working Australians are
silly, or gullible but this guy is out to rip their wages to pieces he has
opposed every wage increase since 1983, yet he says he is going for
the blue-collar vote.
He said he would support sensible spending cuts, but then refuses to
nominate which ones he would support, even though he has a primary
list of proposed spending cuts by Departments. He says he denies in
the Telegraph, in Sydney, that he has an inability to make tough
decisions he denies he has the ability to make tough decisions and
then he appoints both Crichton-Browne and Prosser as his delegates
in Western Australia because he won't make the tough decisions about
which one it should be. He says history is important to him when it
comes to the monarchy, but he tells the Telegraph that when it is his
own history, history is not important. When we talk about his history
it's not important, but history is important to him. He tells journalists he
may change his mind on the republic, but he's against it now. In other
words, if the Prime Minister Mr Keating will actually lead Australia
towards a republic, he might make his mind up and he might follow.
Some leader! He indicated he may change his mind about the republic
while he was still opposed to it now he could not say what his view
might be in 5 years. In other words, " if Mr Keating will show
leadership" as usual " I might consider my position, and I might
fol low',.
But as we go through these amazing acrobatics, he says that there
was a reform fatigue in Australia, and in the Australian electorate that
he believed there was a desire for gentler policies. In other words, no
more reform. So if you look at the headlines ' Vague is best", Mr
Kitney's view that he may become unrecognisable, that he is walking
away from all these policies you wonder what he actually stands for.
Some of my critics and his supporters like Mr Alan Woods from The
Australian, or Mr Steve Burrell from the Financial Review, of Mr Des
Moore what do they think of their great dry hero now? When he is
opposed to revenue raising, he's opposed to interest rate rises, and
he's opposed to large spending cuts in other words, he is opposed to
all the variables of an Australian Budget. So where does he stand? I
mean, where is the hairy-chested Budget keeper of old? Where is the
dry Mr Howard? Well, he has dried up. He has almost dried away.
So, it was very revealing... . there is Mr Howard backing off budget cuts,
but then he said Mr Howard said that he would oppose in the
Senate any tax increases in the Budget as an exercise in political
accountability. In other words, he will try and wreck the Government's
budget, but is opposed to tax increases himself, he's opposed to large
spending cuts he says and he is also opposed to using monetary
policy or interest rates to slow the economy.
He says the countrp, has ot reffrrrn fatique. and he mtpnts be a
political chameleon. The question has to be then asked why do we
need him? If we think Australia should become a republic, he says
he's not sure he will see where Mr Keating leads us, and if he leads,
he may follow. Well, I don't mind leading. I don't mind leading and I
am after followers, even if it's him. But he goes on to say that he has
expressed serious reservations about the Racial Vilification
Legislation, casting doubt on the Coalition's promise to produce it's
own Bill, where they would not support the Liberal and National Party
would not support the Government's Racial Vilification Legislation,
but introduce their own, he is now saying they may not even introduce
their own. They may not even introduce their own. So, on that he has
sort of moved backwards. So, I think, I can only, I mean, I'm not a
great admirer of sub editors in this country, but The Courier Mail did
pretty well today and ' Vague is Best' from Mr Howard. I mean here he
is with a round of interviews ' Vague is Best' is about all that people
could drag from Mr Howard's chameleon like stunts over the last
couple of days. So, as long as we now know that the sort of
government which Mr Howard is proposing to Australia is one which
has no policy specificity, no strength in any of the fiscal or budgetary
instruments, no clarity in where he stands ideologically and only an
opportunist view that he is goina to support, look after, the blue collar
people who he spent half of working life trying to down in every
wage round and every tax Lnd every benefit that ever came their
way. I don't know whether he thinks they are silly or gullible or both.
At any rate, at least I now know what I am dealing with a political
blanc mange and one thing about him, I'd probably be able to stretch
him around a bit. If he is pliable and rubbery, that will do me fine.
J: Maybe he thinks all he has to do is tread water.
PM: Or melt. Tread water or melt. Change shape again.
J: You don't seem to be very impressed with him, but Mr Packer does.
PM: Well, that's all right. I mean, he and Mr Packer have obviously had
conversations.
J: Do you think Mr Howard has promised something to him?
PM: Well, I think, there is no doubt that Mr Howard has given him the nod
that he would remove the cross media rules.
J: Are you going to have to make some decisions about that in the near
future?
PMV: Well, I may well do, may well have to.
J: There are reports that Mr Murdoch has bought more Fairfax shares.
PMV: Well, who knows, who knows.
J: Are you going to be intimidated by Mr Packers remarks last night?
PM: No, I told him yesterday, I am in the conflict business. I don't take the
troubles I give them to people like that.
J: Are you going to have to enforce the 15 per cent law though?
PM: I'm sorry, you look taller than yesterday.
J: With people buying shares, Mr Packer and Mr Murdoch, the
Government is surely going to have to step in.
PM: Well, the Government will make policy wherever it needs to be made,
wherever we come to a policy fork in the road, we will go one way or
another.
J: Are you at one at the moment?
PM: Not necessarily, no.
J: There are elements in Caucus that want to tighten the cross, media
ownership laws.
PM: We have got elements in Caucus that want to do most everything, but
anyway.
J: Is that just an anti-Packer thing?
PM: I think there is a genuine desire in this country for plurality in the media
and ownership and it is a good thing. Look here in Western Australia,
you have got one newspaper and one newspaper only, you know the
Pravda of the West. You can have a day out here and not even be
recognised, just obliterated, just like a Pravda sub editor. That is why
we need plurality. That's why I'm glad to see you all here.
J: Is this a nationalistic argument? Is this an argument about Australians
owning Australian newspapers?
PM: Australians obviously should have, at least, as many rights as
foreigners, but again, there is another overlaying thing with that and
that is the concentration of ownership and plurality.
J: Is he just flouting the laws?
PM: I don't know. I'll have to take advice about that. Ok, well let's leave
that bit there. What else have you got?
J: Can I just ask you one more on that.
PM: Well, maybe, just one. Promise, cross your heart and hope to die.
J: Is Mr Packer thumbing his nose at the Government?
PM: I don't know. Did it take you long to think that question up.
J: Have you enjoyed your stay here?
PM: I have actually, but Richard got very snaky yesterday, didn't he? Not
making a pun I mean, snaky and he came and said, he come out very
ashen saying, what was the word he used, he said ' no, I'm not thin
skinned' or words to that effect.
J The Premier has come out this morning and accused you of using tax
payers money to campaign in marginal Labor seats.
PM: Oh shucks, did he? Shucks.
J: What do you mean by that?
PM: Shucks.
J: Have you seen reports this morning that the Ford Motor Company is
considering closing its operations in Victoria?
PM: I haven't seen it.
J: Last time you were here Mr Keating, I suspect you may have been a bit
more reserved about the Premier. You didn't try and upset him.
You're comments were a bit less provocative. Have you changed your
attitude?
PM: I think Western Australians should note that when the Prime Minister
of Australia comes to Western Australia, the West Australian Premier
should try and do business on the things between us. But, you have
got a Western Australian Premier who is so arrogant and puffed up
with his own importance that he thinks he doesn't need to do any real
business with the Commonwealth Government. Well, that's fine with
me, I mean, I think that is a mistake, but that's the way he has chosen
to make it.
J: Is it just words or is it affecting the relationship?
PM: Let the people of Western Australia make a judgement about these
sort of antics that he puts on. I mean, I come over here it is a planned
visit, the itinerary is well known, he was invited to at least one of the
fuJnctions and I do see . jeff Kennett. I do see John Fqhey, I do see
Wayne Goss and half the time the media don't know I'm seeing them.
We go in, just have a talk about various things, try to get things
resolved. But here it is grand standing and little boy games and that is
why I said, if he wants to play games, well we can give him a game.
J: How successful do you think your message was? That is, that the
Federal government is responsible for Western Australia's growth?
PM: Well, that is, I think, the central message that West Australians should
understand. That is, the growth in Western Australia is coming from
the Federal government's policies, but these State Ministers wonder
around cutting ribbons on projects and they say where did these come
from. You know, they are cutting ribbons saying where do these come
from? Well, they came from the Federal government, that's where they
came from. I think it is important that Western Australians know that
the central plank of the last election campaign wherein I committed
myself to growth and employment growth has been faithfully honoured
by me and the Federal Labor party. Thank you.
ends