PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P. J. KEATING MP
DOORSTOP, SHERATON HOTEL, HOBART, THURSDAY, 16 JUNE 1995
6& OE PROOF COPY
PM: You might know that overnight I wrote to members of the South Pacific
Forum, as the Chair of the Forum this year expressing Australias
condemnation at the decision by the Government of France to resume
nuclear testing at Mururoa Mtf and I have sinCe had communIcations
back frorm Forum country leaders wishing to join with Australia In a formal
statement and protest condemning France's decision to resume nuciea
testing In the South Pacific.
I proposed to the Forumn member countries and their governments that
there be a delegation from Australia, that Is led by Australia, with the
Forum mnembers to France seeking a meeting with the government of
France to say that we think this decision is deplorable and should be
desisted from. That Is, desist from any further program of testing of
weapons. Can I say more generally, this Is not a necessary thng. I believe, for the
government of France to do. It is a pity thot a country of such substance
should needlessl undertake such a program when the thing that will
protect the French people Is engagement with the rest of the world and
understanding and not a 1990s version of the Maginot line. What will help
Franoe most is enggement with bt neighbours In Europe end
engagement Wth the rest of the* world which, in the peidsince the
cestion of nuclear testing, France was seeking to do with some
sccnmpishment That is, to engage other countries and to be part of the
world dialogue, In doing this, in a sense, coming from that sort of Gaullist
view of the world, that part of the role of the French government Is to
protect the French people rings a little hollow now after the cessation of
the Cold War and the fact that the problems now to be dealt with are far
more complex such as remving the nuclear power stations in the old
' z
I J JU I I. 1) 0.4 1 * q U U I Cr
. jurl ' D 0 0 iNO. UI r. L
2
Soviet Union, taking that threat away from continental Europe, removing
the stock piles of nuclear weapons, cleaning up nuclear sites all over
Europe and northern Europe and eastern Europe. These are the things, I
think, are more a danger to the French people than something which may
be deterred through the further development of an offensive nuclear
weapon capability.
So, it is a wilful and regrettable decision and one which will do the French
people and the French government no good. At any rate, we will be
expressing our opinion forthrightly and directly and doing so in the
company of Forum country representatives and Senator Evans will be
leading that delegation.
J: Prime Minister, what more could you say to those in the ALP, in particular,
who are concerned about the perceived softness of the Government's
original response especially by Gareth Evans?
PM: I don't think it was soft. We said we deplored the decision. I said that we
deplored the decision. Today we are saying we condemn it. There is not
much more we can say than that. What we are saying is that the way to
express our rejection of this notion of testing Is to do it in a way where we
make our views clear, but at the same time and I think the government of
France has made its position dear, that Is It is going to go its wilful way
unless world community opinion changes its mind. Now, apparently, I
haven't seen the text but President Chirac has said something about that
sort of an approach this morning something negative but that will not
deter us from sending a delegation there.
J: Do you believe there Is any case for concrete trade sanctions against the
French?
PM: Well. you have got to remember, I think, and this is what the Foreign
Minister has pointed to, what we want the French and all other people In Is
a comprehensive test ban treaty. Now, the world is becoming a much
nastier place. You have got a lot of ex-Soviet weaponry laying around the
place. You have got a lot of nuclear scientists from the old Soviet Union
wandering around the world with their wares. You have got the Soviet
fleet, Pacific fleet, rotting away up in Vladivostok and all those reactors
exposed to the atmosphere. You have got potential diversion of nuclear
fuels to some now non-weapon states. What is going to matter to the
world is getting a comprehensive treaty negotiated. President Chirac has
said France will be In this. We want to hold the French to it. So, let's
make sure our response is right and not a wrong headed response which
really does damage to the one treaty that matters.
I mean, when the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed in the 1960s people
gave it very little hope of doing anything. In fact, it has been far more
3
successful at containing weapons proliferation than many people ever,
ever imagined. But now, we are reaching another difficult epoch in the
nuclear story. That is, formerly the weapons of formerly nuclear weapon
states and the spread and drift of these technologies are such that we
need something more comprehensive than the NPT. That is what Is now
in prospect. I think, this Is a great interational opportunity, even the
French understand this. It is more the pity that they put their credentials at
risk In doing this before hand, but still the commitment Is there. That is
why, I think, Australia has the right response and to seek to move to trade
sanctions which will have no effect on the French, in fact, may end up
damaging Australian interest more than theirs Is not the right response.
People have also said, ' oh well, we should undo any co-operative mlitary
activity we have with them now', but a lot of that is about surveillance
activities in the Pacific for the benefit of Pacific island nations. So, there IS
not much sense In that either.
So, I think, we have got the response as we should have it. but let there be
no doubt In the minds of the French how wilful and unnecessary we
believe this is. How much it files in the face of a sensible participation by
France In a comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and how when the rest of the
world has always looked to France for International leadership, and often
has got it, this is not one of these occasions.
J: Do you think the union movement then has over-reacted by calling for
some bans on French companies and calling for consumer bans?
PM: It is not a matter of whether they have over-reacted. It is a matter of
whether one can deliver things that matter. Keeping the response
proportional to what they have done is important It Is a measure of our
maturity. And, can I say, that In many respects the relationship with
France in the last few years has gone quite well. I personally restarted it in
1988 with Premier Rocard and as a consequence of that I proposed to him
that we reserve Antarctica as a wilderness park for the next half century.
As you know, that actually happened and so while one can reasonably lay
a charge of environmental vandalism at the French in Mururoa, you can't
lay the charge to them about Antarctica.
J: do you believe ( Inaudible)
PM: Hang on, it is a news conference. It is not for you.
J: So how big a set back Is this to our relationship with France?
PM: It Is a set back because, I think, Australia Is developing an independent
and quite strong dialogue with the French, but this must be true of many
countries with France. But, President Chirac has put this at risk with this
action which Is now receiving international condemnation as it should.
-j -1 L I I ; d jz-iu ui r u
4
J: But, does it soften our response, I mean he is not really worth putting at
risk because he gets to have his cake and eat it too?
PM: No, he doesn't get to have his cake and eat it too. This opinion will be
registered, but nor do we want to see one of the weapon states of the
world not be part of the comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and not be a
participant In the problems. I mean, these are real problems. The
problems that people In this country don't often think about like the rotting
carcasses of those power stations in the Ukraine, like the rotting carcasses
of those ships at Vladivostok. They are not on the lips of everybody, but
they are on the minds of the Australian goverment
J: Prime Minister, on a different issue, do you think that Bernie Fraser's
statements of a day ago about interest rates dampen the likelihood of a
further cut in the next couple of months?
PM: I just think the Governor was saying that which was obvious. That is, that
he was trying to warn markets of any notion of stampeding the
Government or the Reserve Bank along. That Is against the context of a
quite substantial fall In long term interest rates because you understand
that the long bond rate the 10 year bond rate is set not with any
reference to the Government, but in the market place and that has been
set because of the Budget parameters. Not in any artificial way. I notice
Mr Howard trying to glean some miserable political advantage from it
yesterday, what's left of his political hide after his fiasco on the republic.
Let me just say a couple of things about Mr Howard now that I have got an
opportunity. Two major statements in a week: The headland speech one
commentator described as mulch. The republic response completely
indecisive and incoherent. The thing to know about John Howard is he
stands for nothing. He looks pathetic because he stands for nothing. He
is just the same character he was in the late 1980s when the Liberal party
got rid of him as leader. A lot of people have been trying to reinvent him.
He is not capable of reinvention. And then yesterday, he came out and
said he is really for the Monarchy after all. Can you believe that? That
anyone today who believes In this country, what it has become, the notion
of what we think of ourselves, our complete right to be to independently
represent ourselves that somebody proposing of himself that he should
be the Prime Minster said ' oh no, by the way, I don't agree with that. I
believe that our head of state should be the monarch of another country.'
Can you believe that? That Is where he stands.
Then, in that fiasco he walks out and then tries to say that any fall in
interest rates will be politically motivated. The fall you see in interest rates
to date over one percentage point on 10 year bonds came not from
political motivation, but by the strength of a major economic change in the
.-1J U . Z I O U I r
ID. Jun No. 017 P. O
Budget. In other words, falls in interest rates In this country, whether they
are ones we have had or any in the future, will come from the value of the
public policy changes. Not by some manipulation of the Reserve Bank.
These were empty charges which John Hewson used to make and that
former Reserve Bank governor said that relations with the Government
have been entirely proper, but he said you have got to be an insider to
know that this was not always so. This was a reference to Mr Howard's
period. So, what I would say to Australians is this: the Budget has eased the bond
selling program by $ 15,000 million. That is one of the reasons why the
long bond rate has fallen. It is one of the reasons why the fixed Interest
rates have fallen and any falls in interest rates, whenever they occur, will
come because of the soundness and quality of Government economic
changes. Not by any political manipulation.
J: Oo you think they will fall before the end of the year?
PM: I am not here to predict interest rates.
J: On the republican issue, what do you make of Ray Groom's move in
Tasmania. Is he moving too soon?
PM: I think it Is a refreshing change from the strait jacket which this
obscurantist Mr Howard has placed In the Liberal party in and for a Liberal,
in Mr Groom, to stand up and say that he believes it is inevitable that
Australia should become a republic and that Tasmania will test this notion
first In terms of the governorship, the replacement if you like, the
relationship between Tasmania and the British Crown is something which,
I think, is a position that the Liberal party in general should be taking. So, I
certainty support Mr Groom on this.
J; But is it reasonable for the State to go first?
PM: The greater purpose will be served with the nation making such a change,
but who are we to say and who am I to say ' oh no, Tasmanians have not
got a right to express an opinion about it and make a decision, if you like,
about'. They have and good on them.
J: Mr Howard was down here two weeks ago and has promised a special
package for Tasmania.
PM: Yes, well do tell me, do tell me. He has promised a special package for
Tasmania. Well, have a look at Tasmania under the hands of a Liberal
government. the only employment growth in Tasmania has come from
Federal Labor government programs. We have had this recovery on now
for three years and the only growth in employment in Tasmania has come
6
from Federal Labor government programs. In fact, the private employment
base of the State has actually shrunk under a Liberal government in
Tasmania. This morning I was at a Landcare project and discussing with
some commonwealth officers in charge of Skillshare and some of the other
labour market programs the importance of getting young people trained
and into work. Could you Imagine Mr Howard gMng that any priority.
These are the very programs he actually wants to cut. So, when he comes
down here wandering around with his 1970s policies and his 1950s
philosophy saying ' he will give Tasmania a package'. Say ' sure you will
Johnny, sure you will'. Thank you.
ends