N ATIO 0N AL P R ESS C LU B
LUNCHEON AT HOTEL CANBERRA REX, CANBERRA JUNThE 1968
SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTER, RT. HON. J. G. GORTON, M. P.
Mr President, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen:-
This must necessarily be a truncated report on visits recently paid
to the United States, Viet Nam, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia.. Being
brief, it can only touch on some of the matters discussed and that-without
going into the matters in any depth, Indeed, if it were to do anything else,
iwould deprive you of that which you have come along to do, and that is to
Wsuch searching questions as may have occurred to you before this Luncheon
took place. One of the main purposes of the visits to these countries nearest
0~ Mr President, was to demonstrate that although there had been a change of
mie Ministers in Australia, there had been no change in our interest in or
desire to co-operate with those Asian countries in our region. I wished to
demonstrate that that policy:-furthered so well by my predecessor, was a
continuing policy of the Australian Government and, as I believe,' of the
Australian people.. This, I think, the visit succeeded in doing,
A further purpose was to make personal contact with the leaders
of the countries visited and with other senior people in the Administration
of those countries., It is always a good thing if you are at some later stage
to speak to, or to write to an individual,. to have met that individual
feto face and for him to have met you.
6 A third purpose, and indeed not third in point of importance, was
a desire to see and meet with and bring greetings from Australia to those
Australian forces which are serving overseas in various areas and which are, in
pnt of-numbers, the greatest forces we have had serving overseas since the
clusion of the Second World War,
These visits. Mr President, took place against an international
background of change,.
Firstly, the President of the United States was trying to bring
North Viet Nam to the conference table to see whether a just and honourable
peace could be negotiated in that war-torn country, and to that end, he had
ordered at some considerable military sacrifice, a cessation of bombardment
over a large area of North Viet Nam, He had announced that he, himself,
would give up any hope of being re-elected ae President of his great nation,
so that he could devote his efforts to that end and so that he could not be
accused of devoting his efforts to that end for personal political purposes..
This had led to a flood of speculation that the United States might withdraw
altogether from Asia: might withdraw altogether from Viet Nam, might accept,
in the words of the President of the United States.. a " fake" peace which was
merely a prelude to a takeover by North Viet Nam of the South, and might lose
all interest in involvement in this area of the world,,
An assessment of the answers to these questions was clearly of
importance to Australia's future planning, and I sought to make this
assessment in personal talks with the President and with such of his
likely successors as I was able to meet, and I have reported on this,~
Secondly, Mr President, there had been a fundamental change in
the basis on which Australia~ s strategic planning had for more than two
decades been predicated,~ This was caused not only by the accelerated
British withdrawal from the Malaysia/ Singapore area, but also and this
is of at least equal importance by the uncertainty that surrounded the
questions as to when, and with what forces and under what circumstances
the British would contribute to the defence and stability of the region
to our Near North after their withdrawal.
Clearly, a concept of forward defence by troops stationed
outside Australia. valid when based upon participation with Incal forces
of a major power, needed minute examination when the forces of that
major power were to be withdrawn and the circumstances of their re-entry
were unknown., Clearly any contribution by us to the stability of the
ion after 1971 cannot be fixed until we know what Britain, New Zealand,
* aysia and Singapore will do, or are likely to do, in the future..
Against this background ' I have asked before the visits took place
that our Defence Committee should prepare a new strategic assessment, a
~ wstrategic appreciation, taking into account those fundamental changes
ch had occurred some four to five months ago, and which had so radically
altered those assessments which, for more than two decades, we had accepted.
These journeys, and the initial meetings of the Five Power Pact
countries in Kuala Lumpur, have provided some of the answers to the questions
that we have to ask ourselves, The new assessment from the Defence
Committee when it is presented to Cabinet, as I expect it will be by
August at the latest,. will enable us, together with the facts gathered
on these journeys, properly to assess what the far future role of Australia
should be and I say " far future" because the end of 1971 is still three
and a half years away.,
0 But against this background, and until we get that appreciation
and assess it and set it up against the facts gathered in the conferences
and the journeys that have taken place, until we have examined a number
6 various possible alternatives for long-range planning, it would be
~ esponsible to settle long-range military planning, We would not
propose to do it until we have the full facts on which to settle those
plans; which is not to say that our forces will not gro~ w greatly in
capacity next year; for they will,
Against this background, there was added value in meeting
personally the leaders of Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesiaz In the case
of Indonesia, this was not because she was involved or is in any way
likely to be involved in such decisions as we may make in conjunction
with New Zealand, Britain-Singapore and Malaysia, but because she is our
nearest neighbour, because she is a significant power in this area, and
because that being so, I thought it proper and right that these matters
should be the subject of discussion between her President and myself,
Now, I turn very briefly to the countries visited on this
Asian tour,~ 9 o/ 3
In Viet Nam * the fighting is as fierce and as cruel as ever
There are indications that since the partial embargo on bombing of North
Viet Nam: i there has been a very great build-up of North Vietnamese
regular forces in South Viet Nam.. It is belived these forces will be
used over the coming months in co-ordinated attacks on Saigon and other
centres of population, designed primarily to influence public opinion
outside South Viet Nam, and designed in the hope of influencing the
talks at present going on in Paris, These are talks which it is all
too easy to describ. e as peace talks, but which in fact are not, but
merely preliminary talks to see whether there is a basis for the
negotiation of a just and lasting peace, talks which regrettably have
so far made no discernible progress, talks which, as I said when they
were initiated, contained the seeds of hope, but talks which so far have
not shown any indication of the germination of those seeds.
I found an intention on the part of the South Vietnamese
Government to increase their own armed forces., to make a stronger
contribution themselves to the war-~ and I found;. too, a nagging fear
amongst all with whom I spoke that there might be in Paris some
further military concession without reciprocal concession by the
Worth Vietnamese which would undermine the morale of the armed forces
of South Viet Nam and of the population of South Viet Nam. I do not
believe these fears are justified,
Turning now, Mr President, to Singapore, I had long talks with
Wee Kuan Yew and with'the Foreign Minister Rajaratnam-There was
evidently a lively appreciation there of the need to build up Singapore's
capacity to defend itself, and a determination to do this side by side
with the successful efforts presently being made to provide better
living conditions for the people of Singapore.
There was a purposefull attempt being made to tackle the
problems of unemployment. which are still great, and a conscious attempt
to forge the divergent races living in Singapore into a unified whole
owing allegiance to that city state giving loyalty to that city state
and not to the origins from whence they sprang.
There is no doubt of the genuine belief of Lee Kuan Yew that
the defence of Singapore and Malaysia is indivisible and there is no
doubt of his intention to contribute to that defence and to do what he
* can to see that this indivisibility is not in any way divided,
For ourselves; it seemed to me that what we could do best to
help was to provide technical assistance defence aid in the form of
equipment and matters of that kind: to encourage private investment
in Singapore and to continue -that government assistance which we
already are contributing
In Malaysia. too ' there was an equal awareness of the
indivisibility of defence between Singapore and Malaysia and an
equal awareness of the need for defence in adequate strength in
in that area., defence to which they must contribute,
There I had the opportunity to speak at some length with the
Tunku and his Cabinet in private on these matters,' and had the honour of
being the first Commonwealth Prime Minister to be received on the floor
of the Malaysian Parliament and to receive an address of welcome by
the Prime Minister and by the Leader of the Opposition. Although I should
point out to this gathering that there are so many different parties
in the Opposition that they have been unable to agree amongst themselves
who is the leader, so the leader is designated by the Prime Minister,
Sir.' if I have spoken largely of defence, it is because the
question of defence looms so largely in the minds of the leaders., both
in Singapore and in Malaysia. I found in these countries no acceptance
whatever of the proposition that what they need is economic aid in lieu
of defence. but rather the reverse, although; of course, they need both.
In Indonesia, on the other hand-the emphasis in all our talks
was on the economic conditions, particularly in Java, and what might
be done by the Indonesian Government itself for that must play the
primary part and by other nations in conjunction with the Indonesian
Government to improve those conditions.. This will take a massive effort
by the major powers and will require careful selection of projects and
effective administration in order to be successful,.
I found there, too, complete acceptance by the Indonesian
Government of Australia's peaceful intentions and complete acceptance
of any decisions we might make to contribute to Singapore's and
Malaysia-s defence after 1971.
Now, Mr President I know you wish to get to questions;. and I
Would merely conclude on thi's note. because after all, the question of
what is happening in Viet Nam is of major importance -in this country.
I see no reason for any change in Australia's attitude to this
~ truggle, We belive the Americans are right to seek for the South
ietnamese the right to elect their own government, to carry out that
election free from invasion, terrorism or threat and to have such
decision as they may make respected by all,
We belive that we have a stake in demonstrating that armed
aggression must not succeed.. We believe we now contribute sufficient
forces from Australia to carry out our duty in this respect,: and we
have the will to continue this contribution in concert with our Allies
until the political objective which the military operations are aimed
at is achieved; and until, if such political objective is achieved, we
can turn. as I would like to turn our efforts. to rebuilding that
ounryand providing to its people that kind of life which I feel under
terown control they can achieve..
I think I had better stop so that you have plenty of time for
use t on s Th a n k yo u
QUESTON SESSION:
Q Bob Baudino: Mr Prime Minister, if I may be forgiven, I
intend to indulge in the fashion of the Indonesian press
conferences and to ask you two entirely unrelated questions.
You have referred to our defence planning and mentioned it would
be irresponsible to go ahead with forward defence planning of
this kind You have also added that our forces will continue
to grow in the meantime.. Could you give us further details of
the interim plan for defence--Secondly,. at Nui Dat,, when
addressing our own troops, you told them that for every nut
who held up a placard or sat on the road in Australia-there were
one hundred others behind them. I think there may be points of
clarification needed here,~ C.
1W
PM: Thank you, Mr Baudino. The answer to the first question
you have asked is this-As a result of decisions already taken on
defence, there will in the 1968-69 financial year be significant
growth in the Australian defence capacity. There will, during that
period, be delivered the 24 Fill strike aircraft which will be
arriving and be put into service.. There will be 36 Macchi jet trainer
fighters delivered ( which have an operational capacity). There will
be delivered one new corvette to the Navy.. There will be delivered
a large amount of new Army equipment, There will be delivered to the
Army. apart from the ordinary equipment from memory, I think some
36 light aircraft and light helicopters, And the size of our
Regular Armed Forces will grow by at least 3,. O00O men, In addition,
there will be very large works programmes carried out for the Army,
the Navy and the Air Force in areas spread throughout the whole of
Australia.. Even that is not a complete list of the new equipment
to be delivered during this period of time. For example, another
Oberon submarine will be delivered and put into service during
1968/ 69., So there will be during the coming year great accretion of
defence hardware, if I can put it that way. and an increase in
defence forces There will also be a considerable increase in
defence expenditure for it will, on any estimate I can make, go up
to at least $ 1,250,000. The overseas requirements that we will have
to extend will rise from round about $ 350 million this financial
year to something like certainly well over $ 400 million next
financial year. So there is no interruption to defence planning;
there is no interruption to the accretions to the strength of our
Forces.. But seeking to look a long way ahead, it will probably
be towards the end of the year before some new Three-Year Programme,
to be operative not in the next financial year but in the one after
and in the two years after that-will be able responsibly to be
brought down, That would be the answer I would give you to the
first question. On the second question, that relating to ' nuts-, I would
like to make two things clear. One is that this is not to be taken
as a reference to those who oppose a course a government is taking,
and who use the proper channels to express that opposition the
proper channels being the newspapers,. being any media of public
expression that can be attained, being the holding of public
meetings, being seeking to influence public opinion against the
last expression of majority public opinion; for this must be
maintained as a right of any minority. As Voltaire indeed said:
" I disagree with what you say, but I would defend to the death
your right to say it" But if that minority opposition is extended
to actions -actions such as throwing things at people with whom
the disagree, actions such as throwing paint over the cars of
representatives of nations with whose policies they disagree, actions
such as carrying placards and lying down in roadways to disrupt
traffqic; then that-I think, is something not known and not proper
to a democratic society, because it is not an assertion of minority
rights to seek to change majority opinion,. It is -the beginning, an
incipient requirement of a minority to force a change in majority
opinion by breaking the law and by disrupting the rights of the
majority,. This kind of thing, beginning in this way, can ultimately
lead to the sort of tragic consequences we have seen in other
countries, and I belive that perhaps ' nut' is rather too mild an
expression for those who break the law and disrupt the traffic and
throw and threaten those representatives of majority opinion with
which they disagree, A minority has rights which must be protected,
but it has no rights to seek to impose its will by any degree of
force on a majority which disagrees with it, .7 6
Q Herschel Hurst. Melbourne Sun: Prime Minister. you said
in-your speech here today, in effect, '. that you believed the South
Vietnamese people wouldn~ t be sold out at the Paris talks, In the
course of your discussions with President Johnson in Washington
recently, did the President indicate to you just how far the United
States was prepared to go in concessions to the communists to end
the Viet Nam war?
PM: The President of the United States indicated to me both
privately and in public that he would not be prepared to accept
anything which he described as a ' face' peace; a " fake" peace as
I understand him to mean being a peace which was a formula designed
to cover a withdrawal without obtaining the objective of giving the
South Vietnamese people a change in freedom to express their own views.
He has said this privately, he has said this publicly, and I believe
that as far as he and his Administration are concerned he will not
make concessions which would lead to such an outcome, This
Administration. of course, has some six or seven months to run. He
spoke for himself as President, He made it clear he could not speak
for his successor as President and neither can I, but I did gather
the impression from the likely successors to whom I spoke that there,
too, there would be unlikely to be concessions which led to a disguishel
surrender and a disguished abandonment of the objectives which were
initially sought to be attained,.
Q Chris Forsyth: Sir, you mentioned a whole list of defence
hardware deliveries that we were going to get this year, It was
before your time that the decisions were made several years ago, Your
Government has delayed the Three-Year Defence Programme by a year, Sir,
Does this mean that Australia will have a years pause in defence
hardware buying and planning with obvious repercussions for deliveries
in the future?
PM: Well,. some of that hardware that you refer to wasn't before
my time.. In fact the submarine was ordered while I was Minister for
0the Navy, if you dont mind my saying so., Oh, you mean before I was
Prime Minister .,, but I do claim the ordering of some of that
hardware that will be in service during the coming year,, The point
of your question is should we not already have ordered a lot more
hardware for the subsequent year. and I don't believe that that is a
valid suggestion. When you order a ship., you are seeking to case your
mind forward to see what you want that ship to do for the next
twenty to twenty-five years, what part you want it to play in an
overall defence plan., When you order an aircraft you are seeking
to cast your mind forward to see what that aircraft is going to do
for the next ten to fifteen years, what part it is that you want
it to play in an overall defence programme, With such fundamental
changes as we have had and with the new strategic assessment coming
up, and with further matters to be resolved in the Five-Power Pact;
then I think it would be irresponsible until all the data is in
to order further hardware for immediate delivery,, It is more
responsible to wait until we have been able to assess and announce
where it is we believewe are going in five or six years time because,
after all, up until 1971, three and a half years' time it is known
what will happen there,, It would be irresponsible to assess beyond
that time before we have had a proper assessment and appreciation; and
if that is disagreed with, then it is disagreed with but it is the
view that the Government takes, C rc/
Q Frank________ ain Agence France Press and Macquarie
Radio: Can you tell us, Mr Prime Minister, whether this steady
rise in defence expenditure will lead to a steady decline in social
services and in national development?
PM: No. I don't believe the steady rise in defence expenditure
does mean a steady decline in social services and your other point
was national development because there will be a steady rise in
GNP, there will be a steady rise in national production and in its
value Indeed., we are now going through what I call the tantalising
years because two years ahead or two and a half years ahead, that
kind of period of time, we can see coming in to us the full benefits
of the minerals which are now being mined throughout the length and
breadth of this continent. We can see coming into to us the import
replacement value of the oil which is being discovered., We can see
coming in to us the benefit of the increased employment and the
increased industrial muscles which these will generate and which
other things will generate. So I not only see no decline in social
is services, but it is as I have said before, essential that we should
look at the areas of most need in social services and seek to overcome
them as part of a project of complete overhaul of our approach to
social services, Having said that, it is also clear that resources
spent on defence cannot be spent in other areas of national development
whether they be social services, whether they be education, whatever
they may be. It doesn't mean a decline, It does mean less capacity
to increase-
Q Jack Commins, ABC: Sir, has your recent visit led to any
rethinking on defence on your part? I refer to your initial statement
after becoming Prime Minister that the facts and future defence
expenditure must be balanced against internal development. I suppose
you answered that to a degree in the previous answer, but overall, I
think the question in all our minds is whether an increase in expenditure
will lead to an increase in taxation in the new Budget?
Now: really, do you honestly expect an answer which may
forecast Budget possibilities taxation. ( Commins: It was worth
a try') So youve tried, so thank you-
Alan Wood: Bearing in mind your reply to Mr Forsyth~ s
question,. I wonder if you could tell us where the defence hardware
already on order and ordered on the basis of an out-of-date defence
assessment, will fit into the new assessment?
PM: Before I answer that question, I would like to say that I
dont accept your statement that what has bee. n ordered has been
ordered on an out-of-date defence assessment, For example, I would
believe that the strike aircraft ordered would be necessary whatever
the future defence assessment may be-They have been ordered in the
United States you asked me, I think, where they had been ordered.
The submarine to which I referred and which also, I think, is an
integral part of a Navy however we may imagine that Navy to be
operating, has been ordered from the United Kingdom, as has its
predecessors. The Macchi jet trainers have been; or rather will be
built in Australia itself-The 12 Mirage fighters. which I omitted to
mention will be added to our defence capacity in the next year. will
be built in Australia itself. All the works programmes to which I
referred will obviously be handled in Australia itself, I cannot give
you them item by item because I haven't got it in my mind all the
pieces of defence hardware; but that would give various examples of
where this is coming from, and you will perhaps have noticed that we
have recently placed orders for electronic equipment for defence
purposes, again with Australian industry.
QStan Hutchinson: " Mr Prime Minister, when you were abroad,
you made an enigmatic reference to an Israeli-type army, Now the
Israeli-type citizen soldier depends for his emotional stimulus on
virtually being able to look out his window and see what he can
identify as an enemy, What would you substitute for that to keep
the Australian citizen soldier keen and enthusiastic?
PM: We have had two world wars in which we have from the
beginning relied very considerably on that citizen soldier to which
you refer Indeed., I think, at the beginning of both the First and the
Second World Wars, we had no regular army worth the name to put
into the field.: In both those cases. we had time to prepare to call
the citizen soldier into camp, to weld him into a unit, to then send
him abroad whether he had chosen to join the AlP at the beginning or
whether subsequently he went as reinforcements. Now we do have a
Regular Army stronger than before, but it needs, I believe to be
backed up by Citizen Military Forces, adequately trained, able to be
quickly mobilised. I think it unnecessary to suggest that they need to
look out of a window in order to be galvanised into giving their
services in this way. I believe there are many Australians who are
prepared to devote their time to Citizen Military Force training
so that there will be able to be a back-up force for a Regular Army.
It appears to me, particularly in a country which for decades will have
a requirement to build its strength through development, that this kind
of back-up force is good, is effective and is necessary-
Q Harry Stein: Mr Prime Minister:, during your recent journey,
you were not able to obtain a non-aggression pact with some of the
nations, which you had indicated you would like-I put it to you, Sir,
dont you think that ata time when there are no Australian troops
fighting against Asians as they are doing now in Viet Nam, that it
will be easier to establish a non-aggression pact with our Asian
neighbours?,-
P Well I would put it back to you that I don't think anything
of the kind In the talks that I had with the leaders of the Asian
nations to whom I spoke.-that is in Singapore; in Malaysia and in
Indonesia, I had no indication whatevey that there was any suggestion
that Australian troops should not be engaged in seeking to protect, as I
believe they are seeking to protect, the rights of the people of South
Viet Nam It would have been a little strange, would it not, had it
been otherwise; because after all, the people of Singapore and leaders
of Singapore and of Malaysia are interested in their own defence and
in exercises to help their own defence, which will involve Australian
troops. So it would be quite an odd volte face if what you suggest were
so., By whatever name you call it, I don't think it matters, but I would
agree with what Mr Hasluck said in the House before I went away or
rather,-what I think he said in a conference before I went away that
non-aggression pacts in this area and the area fairly close to us could
do no harm and could indeed do good.. This was not a major objective
of my visit, but I have some hopes that as time passes, we could at
least obtain declarations from the countries in the region that they
respect. the one to the other, the territorial integrity and sovereignty
of each other.. While the cynics may say this means nothing; at least
it is; I think,' something which it would be hard to attack as wrong to
seek to obtain. / 9
Q Mr Prime Minister, do you believe a resumption of the
bombing of North Viet Nam would necessarily jeopardise the Paris
preliminary talks?
PM: I haven't had any conversations or any suggestions
concerning hypothetical questions such as that.
Q Chalmers: Mr Prime Minister, this week Mr Holyoake was
quoted as saying thlat in lieu of a visit he was contemplating to
Canberra, he had a long telephone conversation with you. I was
wondering whether you could tell us anything of the telephone
conversation, particularly what he may have said, and in particular
whether that conversation contemplated a meeting between yourself
and Mr Holyoake either here or in Wellington?
PM: No, not really.. Mr Holyoake stayed behind in Kuala Lumpur
rather longer than he had intended in the hope that we might have had
a discussion there on what had transpired at the Five-Power Talks and
what he saw as the future after 1971 and matters of that kind. But
* there was a fa. irly split-second schedule arranged and except over a
dinner which was not a completely appropriate occasion, this kind of
discussion was unable to be properly developed. So he did ring me
up on the morning that I returned and he put to me then his own
tentative views, his own forecasts and asked me for mine and they were
purely discussions, exploratory and tentative in character. He was
seeking to find out what was in my own mind and I was seeking to find
out what was in his for some considerable time in the future.
QPeter Samuel: Mr Prime Minister, two months ago, our
delegate at the United Nations spoke on the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty and he expressed a lot of strong reservations about this treaty,
and this led to the expectation that we might join India and France in
not signing the treaty, Since then, you have been to the United States,
you have been to Asia,, I wonder if you can give us any more indication
of your thinking on this treaty?
Pie You will have noticed that the resolution which was passed
by the General Assembly was to comment the treaty. You will also have
noticed that we in Australia indicated that we agreed with the principle
of such a treaty but wanted to be sure before we signed it that it was an
effective treaty and that we would be requiring answers as to the
method of withdrawing from the treaty, questions as to control over
people from the international agency who might be sent to be stationed
here to examine various defence installations, questions as to the
rights one had for the civil uses of atomic energy, questions as to whd
in fact was going to sign the treaty and who in fact wasn't, and a large
number of related questions, So, yes in principle, we think that a
treaty of this kind, if it can be made effective, would be good, We
have therefore voted to commend it, it is open to signature, but we
would wish the answers to a lot of questions we raise to be given to
our own satisfaction before we would sign what we commend in principle.
Q Could I just ask a supplementary question to that one?
Will this our decision whether or not to sign depend to any extent
on the major strategic re-assessment that you spoke of and-expect in
August?
PM: I don't believe so. No, I don't believe so. We have to look
decades ahead on this particular matter you have raised. After all, as
far as Australia itself is concerned, we have no nuclear capacity at all.
We have no nuclear plants at all, nor are likely to have any chance
of manufacturing any nuclear defence for at least a decade, so it is not
an immediate matter with which we are concerned. It is rather a matter
of seeking to see how it will work and, as far as one can, to look ahead
to the future of not you or I but younger ones living in Australia.
Q David Solomon: Prime Minister can you see any end to the Viet
Nam war coming other than through the Paris talks?
PM: Well, Mr Solomon, so far, I can see no end at all to the Viet
Nam war coming through the Paris talks because up to this stage there has
been nothing but an exchange of polemics, a refusal on the part of the
North Vietnamese to admit that there are any North Vietnamese troops
in South Viet Nam, a refusal on the part of the North Vietnamese to admit
that they are providing the rockets and mortar shells to bombard Saigon
in return for Hanoi being freed from bombardment, and this all carried on
in public0 So that is answer to a part of your question0 The answer
* to the second part is that it must merely be an impression and an
assessment. It cannot be taken as a clear indication of what will happen.
Of course it can't, looking ahead. But I believe, given sufficient will,
that the military objective of obtaining political freedom for the people
of South Viet Nam can be attained.
In the light of that answer, Sir, and in the light of your
earlier statement about the bombardment of Saigon and the build-up
following the cessation of American bombing, would you like to see, as
the American newspapers have suggested, some deadline put on the bombing
halt?
PM: I have already had a question similar to that from, I think,
the " Sydney Morning Herald" 0 This is a sort of hypothetical question
which I would not wish to give an answer to0
Sir, on the question of taxation, which you dismissed earlier,
Wcan I put it to you, how would it be possible to increase defence
expenditure by such a large amount and not neglect social services and
national development without increasing taxation.
I thought I had endeavoured to give an indication of the answer
Wto that, and I am not to be taken as forecasting anything concerning the
Budget this or future Budgets one way or the other, but as a country
grows, and as its population grows and as its GNP grows and as its taxable
income grows, so there is a capacity to increase not only one facet of
expenditure but a number of facets of expenditure0 Now, it is a matter
for decision as to whether they are increased sufficiently, or which ones
are increased sufficiently0 But there is not a fixed sum of Government
revenue which remains fixed year after year so that taking from that sum
a greater amount for Project A leaves lessfor Projects B and C and D,
rather there is a growing sum which year after year grows, and from the
growth, there can be distributed to Project A, B9 C or D that part of
that growth which it is believed contributes best to the national good.
Q David Gilmorgan: Mr Prime Minister, as there is no embargo
on culture, what is the point of having a cultrual pact between two
countries?. 0.00/ 11
I think it a little surlxising,, Sir, that you should suggest there
is no value in a cultural pact merely because there happens to be no embargo
as you put it on culture I would have thought that if two countries,
who are as close together as are Indonesia and Australia, both indicated
publicly that they were interested in and would do what they could to
exchange artists; whether they be manual artists or performing artists
to exchange teachers, to exchange visits, to ( in the case of Indonesia
make known in Australia the materials they produce if you like, the
special batiks they produce the kind of ballet telling the stories long
rooted in Indonesian history, the sort of music which comes from parts of
that country and in exchange to receive the opportunity to hear music
of a different kind from our own symphony orchestras, to see dancing of a
different kind from our own culture., that this could do nothing but good,
and that it was rather a negative approach to say there is no embargo on
culture so let us do nothing, It is rather a positive approach to say
both our governments think that the more that can be done to see that each
country sees the culture of the other, the more each country may tend to
. understand the other, and that if that happens, this is not an insignificant
advance..
Q Stewart Harris: Sir.; I think next year Indonesia is going to
give West Irian an act of free choice to decide whether to stay under
* Indonesian administration or become independent. In the last six years
since Indonesia took over the administration of West Irian, Australia has
received in New Guinea about sixty-three refugees and their dependants from
West Irian,. Next year I think it is possible that the number may increase
for one reason or another., The frontier between West Irian and Papua/ New
Guinea is not defined on the ground and is not agreed to by the
Governments of Indonesia and Australia,. There could be problems on the
border-, I was recently up there.. There is no contact at the moment
between the Administrations of West Irian and Papua/ New Guinea. There was
i~ n the time of the Dutch:, Australia~ s relations with Indonesia are now
excellent-You were. in Djakarta yourself recently, Sir, so I was
0wondering if you could get contact going on the ground between the
* Administrations of West Irian and Papua/ New Guinea so that any problems
that might occur next year could be understood in advance?
IM: I think that is a matter, Mr Harris, that I would need to
* discuss with the Minister for External Territories and the Minister for
External Affairs. You surprise me a little because perhaps wrongly
but nevertheless certainly I was, and am, under the impression that the
boundary between West Irian and Papua/ New Guinea is on the map agreed
between the Government of Indonesia and ourselves. Certain exercises have
been carried out to demarcate the boundary and to seek to mark it insofar
as it can be marked. Cairns of stones have been built on the particular
parallel which,; I think, is accepted by both countries. But in between
those cairns, of course, there is just wild jungle, and so indication
of boundaries as one would find in more heavily populated areas, so that
one could easily wander across the boundary without knowing it, from Papua/
New Guinea into West Irian or from West Irian into Papua/ New Guinea-It
will take a long time before this can be stopped, All I can say in answer
to your specific question is that I would have to take that up with the
Minister for External Affairs and the Minister for External Territories,
But I do think that our relations with Indonesia are so good that if there
are problems there they are more likely to be overcome now than they might
ever have been likely to have been overcome in the past.