THE PRIM4E MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE
PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA
TUESDAY, 19 JUNE 1973
PRIME MINISTER: Ladies and gentlemen: There has been no
Cabinet committee meetings this week. Yesterday, today and
tomorrow we are holding these economic consultations with industry.
I thought it might suit you if I were to have this press conference
at noon, well before lunch, so that the afternoon papers could
get their turn. I have no announcements to give you. Last week
Mr. Jack Fingleton asked me about the cost of cable communications
between India and Australia and I said I would find out what was
the basis for it. I haven't yet got the information I want.
Are there any questions?
Q. Now that you have finally got the invitation to Washington,
can you tell us just what you hope to raise in your talks with
Mr. Nixon and what you hope to achieve while you are over there?
PRIME MINISTER: I have no further information to give you on
thismatter.
Q. Two of your most senior ministers, over the last couple of
days, have had differing views on tax increases. Dr. Cairns
says he will press in the Cabinet Budget talks for tax increases
to correct any inequality in education and health. Yesterday
Mr. Crean said that Labor's major electoral promises will be
honoured and he would not increase taxes to pay for the promises.
Will you give unequivocal support to Mr. Crean's declaration about
tax increases?
PRIME MINISTER: What I said in the policy speech stands.
Q. I would like to bring up the question of Cuba which we
discussed at the press conference last week. I questioned
Marshall Green about this the new United States Ambassador
at the National Press Club and he said: " We and others should
expand dialogue and negotiations with other powers". And then
specifically on Cuba he said: " I don't see from my remarks
that I have just made now that there would be any intimation
that we are protesting against any other country opening dialogue
with each other; on the contrary it seems to me that was the
very point I was making". In view of these remarks might
deference to America still be a factor in our relations with Cuba
or absence of relations with Cuba or diplomatic or consular
representation? PRIME MINISTER: Australia and Cuba have always recognised each
other. There is no diplomatic or consular representations
by either country in the other country. But it is all a question
of priorities and the Caribbean has not hitherto been an area
of great diplomatic or consular priorities as far as Australia
is concerned. We will be getting some representations there.
All the countries in the Caribbean belong either to the
Commonwealth or the organisation of American States and I would
expect that in my visits to Mexico and the United States and
Canada, I might discuss the augmentation of our diplomatic or
consular representations in the Caribbean. That is the context
in which you have to regard Cuba.
-2-
Q. Did you think that Mr. Hamer and Sir Robert Askin are
justified in claiming a victory in London? Do you feel that a
referendum may be necessary to solve this question?
PRIME MINISTER: You are referring to the abolition of appeals
to the PrivyCouncil? Well, I would be happy to know what their
attitudes are to this question of abolishing appeals to the
Privy Council. I don't believe that any contemporary political
leader in Australia would resist the abolition of appeals to the
Privy Council. How it is done is not so important, as the fact
that it be done.
Q. When you say " how it is done is not as important as it be
done". Well they don't like the way that you are doing it.
PRIME MINISTER: Well, what do they suggest?
Q. Well, do you have any alternatives?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, I would be happy to consider any alternative
that they propose. The fact is that the Labor Party has been
committed to the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council since
1908. This is a very long-standing political commitment, and I
suppose the Liberals might claim one of their paragons as Prime
Minister was Alfred Deakin. Alfred Deakin was against continuing
appeals to the Privy Council back at the end of last century.
You remember the discussions that he and other Australian
leaders had with Joe Chamberlain the one of two generations ago,
not the present one on this very question. That is, I would
imagine that since before the first World War every significant
political leader in Australia has been in favour of abolishing
appeals to the Privy Council. Now I am quite happy to discuss
any alternatives that Mr. Hamer and Sir Robert Askin suggest.
Q. When would you do this?
PRIME MINISTER: Whenever they like. Whenever they suggest.
Q. Next week, Sir?
PRIME MINISTER: If they like to suggest to discuss it at the
Premiers' Conference, I would be very happy to do it. It is
really an absurd anomalv that we should still have the possibility
of appeals or petitions to the British Privy Council and this has
been a matter of great diversion over the last couple of weeks
here and over in Britain.
Q. Can I take it from that that you are quite prepared to
reconsider the approach which you outlined to us in London?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, let us see what suggestions they make
about it. A lot of suggestions are made about referendums on
this question. I would have thought anybody following British
politics in the last couple of years would have noticed that Mr.
Heat1N in particular, asserts the responsibility of Government to
make up their minds in these matters not to seek the referendum
to decide issues. That was the whole issue on which he was so
resolute, you remember, on Britain's joining the Common Market.
Governments ought to make decisions on this matter.
-3-Association
Q. Sir, the Associated Chambers of Manufacturers/ yesterday
made some very dire forecaslt about the expected rate of inflation.
Have you any comments on their forecasts and have you had any
alternatives on forecasts from the Treasury of the rate of increase
of the consumer index maybe?
PRIME MINISTER: No, and no.
Q. I understand that you recently had a letter from the acting
Queensland Premier, Mr. Gordon Chalk, asking in effect how
Aboriginals will be better off under federal control than State
control. Could you say what is the core of the disagreement
between the federal and State Governments on this matter?
If the Queensland Government won't co-operate with the federal
Government, are you going to need enabling legislation?
PRIME MINISTER: The Queensland Government takes a paternal
attitude. The Australian Government takes a fraternal attitude
on this matter. Six years ago, overwhelmingly the Australian
people at a referendum gave the Australian Parliament the
authority to pass laws concerning the Aboriginal people, the
people of the Aboriginal race. My Government proposes to introduce
appropriate legislation in the Australian Parliament to promote
the welfare of people of the Aboriginal race. There is one matter
on which neither Mr. Bjelke Petersen or Mr. Gordon Chalk have yet
replied to in correspondence. It is now over six months old.
It concerns the repeal of the discriminatory provisions of the
Aboriginal and island affairs legislation of the Queensland
parliament. The view is, and it is a view expressed by our
predecessors as well as by us, that this legislation is in
conflict with the 1965 international convention for the
elimination of racial discrimination. We propose,-. in the
Budget session, to bring in legislation to implement that
convention and this will enable us to override the Queensland
legislation. In other words, we will be carrying out another
undertaking Mr. Gorton made over three years ago.
Q. In answer to an earlier question, I understood you to say
there would be no increase in taxation in the next Budget.
In reply to a question from Tony Thomas, you said'no" in both
cases. The second part of his question, as I understood it,
was about....
PRIME MINISTER: Whether there was a Treasury estimate as to the
rate of increase in the consumer price index? And, I said " no" to
that question.
Q. Well, I was just wondering in this context if you haven't
got any forecasts of the economy, how can you at this stage make a
promise about no increase in taxatio n? Does this mean that
irrespective of the rate of inflation or rate of inflation
forecast, that there will not be any increase in taxation?
PRIME MINISTER: Will I read what I said in my policy speech?
I said it stands.
Q. Given that there may be high levels of economic inefficiency
in the expansion of Australian defence industries, will you see that
any proposals to expand Australian defence industries are first
referred to the Protection Commission?
-4-
PRIME MINISTER: No. You've asked questions and I have given
you an answer.
Q. I am asking you a second question. Why not?
PRIME MINISTER: I gave an undertaking that we will develop
certain basic industries in Australia and among those I think
mentic ned was light aricraft, fighter aircraft, rolling stock,
pipelines and so on. These are commitments we want to establishbasic
industries in Australia for which we know there will always
be a demand by Australian Governments or Australian companies.
Q. Sir, Why is it
PRIME MINISTER: I am not going to assume that Australian
defence industries are inefficient.
Q. Why not look at it and see if they are?
PRIME MINISTER: Well they have not, in general, been given a
ch~ ance. I don't think for instance, one could say that the
Mirage program was inefficient.
Q. Why is the additional production of Nomad been limited to
aircraft when as Dr. Cairns said yesterday
PRIME MINISTER: There has been no decision on the Nomad aircraft.
Q. So it may not be 50 aircraft?
PRIME MINISTER: There has been no decision on the Nomad aircraft.
Q. Mr. Ducker, the New South Wales President of the branch of
your party has some rather strongly worded remarks today to make
about a group within your branch. Do you agree with his statement?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't comment on organisational matters.
Q. Do you have a particular view on this matter a personal view
on this matter?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Q. Could you tell us why not, Sir?
PRIME MINISTER: I will deal with this within the organs of the
party if it arises.
Q. Do you have any comment on the current dispute in the motor
industry, and do you see a role for the Commonwealth Government
in bringing the dispute to an end?
PRIME MINISTER: I am considering this just at the moment. It is
a bit premature for me to say anything about this.
Q. Will you be recalling Mr. Cameron from overseas?
PRIME MINISTER: Certainly not.
Q. In the context of your proposed visit to America, are you
embarrassed at all about the remarks made by Senator Wheeldon
belittling the ANZUB pact?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't comment gentlemen on reports or
interviews that my colleagues give or opponents give. You
know this.
Q. What action could the Federal Government give if any
in the Ford dispute?
PRIME MINISTER: I am not sure.
Q. At the special Premiers' Conference last month, you sent
a joint Commonwealth/ State committee to investigate ways to
solve the problem of inflation. Could you tell us whether
that committee would be in a position to present a final
report to the Premiers Conference?
PRIME MINISTER: I expect so.
Q. Two issues. When could you expect an announcement by the
Federal Government on the future of the export incentives
scheme?
PRIME MINISTER: In about 9 months.
Q. This would be about three months before it expires?
PRIME MINISTER: The decision has been made and announced.
Q. Yes, to continue to June 1974.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes that is right. To continue the present
one until -theen d of next financial year.
Q. Yes, I was talking about...
PRIME MINISTER: No. I am only guessing when we will make a
statement, but I would not imagine we would resolve this matter
before the end of 1973.
Q. The other one. Have you seen the report of Sir John Crawford?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Q. When do you expect to do so?
PRIME MINISTER: I think next week.
Q. How soon after will it be published?
PRIME MINISTER: All reports in the normal course are released
very promptly.
Q. Will the Coombs Task Force...
PRIME MINISTER: No, that's in a Budget context. I hope that that
will be published with the Budget papers. No, but you can understand
you don't expect us to...
0. You answered it. If ever it was going to be published and
you've said you hoped it will be published..
-6
PRIME MINISTER: My present inclination would be to table
the Task Force report with the Budget papers on the 21st
of August. But we wouldn't publish that before the Budget.
Q. On the question of the export incentives which Mr.
Hawke raised. Have you changed the position you adopted in
Cabinet when this matter was discussed earlier this year?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
Q. That the export incentives should be phased out?
PRIME MINISTER: Phased out?
A. Phased out.
PRIME MINISTER: I thought that they should have been ended.
Tha-t is the present scheme. I mean I am not committed against
forms of export incentives. What I don't like is the present
one which is the atrociously expensive one. An export incentive
scheme shouldn't be a perennial. Certainly we ought to encourage
Australians to export their resources, their skills, or to establish
a foothold for them overseas, particularly in our region. There
is a very good case to establish export links but there can be
very little case for keeping on a scheme for ever. The present
one is too unimaginative, too rigid, no longer relevant. But the
situation we inherited, as you realise, was that the scheme was
expiring at the end of this month and while the Australian Labor
Party had never committed itself to continue the scheme, by the
time we got around to considering it that's about three months
ago it would have been rather short notice to let it expire
at the end of June. I wouldn't have minded it going to the end
of December. In fact it has been extended until the end of June
next year. There was a proposal, which our predecessors made at
the 11th hour, that it should be extended for another five years.
That didn't get much shrift. We will hope to review this matter
but you can't really review it until the Budget has been, brought
in.
Q. When you spoke in Adelaide the other day you said that,
quite rightly, we were subsidising motor vehicle exports to
South Africa. Do you have any figure to the extent to which
we are subsidising exports to South Africa under the incentive
scheme?
PRIME MINISTER: No I haven't. There is difficulty. I think
the law in fact prevents the publication of taxation figures such
as this.
Q. But that would only be for individuals. You can aggregate.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, but a company is an individual.
Q. Yes, but I mean aggregate of exports to South Africa.
PRIME MINISTER: You are asking me to ascertain and to state how
much the Australian taxpayer subsidises the export of Holdens
and Fords and Chryslers and Leylands to South Africa. I suppose
you are right there. You could if there were several makes being
exported to South Africa. I suppose one could ascertain the sum
total of the subsidies the taxpayer makes on thoseexports.
-7-
One could not of course, under the law, disclose what the
subsidies by the taxpayer are for any individual motor company.
I don't know how many motor car companies do export to South Africa.
But as it is we pay the taxpayer pays about $ 100,000,000
a year for various forms of export incentives, market development
overseas and there are very great competing claims on the taxpayer
and the present scheme, in my view, my strong view, does not
deserve $ 100,000,000 a year at the expense of competing claims
on the taxpayer.
Q. Have you any clear agenda items for the Premiers' Conference
at the end of next week. Apart from the important financial
dispersement and Loan Council matters. For example, is it clear
yet whether, apart from the question of the Privy Council raised
earlier and perhaps inflation, would city transport, railways,
off-shore resources constitute any...
PRIME MINISTER: I don't think off-shore I don't think
off-shore resources is listed. I haven't got the list in front
of me. Nobody has so far asked for abolition of Privy Council
appeals or off-shore resources legislation to be listed. I think
I'm right in saying that. And the other matters you mentioned:
they're listed if my memory is but in particular we will be
wanting to discuss welfare, housing and education.
Q. The Torres Strait islanders who were down here last week
are very concerned that there should be no drilling for oil in
the Torres Strait...
PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
Q. Have you a view on this and have you a view on their other
concern about no movement of the border?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't believe that drilling in the Torres
Strait shouldc be permitted until it is quite established that it
can be done with safety that there can be no harm to the
environment. I was able to remind the visitors from the Torres
Strait islands that it w-4s the Queensland Government that was
in favour of drilling in Torres Strait and the vicinity of the
Great Barrier Reef. It was the Australian Government that
successfully resisted and frustrated those proposals. It was
the Gorton Government which prevailed on the Queensland Government
to establish Royal Commissions, which are still sitting, into
this matter. It was the Australian Government which safeguarded
the Torres Strait and the Great Barrier Reef environments. The
Queensland Government would have run the risk of spoiling the
environment. The question of the border is a matter which I hope
the Torres Strait islanders will discuss with the Papua New Guineans.
I am not too sure to what extent I should say what we discussed
because I believe it was a private gathering. I am quite hopeful
that there will now at last be discussions. I pointed out
that the Australian Government could only help to bring such
discussions about until the end of November, because after that
Papua New Guinea will be self-governing.
-8-
Q. Is the Government still happy with the rigid nexus between
the Australian and American dollars? It seems to be producing
some arbitrary result if the American dollar...
PRIME MINISTER: I'm not going to speculate on the currency.
When we change the parity it will come as a great surprise, and
it will be a very well kept secret until we change it.
Q. Is breaking the link....
PRIME MINISTER: I am not going to speculate on things like that,
pl-ease.
Q. The General Motors Holden appointment of an American to
run their Australian operations. Do you have any views on this?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
Q. What are they?
PRIME MINISTER: I think the appointment was very ill-timed.
And I have no doubt that their sales will suffer as a consequence.
Q. It seems that the first French explosion is immenent. Is
there any decision on when the Australian ship may leave for that
area? PRIME MINISTER: No. There has been no change in the decision
which was already announced on that matter.
Q. You must wait for the New Zealand move first?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, there is no change in what~ we announced.
Q. Will the Commonwealth Government see that G. M. H. does suffer
through this appointment?
PRIME MINISTER: No. The Australian public will draw their own
conclusions about this.
Q. But in the purchase of cars for the Australian Government?
PRIME MINISTER: No, will we buy I should imagine the present
rules apply. We'll buy the car on which we get the best deal.
Q. On this question of the dispute in New South Wales, you
said... PRIME MINISTER: No, well I'm not going to comment at this
press conference on this. I'm not going to promote....
Q. Unclear.
PRIME MINISTER: Well if you don't mind, I'm not going to
pursue it.
Q. After we have gained control of North West Cape, should
the United States seek permission to send a signal to fire
nuclear weapons. Will you always say no?
PRIME MINISTER: This is hypothetical, isn't it?