THE PRIME MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE
PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA
12 MARCH 1974
PRIME MINISTER: Ladies and gentlemen. I haven't got anything to
volunteer to you. Is there anything you want to ask me?
QUESTION: I refer to the return of power of the Labor Government
in Britain and your previously unsuccessful attempt to get
support from the Heath Administration for Australia's argument
with the French over nuclear testing in the Pacific. Have you had
any contact with the new Foreign Secretary, Mr Callaghan, about the
proposed French tests this year, if not, would you expect to get
more sympathetic support from the new Administration than from the
previous encumbrance at 10 Downing Stre et?
PRIME MINISTER: We haven't had any communications with the new
British Government yet. I do think that they will be more positive
on this matter than the previous administration.
QUESTION: Sunday night in your address to the nation, you were
talking about the five referenda which you said would be held
at the same time as the Senate election. In viewof what's been
happening in the Senate, does this mean that the Senate election
will not be held until it is possible to hold the 5 referenda.
Alternatively, will you hold the referenda after the Senate election.
PRIME MINISTER: No, the proposal all along has been to hold the
referendums at the same time as the Senate election. That was
stated more than 6 months ago at the Constitutional Convention
in Sydney, and it has been stated on several occasions since then.
My broadcast and telecast on Sunday night dealt with the four
referendums for which bills have now been twice passed by the
House of Representatives and once rejected by the Senate. The
broadcast and telecast didn't deal with the Constitution Alteration
( Inter-Change of Powers) Bill because while it has gone through
the House of Representatives it hasn't yet been voted on by the
Senate. If the Senate rejects that bill then that referendum
couldn't be put to the people. The other referendums can all be
put to the people because, even if the Senate twice rejects them,
there has been the necessary double passage by the House e
Representatives. QUESTION: But if the Senate does not reject them in time for perhaps
the date you were thinking of for the Senate election, would you
then hold the Senate elections back?
PRIME MINISTER: It is quite clear that the Senate knows that these
referendums are to be held together with the Senate election
and if there was any delay in the Senate we would make it clear
that that would be regarded as a failure to pass and we could ther....
QUESTION: You would go to the Governor-General on this?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, yes, as the Constitution provides. The
Constitution has always made it possible for the Governor-General
to put a referendum to the people if it has been twice passed by
the House of Representatives and twice rejected by the Senate.
The Senate can't prevent a referendum being put to the people in
those circumstances.
-2-
QUESTION: You say the Constitution makes it possible for
Sir Paul Hasluck to do that. Hlow certain are you that he would take
this view. Is it mandatory for him to take the view~ that you
have suggested?
PRIME MINISTER: I am certain the Governor-General would act on
the advice of his Attorney.
QUESTION: Even if the Senate approves the referendum on the
exchange of powers, it's not possible now for you to have that
referendum in conjunction with the Senate election before May 12,
and the likelihood of the Senate having rejected a change in the
Standing Orders is in fact a delay of about another month. Do you
now have any hope whatsoever of putting back the Senate election
until June to have that referendum with it?
PRIME MINISTER: The Senate election doesn't have to be held until
the end of June because the Senators who will be elected will take
office on 1 July. Ordinarily Senate elections, like House of
Representatives elections, are held on Saturdays. So, accordingly,
it would be possible to have the Senate election on the last
Saturday in June. I'd add that I would expect certainly hope
that the Senate would pass the Constitution Alteration ( Inter-Change
of Powers) Bill because this bill was approved, in principle, in
fact applauded by the Premiers of N. S. W. and Victoria. Also, by
the Premiers of South Australia and Western Australia
and the Attorney-General who was leading the Tasmanian delegation
at the Constitutional Convention last September. And while the
Premier of Queensland didn't endorse the proposal he didn't reject
it either. Since then the seven Parliamentary draftsmen, the
Commonwealth, the six State ones and all the Attorneys-General,
the Commonwealth and the six State ones, have considered and approved
the text of the bill which I introduced and which the House of
Representatives passed. This was promised at the Constitutional
Convention six months ago, so it would be a gross breach of faith
if the Opposition parties in the Senate were to delay that bill.
You mention the call of the Senate. Under the Standing Orders of
the Senate such a call takes place on the third reading. If, on
the second reading, the Opposition Senators were to vote & qainst
the bill then, of course, there would never be any third reading,
there would never be any call of the Senate, so one would know I
expect the fate of that bill on the second reading.
QUESTION: What's the date of the Senate election?
PRIME MINISTER: That depends on the dates on which the Senate passes
any of the five bills for rererendums ,.. hich are before it or the
date on which it rejects any of the four which it has already
rejected once. I should add that if the Senate this time passes any
or all of those four which it previously rejected, then two months
must elapse before those referendums which it approves are put to
the people. If it rejects those all of them the second time
then -there is no minimum period before they are put to the people.
QUESTION: I was just wondering what your reaction was to the apparent
reluctance by the A. C. T. U. Executive to co-operate in the
introduction of some skilled car workers from the Philippines to
Australia as permanent settlers, and further if you feel that this
decision may have caused some misgivings in Manila about
PRIME MINISTER: I am discussing Mr Cameron, the Minister for
Labor, Mr Grassby, the Minister for Immigration, and I are discussing
this matter with the officers of the A. C. T. U. next Friday morning
in Sydney.
QUESTION: Just following on that que~ tion. Do you still believe
that they should be allowed to come to Australia?
PRIME MINISTER: I will make no more statements on this matter until
Friday morning.
QUESTION: Do you remain committed to completely abolishing the means
test on old age pensions in the life of this parliament?
PRIME MINISTER: You know what I have said in the policy speech.
QUESTION: Do you have any plans to visit the flood areas of N. S. W.?
PRIME MINISTER: I am seeing if I can arrange my program to go there.
QUESTION: We understand there is an Interim Report from the
Henderson Inquiry into Poverty received by the Government. I wonder
when that report will be released?
PRIME MINISTER: We haven't discussed it in Cabinet yet. It hasn't
been circulated in a submission to Cabinet yet. I would expect
that it would be released this session.
QUESTION: There has been discussion over recent days by Mr Crean
the Treasurer, on the question of restructuring the tax scale.
He said today he would do it. Do you believe this should be done
in this year's Budget.
PRIME MINISTER: We haven't discussed this. There has been no
submission to Cabinet on this matter.
QUESTION: To take you back to David Solomon's question. Were you
saying that the only influence on you on what date you decide to
have the Senate election was whether or not you could hold the
referenda on the same day?
PRIME MINISTER: We shall hold the referendums on the same day,
and I can't say what that day is yet because the Senate still has
the bills for the referendums before it.
QUESTION: Would you give favourable consideration to any suggestion
that the federal Government should enter the life and general
insurance field?
PRIME MINISTER: I think there are much greater ar-gulnts for the
federal Government entering the general insurance fild than fuc
it entering the life assurance field. Life assurance is 3enera). y
mutual and there is a fair amount of competition on the terms thet
are available. I do believe it is important that the Australian
Government should enter into the general insurance field mjost
of the State Governments have already entered it. It is a field
which io dominated still by foreign companies.
QUESTION: The West Australian and the federal Government
co-operated on feasibility studies of the West Australian log of
the national pipe grid. This report has been presented and
has been available for some time but hasn't been released. When
do you expect that this report will be made public?
PRIME MINISTER; I didn't think it w-s available yet.
QUESTION: Well it has been widely leaked in West Australia and
it has been presented to the Government.
PRIME MINISTER: I didn't know it had.
QUESTION: Abolition of the means test, Prime Minister. Would you
counternance any slowing down in the abolition of the means test
beyond the lifetime of this Parliament.
PRIME MINISTER: As you know, before the last elections both the
Liberal Party and the Labor Party committed themselves to the
abolition of the means test in the lifetime of this Parliament.
QUESTION: Mr Gorton indicated in 1970 that the Commonwealth would
pay all legal costs if the StaLes took the Seabed issue to the
High Court. Is this your intention also?
PRIME MINISTER: I haven't considered that. We have given no
undertakings on that. The States, you will remember, acted without
consulting the Australian Government on some matters in this field
when they petitioned the Queen to refer certain matters to the
British Privy Council. And, as the Queen stated in bhr : peech
opening the Parliament, both the British and her Australian
ministers advisedher not to do so.
QUESTION: I am wondering how you reconcile the referendum proposal.
to make all electorates equal in numbers of people with your past
adherence to the principle of " one vote one value". If you still
adhere to " one vote one value", will you be extending the franchise
if the referendum is passed?
PRIME MINISTER: The referendum bills, you remember, guarantees
that everybody who is 18 or more shall have a vote for every House
of Parliament in Australia not only the two federal Houses of
Parliament but all the State Houses of Parliament including, of course
the Legislative Council of which isn't elected directly
by the people at all. So, there will be no extension of the franchise
The Bill itself guarantees the franchise to people who are 18
or above except where there are laws restricting the franchise in the
case of people of unsound mind or serving prison terms. Any such
restrictions, like any other applications of that Constitutional
proposal, are left to the High Court to determine. Anybody who has
a vote or believes he should have a vote will be able to approcuh the
High Court under this referendum proposal, so there will be no
extension of the franchise involved in the referendum proposals.
QUESTION: But what about the question of " one vote one value"?
PRIME MINISTER: My view on this has been expressed for 10 years
in the Parliament 10 years and 1 month. Ever since the Warren
Court, the Supreme Court of the United States, laid down that
principle. The Australian Constitution borrowed from the United
States Constitution the provision that in determining the number
of members in the House of Representatives from the various States
one should take into account the respective population of those
States. Now, the U. S. Supreme Court, for ten years now, has said
that one also equates the population of districts, as they call
them, within each State, and that is what we are doing in this
referendum proposal. We say that the population is what is considered
in determining how many members there will be in the House of
Representatives from each State. And we therefore say that in
consistency there ought also to be regrard paid to the population
in determining the respective size of the electorates inside each
State. I have said this for over 10 years now.
QUESTION: Has it been established, and are you satisfied that
there was no cover-up of the Perkins Affair by your staff?
PRIME MINISTER: Certainly I am satisfied. I am surprised that you
are making that insinuation. People made it in the Opposition
parties in the House of Representatives to their discredit and in
breach of the customs and courtes * ies of the House, mentioned the
name of one of my advisers a contemptible action. Now, I hope
you are not suggesting that any of them have done it but, in case
you are, or in case any of the viewers have such a suspicion, then
it is their duty as well as their option to give any evidence for
that suspicion to the Crown Solicitor or to the A. C. T. Commission. 1--
of Police. As you know, there have been persons arrestect arribincj
from the incident of Thursday week and also there have been some
summonses issued but I am not sure whether they have all been
served or if all the perscns concerned have been arrested. But once
it was known that there might have been facts not disclosed in the
undefended proceedings before the Canberra courts then the
Attorney-General, immediately, through the Secretary of his Department
had the Crown Solicitor for the A. C. T. and the Police Commissioner
for the A. C. T. look into this matter. As a result there have been
summonses issued and some at least of them have been served and
the persons concerned arrested.
QUESTION: I was just wondering whether you would make a categorical
declaration now that you will adhere to the schedule that you
proposed to abolish the means test in the lifetime of this Parliontent?
PRIME MINISTER: I have answered enough questions on this already.
I won't make any further statement on-it. I believe what I hav&. said
is quite clear, but what I have said I am not going to repeat.
QUESTION: You have saved me the trouble of asking a question,
Prime Minister.
PRIME MvINISTER: That doesn't deter many of you because my observation
of these conferences is that you all want to get your own pers,:? nal
reply to the same question.