PRIME MINISTER'S PRESS CONFERENCE, CANBERRA,
TUESDAY, 22 OCTOBER 1974
PRIME MINISTER: Are there any questions?
QUESTION: Do you expect to get support of any or all of the
States for the Federal Government's initiatives in building
hospitals? What indications do you have of their reaction
to the proposal? If you don't get support from any or all
the States, will the Federal Government still go ahead on its
own initiatives?
PRIME MINISTER: There is more than one matter upon which I
have writen this financial year to the States concerning
hospitals. I was asked at Question Time today about the specific
proposal that my Government had made to the Governments of New
South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. I had suggested to the
Premiers that since the money which had been made available
last financial year to the Governments for specific projects
planning or construction hadn't been spent to any degree at
all, they should let us take over the sites, complete the plans
and construct and operate the hospitals. The particular
hospitals concerned were Westmead and Campbelltown near Sydney,
Sunshine in Melbourne and Mount Gravatt in Brisbane. In each
case the Premier has replied. In each case I think I could say
that they didn't accept the proposition. I expect that the
Government will be going ahead. Ever since the 1946 referendum
the Australian Government has had the opportunity we would
therefore say the responsibility to provide medical services.
Clearly hospitals are a crucial item in the provision of medical
services. There are not adequate hospital facilities within
ten miles of Westmead or Campbelltown or Sunshine or Mount Gravatt.
The population in each of those areas is growing very rapidly.
It is quite clear that hospital facilities will be needed in
each of those areas much earlier than the States would ever be
able to provide them. In some cases the States haven't got
plans. In the case of Westmead, where New South Wales has had
plans for six or eight years and where, in the last financial
year, we made $ 4k million available, the State was only able to
spend, I think, about 10 per cent of that amount. It is clear
that we shouldn't wait any longer before seeing the people in those
rapidly growing areas are able to have a full range of medical
services at a modern hospital.
QUESTION: Has the Royal Commission into Australia's security
services begun its hearings yet?
PRIME MINISTER: There won't, I expect, be open hearings.
QUESTION: Has it begun its work yet?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes. Mr. Justice Hope, the Royal Commissioner,
has alreay consulted many people.
QUESTION: Will you ensure that as many public hearings as
possible will be held and where, for security reasons, they won't
be held in camera will you arrange for a list of witnesses to be
-2-
made available so that the public are kept informed of the progress
of the Royal Commission?
PRIME MINISTER: I will do nothing of the sort. The Royal
Commissioner is free to conduct his Commission as he sees fit.
I have no doubt that he will conduct it in a completely proper
way none whatever.
QUESTION: If unemployment is increasing at the rate of 5,000
per week, what hope can you offer to the huge number of young
Australians leaving school this year?
PRIME MINISTER: There is a debate going on in the House at
the moment on this, among other aspects, and I don't propose
to duplicate it.
QUESTION: Mr. Cameron in the House last week in reply to a
question by Mr. Cairns said " No" to the question: " Will he
guarantee full employment to the Australian workforce, including
school leavers, by March/ April next year?" Does this mean, sir,
that; jou are presiding over the demise....?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, before you go any further, Mr. Power,
you.. know that I don't comment on things like this. If you
want an elucidation of this matter, you ask Mr. Cameron.
Mr. Cameron is never reluctant to go on radio.
QUESTION: You said yesterday that you and other ministers would
be talking to trade union leaders to explain the Government's
decision on wage restraint. What steps are you contemplating
specifically to secure return of business confidence? Have
you given any more thought to the question of investment allowances?
PRIME MINISTER: I don't want to specify any particular measures.
As I said last week, this is one of the measures which I am quite
happy to consider and my colleagues too. We have shown ourselves
completely flexible in considering proposals to have business
confidence. Business confidence is quite necessary, obviously,
if there is to be adequate employment or investment for the future.
QUESTION: If the Opposition in the Senate amends your Budget
legislation to restore the $ 400 education allowance, would there
be an election in December?
PRIME MINISTER: I won't speculate on that matter.
QUESTION: Are you planning or have you planned a second bid for
prices and incomes powers by a referendum?
PRIME MINISTER: I have taken no steps.
QUESTION: Do you have it under consideration?
PRIME MINISTER: I have taken no steps.
QUESTION: Will you be able to assure Mr. Tanaka, do you think,
when he arrives here later this month that the Australian Government
won't be stood over by trade unions to impose import quotas on
Japanese exports because of unemployment in Australia?
-3-
PRIME MINISTER: You are, I think, referring to something that one
union did in respect to Japanese cars last week. The trade union
movement itself properly handled this matter.
QUESTION: Did Dr. Cairns consult with you before writing to the
Associatd Chambers of Manufactures in support of the campaign
to have the general review of tariffs deferred and its criteria
changed? Do you support that campaign?
PRIME MINISTER: I answered a question on this subject in the
House this morning. Dr. Cairns was acting as Prime Minister
when he wrote the letter which was published in today's
Financial Review. I stated today, at Question Time, that if
ACMA, to whose representation Dr. Cairns was responding, chose
to give its views to the Jackson Committee then it would be very
welcome to do so. I am sure the Jackson Committee would expect
to get the views of ACMA on tariff matters. The Jackson Committee
has been asked to look into tariff matters in the course of its
review of manufacturing industry generally.
QUESTION: Do you support that campaign though?
PRIME MINISTER: I % am inviting ACMA to put its point of view to
the committee which the Government has set up to prepare a Green
Paper on all aspects of manufacturing industry, including tariffs.
ACMA is certainly entitled to put its point of view, but obviously
its views should be put, among other places, to the Jackson
Committee. QUESTION: Further to Mr. Jost's question on the prices and
incomes, do you intend to discuss this matter with Mr. Hawke
at the weekend?
PRIME MINISTER: I wasn't proposing to.
QUESTION: When will you take further steps regarding prices and
incomes? PRIME MINISTER: I have got no further answer.
QUESTION: Do you hope to get the Japanese beef market re-opened
during the talks with Mr. Tanaka next week?
PRIME MINISTER: obviously all our exports to Japan will be
discussed and-among them beef.
QUESTION: Can you explain the logic of the Government's moves to
insist that the oil companies in Australia charge world parity
prices for aviation turbine fuel to international airlines?
Why should the Government be so determined to bood-the. profits
of oil companies at the expense of the airlines, particularly
Qantas and their passengers?
PRIME MINISTER: You ought to ask Mr. Connor about that.
QUESTION: Have you had drawn to your attention remarks made by
Mr. Tony O'Reilly in Albury at an advertising conference last
Sunday?
-4-
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, I have the cutting here.
QUESTION: Got any comments on it at all, sir? In particular
he gave a drubbing to the Prices Justification Tribunal?
PRIME MINISTER: But he gave a terrific boost to the Trade
Practices Act.
Comment: That's right, he did. I think he thinks they ought
to be centralised.
PRIME MINISTER: I don't want to comment on the Prices Justification
Trubunal. Its President is a distinguished judge He has made
some statements himself. He has given prepared addresses himself
on the operations of the tribunal. As you know the tribunal has
been in operation for less than a year and a v~ ery great deal
of pioneering work has had to be done. A great number of companies
don't like what has been done but the Government will introduce
amend;..,-ents to the Act we have done so already in the last month
where those amendments are seen to be necessary or desirable.
The Tribunal will be consulted on any amendments, as it was
concerning the amendments which were made last month. But I don't
want to comment on the operations of the Tribunal; it is properly
constituted and it has been a very effective body indeed.
But I am very happy to quote what Mr. Tony O'Reilly said about
the Trade Practices Act. He approved of the Act. In fact
it was modelled on two United States Acts, the Sherman and the
Clayton Acts, and if it was applied with the same vigour and
capability, it would sharpen competition, obviate monopoly,
increase above-the-line spending, decrease below-the-line spending
and frustrate discriminatory business dealings. Mr. Tony O'Reilly,
you might have pointed out, is the head of the H. J. Heinz company,
so while I don't want to comment about what he said on the Prices
Justification Tribunal T am delighted to quote what he said about
the Trade Practices Act. If it had been in a year longer, as
it should have been if the Senate had passed it when it first
got it, then obviously we would be in a better position than we
are today.
QUESTION: I believe Mr. O'Reilly also had something to say about
the way depreciation of capital assets was counted by the Income
Tax Commissioner in regard to company profits. Did you also take
note of that or not?
PRIME MINISTER: No, I didn't get that far. I don't know whether
he said it but I don't remember seeing it.
QUESTION: Apparently, it was reported?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, I am going naturally on a paper of record,
teSydney Morning Herald. It doesn't report that.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, further down at the bottom of that
article he talks about a proliferation of nuclear devices by
hungry countries. Does that strike a chord with you?
PRIME MINISTER: I have said a few things, naturally, about the
proliferation of nuclear weapons. I did so at the United Nations
three weeks ago.
QUESTION: Do you see any possibility of speeding up the processes
to introduce wage indexation?
PRIME MINISTER: This matter will be before the Conciliation
and Arbitration Commission. I would expect a decision would be
given before Christmas. We will be supporting the application
as you know.
QUESTION: This morning Mr. Hawke called for a series of supplementary
action to the Budget including a cut in indirect taxes, a cut in
imports, grants to the States to enable them to keep down fuel
and transport costs and both tax indexation and wage indexation.
How many of these things are you sympathetic towards?
PRIME MINISTER: These seem to be matters which were covered
by the resolutions of the A. C. T. U. meeting of unions about three
weeks ago. Several of my colleagues and I have discussed these
with Mr. Hawke, Mr. Souter and Dr. Jolly. Discussions will take
place on other occasions over the next few weeks.
QUESTION: Is the Government considering introducing a supplementary
Budget between now and Christmas?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
QUESTION: Has any of the working parties set up after the last
Premiers Conference held any meetings? Have you 7Z-ad any...?
PRIME MINISTER: Most have made reports.
QUESTION: They have made a report?
PRIME MINISTER,: Most of them have made reports.
QUESTION: Are you going to make the reports public?
PRIME MINISTER: I'll consult with the Premiers about this.
QUESTION: Are there any worthwhile ideas flowing from these meetings?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, there are. The State and federal officials
concerned have made a very good examination of the matters which were
referred to them by the Premiers and me.
QUESTION: Are you satisfied with the quality of advice and
submissions flowing to your Government from the Federal Treasury,
and are you finding them valuable in the fight against inflation
and unemployment?
PRIME MINISTER: The Federal Treasury is one source of advice.
My colleagues -and I get advice from several sources and all of
that advice is valuable and is given proper consideration.
Treasury advice is valuable on many matters.
QUESTION: In relation to the CPIs yesterday, both yourself and
Mr. Crean used the word " disturbing". Does the Government therefore
intend to take any more measures...?
PRIME MINISTER: This matter is being debated in the House at
the moment. I don't propose to duplicate the debate.
-6-
QUESTION: Are you leaving it all to the trade unions to show
wage restraint?.
PRIME MINISTER: I expect them to show wage restraint but it
is not a matter for the trade unions only, quite clearly. I put
the point about wage restraint yesterday to ACSPA, and also to
the Miscellaneous workers' Union one of the very largest unions
in Australia and one of the biggest three on Monday of last
week. But it is not the unions only. I believe that the
discussions several of my colleagues have had with Mr. Hawke,
Mr. Souter and Dr. Jolly will help to bring about wage restraintwhat
we are doing, for instance, to urge and support the case
for wage indexation is one instance of that. As a result of
discussions which have taken place between the Government and
the various trade union organisations, ACTU and ACSPA, I believe
there will be fewer and smaller claims for wage and salary
increases. Most employees will find that their needs are
satisfactorily and more promptly met by wage indexation.
QUESTION: Prime Minister, is there any possibility of changes
to your ministry in the near future in the light of the
economic problems? And, in particular, have you given any
consideration to using Mr. Crean' s considerable talents in
another portfolio?
PRIME MINISTER: I would want to discuss this with the Governor-
General before I mentioned it in this wider circumstance.
QUESTION: When does the Government intend to announce its
plans for the development of the Northwest Shelf gas deposits
in sufficient detail so that work which has been held up now
for about nine months can proceed?
PRIME MINISTER: The Government hasn't held up any of these matters.
It is the Petroleum and Minerals Authority legislation which has
been held up again and again, of course; just as, for instance,
were some of the regulations under the Atomic Energy Act.
The Australian Government has been trying to get the necessary
legislative framework to implement its resources policy, its
resources program. We haven't held it up.
QUESTION: If this legislation takes another year or two to get
clear of the High Court will there be no development until then?
PRIME MINISTER: I hope that it won't take another year to get
clear of the High Court but we didn't take the matter to the
High Court, as you realise. This bill was three times rejected
in the Senate. It was passed at a joint sitting. It is now
under challenge in the High Court.
QUESTION: When would you be seeing the Governor-General about
any possible changes in the ministry?
PRIME MINISTER: Of course that was a purely facetious answer,
as you know. I know 2SM is a fun station but I don't wish people
to think that everything Laurie Oakes asks or every answer I give
him is dead serious.
QUESTION: Hasn't one of the major pieces of the legislation
involving the development of the north west shelf gas already
passed, namely the Pipelines Act and isn't it a matter...
-7-
PRIME MINISTER: That's under some challenge too, isn't it?
QUESTION: No, not that 7, know of. Secondly, doesn't the
dee-omn hinge on two things that are not connected with the
PIR, whether or not there should be ex ports and what price
the Pipelines Authority should pay for the gas and when will
arrwers be given to these questions which so far seem to have been
d Iayed until 1981, instead of 1977, the '.') ringing ashore of gas?
PRI1ME MINIS TER: There are challenges in the High Court to all the
Australian Parliament's legislation concerning offshore matters
including, for instance, the Act which we got through the
Parliament based on the bill which was introduced on Mr. McMahon's
behalf when he was Foreign Minister in April 1970. There has
been a long delay in getting the matter through the Parliament
and now that it is through the Parliament there is a challenge before
th. n High Court. Natural gas cannot come ashore for a few years
yet. I think it is about four years.
Comment: Six years.
PR'. cME MINISTER: I didn't think it was that long, but nevertheless
ot-s6bviously not an imminent matter. There is plenty of time
to miake proper arrangements concerning the Australian control of
this resource and a proper international price for it. The
Government has successfully resisted the attempt to sell off
Australian resources too cheap. You know that the world price
for many of our potential exports, such as uranium, is now very
much higher than the price which we contracted to sell it, or
at least the price that our predecessors approved in the
contracts to sell it overseas. In some of the matters where
contracts came up for renewal we have been able to get a very
much better price. For instance, the price of coal exports is
now three times what it was when we came into office. So, by
the time natural gas comes ashore, four or six years from now,
we would certainly get very much better prices than people would
have been disposed to settle for a year or two years ago.
QUESTION: You renewed your Government's commitment to full
employment yesterday. In this context would you be prepared
to impose quotas on Japanese car imports?
PRIME MINISTER: The whole of the Government's attitude towards
the car industry is under examination. The IACs report was
released as soon as it was got and there have been very full
consultations bigger consultations than have ever been held
bc. fo': e between Government departments and the various companies
cr~ rncerned. I wouldn't give an off-the-cuff reply to your question
at this stage.
QUFSTION: What stage have the Government's discussions reached
on the uranium policy? Has the uranium policy been finalised and
will it be ready in time for the visit of the Japanese Prime
Mii'ister, Mr. Tanaka, later this month?
PRIME MINISTER: This matter has been discussed between the
WX31Histers who went to Tokyo twelve months ago and I would expect
that this matter, like the other exports which I was asked about
p;: eveiously, will be discussed when Mr. Tanaka is here. I expect
thiat Mr. Tanaka is very interested in this matter.
-8-
We want to ensure that there are proper arrangements made for
the supply by Australia to Japan of this resource, which we
have in abundance and of which Japan stands very much in need, k
and I would hope that we would also discuss the possibility
of enrichment of uranium or maybe together acquiring some
technology to enrich uranium.
QUESTION: Which one of the mining companies would be the
first to begin exploiting the deposits?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, let's tell them first.
QUESTION: Is not the production of uranium in Australia contrary
to your policy on world pollution?
PRIME MINISTER: There are some processes concerning uranium which
would produce pollution, that's true. I don't believe that our
Government is carrying out any of those processes or has any of
those processes in mind. We are very much aware, of course, of
that aspect. I might add, because I was asked earlier a question
here and I was asked also a-. question about it in the House this
morning, about some of the uses of uranium under various treaties
and so on. Now, we have made an arrangement with the International
Atomic Energy Authority that we will not sell uranium to any country
except under safeguards approved by the International Atomic
Energy Authority. Accordingly, even if a country hasn't
ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it can still receive
uranium from Australia under the safeguard arrangements we have
made with the IAEA, so all these aspects of proliferation of
weapons,. peaceful uses, pollution are very much in mind in the
whole of our uranium policy. There are some domestic matters
such as pollution, Aboriginal rights and overseas ownership.
QUESTION: Disposal of radio-active material?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes, all those matters are obviously ones which
we have to bear in mind, and when we are discussing which company
will get the rights to extract or process or export uranium, we
will obviously bear in mind overseas ownership and Aboriginal
rights and environment.
QUESTION: Mr. Whitlam, can we clear up a misunderstanding.
In your reply to my questions....
PRIME MINISTER: I don't think there was any misunderstanding
by anybody else or by you.