PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT 16 OCTOBER, 1978 ( U7~
INTERVIEW ON MIKE WALSH SHOW
CHANNEL 10 SYDNEY, 16.8.78
Walsh: Good to see you again. It's about 12 months since you last
did our programme and in that time I think not a day has gone
by in my life without someone saying to me,' as Malcolm Fraser
said, life wasn't meant to be easy'. Do you ever regret
saying that? It's become the great quote of all time I think.
Prime Minister:
I don't think so because it is a fact of life. If people want
to do things well it's not easy, it's hard. You've got to
work at it. You work at this show. An Olympic athlete
works and trains at that. When the family were up camping
at Birdsville and travelling south to Anaininka the only sign
they had on the store, and I don't know if they knew I was
going to be turning up or not, was ' life wasn't meant to
be easy'.
Walsh: I just want to talk about a few things that have happened
recently and some of the issue. First of all, as you are very
well aware, that Mr. Neville Wran in NSW has got a new phrase
coined for him now, its a " Wranslide", because he absolutely
and utterly had a resounding successful win at the polls here
in NSW. How much of a rebuff is that to your Government.
Prime Minister:
I think it's a great personal victory for Neville Wran.
I don't know that it's all that much of a rebuff to the Federal
Government because he fought it on State issues. I don't try
and say that other things didn't impinge upon that but you've
only got to speak to people in this city; Neville Wran is a
popular Premier, who is a moderate Premier and I hope with the
large majority that remains.
Walsh: But the recent Federal Budget even amongst your own people
they are saying that that definitely was a factor in the fact
that the Liberals lost so many votes in the State.
Prime Minister:
Some do, but there were polls taken long before the Budget which
we'd undertaken, the Liberal Party had, which had indicated
about the same kind of change in NSW.
Walsh: So you weren't surprised at the outcome?
-2
Prime Minister:
No, I wasn't surprised at all I'm afraid. The Liberal
Party had been through some difficulties also. Peter Coleman
hadn't been there all that long and I think he is a very
good man but he hadn't really had time to make his mark telt.
The Liberal Party had had some trouble in the Branches and
that had been in the press too much. Now, I think those
things are behind us. But quite apart from his own performance,
in the State scene there were some things happening that were
bound to reinforce it. But can I just quote one of the things
and why I think Neville Wran is very skillful. I saw him
on television in a prepared broadcast just a short maybe a
week before the election and he said while I differ with
the Federal Government in some things I am at one in their
policy of overcoming inflation and on another occasion he
said that it had taken hard and courageous decisions and
implying-. that we were basically on the right track in that.
In that sort of statement, Neville Wran was embracing a large
number of our own supporters at the same time and it was a
great personal victory and I don't think anything should
detract from that.
Walsh: We'll leave that on at that. But I want to stay with the
Budget on a couple of things. One was which some of the
things which seemed in that Budget to hit little people in
ordinary everyday events. Like why bother taking away
the maternity allowance? How much will that save the
Government? Prime Minister:
It doesn't save all that much. I do need to put it into
perspective. Three or four decisions have probably hit the
headlines and people have thought they are uncaring, thoughtless,
insensitive. I think what I would like people to understand
is that we had to have a Budget that was going to reinforce
the general fight against inflation and get inflation down,
get interest rates down so Australian factories can produce
more, get a bigger share of our market and get into exports
as a number of people are now starting ilto. So, pre-eminently
the Budget was aimed at that. Now, if you look at the whole
thrust of the Budget, on the expenditure side and also in
revenue, there are probably not just a half a dozen difficult
decisions that have hit the headlines, but some tens of
very difficult decisions. It might be in the amount of
expenditure you have for a particular program and no one of
those decisions by itself could be said to threaten the Budget
strategy, but taken all together they meant getting to a
responsible overall level of expenditure for the Commonwealth
or not getting to a responsible level. And if it was judged
by being irresponsibleithen you've got inflation starting
to go up and instead of being able to get them down, interest
rates would go up again and I think that would be a tragedy
for Australia. So many of the small decisions also contribute
to the larger one., because. take one out by itself and it
doesn't but add it all together they do. Now, alright, the
maternity allowance. It was decades ago that that was introduced.
/ 3
free health scheme, there was no
When it was introduced there was no/ Medibank. We've got
Medibank mark III which I believe is better, and I think it
is being accepted by the whole community. So the sort of
costs, the sort of problemsthat the maternity allowance was
originally designed to overcome just aren't there at the
moment with modern health care. If you like~ it was additional
pocket money. And in addition to the health arrangements
that we have there are family allowance arrangements, and
these two things together really did make the maternity
allowance outdated and irrelevant in the modern circumstancescertainly
irrelevant to the needs for which it was originally
introduced. Against the overall background which I mentioned
therefore, if . we had said. C kht, it's not serving the kind of
social need that it was designed tdo-other things have come
in and taken its place and are doing it much better, especially
the health arrangements and therefore it is abandoned.
Walsh: What about the one on accumulated holiday pay? That's another
one that worries the average person. Now, if you don't take
your holidays this year, you take them next year because your
boss says" ca you stay-around, we're going through a busy
period'~ or something, the money that you had, which is your
nice little nest egg until next year's holiday, suddenly
becomes taxable.
Prime Minister:
It becomes taxable when you change your employment, or when
you retire and when you've accumulated your holiday pay.
If you are taking your holiday pay still with the same employeri
the arrangements aren't really changed. So, it's when somebody
leaves that job. What had happened in the past was that people
leave their job, they have accumulated holiday pay for which they
get a cash payment and. go and get another job. -In
a sense is defeating the purpose of holiday pay defeating
the purpose of holidays, because people are meant to take
their annual holidays. They are meant to refresh themselves
in doing it, and that's the basis on which it is structured.
I can't see any real reason why people who don't take their
holidays should have that addition to income without any tax
at all, or minimal tax as it was. Now it will be taxed at
the standard rate, which is in part a concession because many
people would be on probably higher marginal rates of tax than
that. Walsh:. On the whole thing of the Budget *-and I'm afraid I'm going to
stay with it a little bit today because there are some things
that really do need to be explained,--the expected Budget
deficit, well it is, $ 3,000 million. But the first quarterly
deficit is already $ 992 million. So if you put that four
times you get between $ 3,900 and $ 4,000 million. So it's
going to be a lot heavier than you thought. / 4
-4
Prime Minister:
You'vye just fallen into a good trap for young players.
Walsh: Have I? This is why I'm not the Treasurer.
Prime Minister:
It wasn't for $ 3,000 million anyway, it was a bit over
$ 2,800 million, and it sounds a lot better being under
$ 3,000. But if you look at the early payments in the
year there are a lot of uneven payments that the Commonwealth
had to make. We have self-government now in the Northern
Territory so instead of paying for the Northern Territory's
services right throughout the year, as we have done in the
past, there was a bulk payment to the Northern Territory that
came in the early part of the year.
Walsh: So, that first quarter is inflated compared to the rest of
the
Prime Minister:
For that and for various other reasons: extra pension payments
and things of this of this kind have come in. The first quarter
is an inflated quarter, and when I saw the figures as they came
out I asked the question that you did. I was told that there
was no reason to think that the Budget would be off-track in
terms of its total result.
Walsh: At the end of year it will even out?
Prime Minister:
Yes. The payments aren't even throughout the year.
Walsh: What about the borrowings? One of the great criticisms of the
Whitlam Government was the fact it was going to borrow so much
money from overseas.
Prime Minister:
How? Walsh:-Well, this is what I'd like to hear from you, because they
planned to borrow $ 2,000 million, and last year the Government
that you head borrowed a total of $ 1.955 million a lot of
it from Japan.
Prime Minister:
Yes.
Walsh: Surely that defeats the arguments that were thrown up against
the Whitlan Government's spending?
Prime Minister:
I don't think so, because Government borrowing properly
conducted has a role to fill in the management of the
country. But this was borrowing under the previous
administration having nothing to do with Treasury advice,
going to odd people from the Middle East, and trying to get
money quite outside orthodox guidelines and for very unorthodox
purposes. That obviously caused a great deal of furore and
you have only got to mention the name Khemlani and all sorts
of odd things are conjured up. Now the borrowing that we have
undertaken has been for a specific purpose, and it's the
Treasury officials who have done it with known and reputable
people as Australia has borrowed. Not just this year or last
year, but Australia has undertaken this kind of borrowing
almost since the war. Not all the time, but Qhen it has
been necessary. I'm sorry for one or two technical terms,
but we believe that the value of Australia's currency is
right, but because of low world trade and because of economic
problems in other countries as well as Australia, there hasn't
been as much foreign investment as we would like coming into
this country and helping developin partnership with Australians,
Australia's resources. The borrowings we have undertaken on
official account have been to protect the balance of payments
against this period when general world trade is low and
general investment in the world is therefore lower than it
would otherwise be. This has been necessary to protect the
value of the Australian dollar and it has been necessary to
protect the balance of payments.
Walsh: So what you are saying is that your move is justified. You are
going through the correct channels, whereas the Labor government
were going through the incorrect channels?
Prime Minister:
The purposes were different too. The Labor borrowing was
going to be a temporary loan for something that was 20 years.
Well,, how you have a temporary loan for 20 years I'm not too
sure. But for quite different purposes and for expenditure
in Australia. These funds basically aren't for expenditure in
Australia. They are basically to protect the balance of
payments during a period when our own exports are slacker
than they would otherwise be. because world trade is slacker
and at the same time when foreign investment is less than it
would be.
-6
Walsh: Which all leads us to the question of unemployment. We had
Dir Street on the programme a few weeks ago, he explained thait
statement, it was reported widely and put into context. The
fact remains that with increased technology we are going to
face, inevitably, either a shorter working week or more
unemployed people.
Prime Minister:
I don't believe that.
Walsh: Well'how do you see the way out of it.
Prime Minister:
Well go back to the beginning of the industrial revolution.
You had the tudd-ites,.. and people who were frightened of
machines and factories. In fact the industrial revolution
led to more jobs being available than ever before in the
history of mankind.
Walsh: Arnd do you believe the same thing will happen again?
Prime Minister:
I think basically modern technology is the same sort of
thin39 it's different a bit but will work out in the
same way. Let me take the example of Telecom. Telecom
gave it's employees-and that particular union that was
being difficult a few weeks ago -they had given them, a year
ago, ten years guarantee against being sacked as a result of
the introduction of new technology and new equipment. As I
understand it Telecom were very relaxed about that guarantee, 3
because they believe that with new technology they are
going to be offering more services, better servicesto
businesses, to people, and that while you might have less
man hours to produce one particular item of equipment,
people are going to be producing more items of equipment
and there will be more things to sell. You have only
got to look at a modern home today, in 1978, compared to
that same home 20 years ago. You have got all sorts of
equipment and appliances in it which are designed to make
living easier, make it easier for a housewife. I'm quite
certain that over the next five and ten years there are going
to be modifications and changes and adaptations of that
equipment which people are going to want, because it will
enable them to do things better, and I think that we really
need to grasp modern technology and innovative technology,
because this is what will make Australian industries
competitive. This will enable Australian industry to get
a bigger share of our own domestic market and get rid of imports / 7
-7
in places, and it will enable them also to get into exports.
Now out of all of that I see there being more jobs. These
things aren't well understood, I agree with that, but we
have got to embrace modern technology and that will be good.
for Australia.
Walsh: Just one other topic I'd like to cover with you while you are
here, and of course it's the news of the day, about the raid
on the ACTU Jetset offices on Saturday. All the papers
commented on it in their editorials, the strange raid on ACTU
Jetset, now do you think it was ill-advised?
Prime Minister:
I've only had a very brief discussion with Peter Nixon about
that, and he tells me he's having a press conference this
afternoon and that he will be putting it into perspective.
Very briefly, he did tell me that on the advice of the
Solicitor-General and the Crown Solicitor an investigation
was warranted. Without pre-empting any part of what he will
be saying, I'm advised that the investigation that was
undertaken was exactly the same as what had occurred in
half a dozen other cases somebody went along and asked
for certain information. That's subject to what my colleague
says after lunch, but if it's the same as what has happened in
half a dozen other cases it would seem to me that it's maybe
Mr Hawke who is building this, or trying to build it up, into
some melodramatic event which, on the basis of what I've been
told, I don't think it is.
Walsh: You claim it was something rather routine for those
circumstances?
Prime minister:
I'm told it's the same sort of investigation that has been
undertaken half a dozen times, and nobody is worried about
it at all..
Walsh: With other travel companies?
Prime minister:
So I'm advised. But what I've said is I had only a very
hurried conversation to Peter, and what I have said is
subject to what he is saying this afternoon, because he
will be handling the matter on behalf of the Government,
and I understand putting it all in perspective and correcting
one or two, as I am advised, of the melodramatic reports
this morning.
8-
Walsh: Right, because one of the hassles of any leader is the fact
that he relies on a team of men, and his own image and that
of his Government is inevitably affected by the Ministers.
I'm harking back to Mr Phillip Lynch and the" Lands Scandal"
some time back. Nowyou removed him from the position of
Treasurer. He's still of course an important part of your
Government. Do you think that the Opposition is going to
continue with the Lands thing, which is still very, very much
alive in Victoria Do you think they will continue to use
that?
Prime Minister:
Two things. I think they probably willbecause the Opposition
likes this sort of thing. I don't think the lands thing is
very much alive in Victoria at the moment. I think* Mr Jennings'
own credibility has been blown a bit by reports of some of
his own activities and this last 60 or 70 page document.
Everyone seems to understand that there is nothing much in
that, and that in any case he would have many opportunities
to put all his information before a Victorian Royal Commission.
Now, the ye ry unhappy thing is when all this was going on in Victoria
about this time last year, and then whatever was said in relation
to Phillip one of the people who had been named in the inquiry
and while it had nothing to do with the Victorian inquiry it in
part got linked up with it. I believe that there has been very
great stress and strain, and Phillip Lynch and his family as a
result of it have already he has already in particular paid
a high price in terms of mental suffering and anguish that has
been involved by himself and his family. It has been demonstrated,
I believe, that there was nothing in the allegations made against
Phillip Lynch. One of the unfortunate things is somebody gets
up and repeats it all again in the Parliament, saying nothing
new, and it then gets reported again as though it's a new allegation,
when in fact its the same one and has already been answered.
Now, against that sort of background I would have thought that in
decency it would be fair enough to let it rest, recognising that
somebody has already paid a high price for all the publicity
that has gone on in relation to it.
Walsh: You don't expect anything new to come of it in other words?
Do you think that they are raking but they won't find anything?
Prime Minister:
Our political opponents have been trying to find something
new. They have asked questions and raised the matter many
times through the question time and other avenues of
Parliament. But on all the information available to me they
haven't found anything new. But when they repeat a tired,
sad allegation, I don't think it should get the sort of
publicity it does as though it's a new allegation. I also
believe that people need to treat very carefully allegations / 9
9-
made under the cover of Parliamentary privilege. members of
parliament can sometimes get up and say the most terrible
things about their colleagues without any evidence at all,
and when that allegation goes out under the cover of
Parliamentary privilege, major headlines in this paper or
that, major items on the news, I really think that the
person who ought to be grilled is the person who makes the
allegation without evidence. That says something.
Walsh: It's one of the failings of Parliamentary coverage that's for
sure. There is just one final question I want to ask you,
and it's probably the most important. How is your prize bull?
We were very sorry to hear about his accident.
Prime Minister:
I understand that you've pursued his accident and got an
explanation from a vet about how this sort of thing can occur.
Well, I suppose it'. s just as well that it doesn't occur to the
human species in the same way that it can to bulls. Well the
Semitals are going well, and the Herefords are going well,
but unfortunately Franz is not of this world.
Walsh: Just a sad note to add to things.
Prime Minister:
But you understand, you know the reasons.
Walsh: We do, and our sympathies to Franz and his descendants.
Prime Minsister:
Well I hope the same fate never befalls you.
Walsh: Oh ditto. OThh adtntko . you very much for joining us.