PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT 6ARL17
COMMENTS TO PRESS IN ALICE SPRINGS
This is a strike that very directly involves State legislation
and it is a strike, or a dispute therefore, between the
truckies and in varying degrees different State Governments.
It is a dispute in particular between the truckies that
industry and New South Wales and as much as anything I think
because of the immediate and knee-jerk reaction that Mr. Wran
had in rushing legislation through the State Parliament when
the normal thing in a beginning of a dispute is to see if you
can talk to the people involved. The legislation has been passed.
I don't know if it has been proclaimed but my understanding is
that Mr. Wran has no intention of using it. The States have
been trying to unload the dispute onto the Commonwealth, but it
is not a Commonwealth dispute, it is a State dispute and involves
State legislation and a State road tax. One Premier has put
to me the view that the Commonwealth petrol tax should be
increased for everyone so that the States could be recouped
whatever they would lose for taking the road tax off the truckies.
Well that is just not on and let me state that in complete, firm
and absolute terms that it is just not on, it is not going to
happen. We are not going to put taxes up on everyone to enable
the States to take a tax off one particular group of road users.
it would be inequitable and unfair and in any case, the States
in recent times have had a good deal more funds available to
them. All the States, over recent years, have decided to reduce
many different taxes of different kinds. This has been their
priority not to reduce or to get rid of this particular tax.
Now having said that, let me also let me condemn in the strongest
terms the action of the interstate truck drivers. What they are
seeking to do by industrial muscle is wrong. It is destructive.
It is harming people just as much as the TWU dispute was a few
days ago, which was denying milk and food and bread to hospitals
and families in the capital cities. The truckies, no matter what
the merits of their claim and I say this in relation to all
disputes where industrial muscle is used ought to get back to
their jobs, get around the negotiating tables with the States and
seek a proper resolution of the matter through consultation; if
necessary, getting the States and themselves jointly to agree to
an arbitrator. But that is their business the State's business
and theirs. If they could jointly agree to somebody arbitrating
the dispute, well then let that happen and let that be determined.
That wuould be for them to decide jointly with the States. But
the action of disruption is wrong and on behalf of the Commonwealth
I certainly condemn it, in just as strong terms we condemn the
action of the more traditional trade unions that cause a great
deal of inconvenience and difficulty. I would like to reinforce
one other point. we've said some reasonably firm things in recent
days my colleague Mr. Street has about industrial disruption
and at no point are we seeking to deny the right of people, or of trade
unions to have thei~ r cases heard before the Arbitration tribunals.
./ 2
6 APRIL 1979
-2
What we are saying that we are going to take much firmer action
than we have in the past against people who don't allow those
tribunals to work in the normal, unfettered manner, who, almost
before they make their case before the Tribunal decide to introduce
work bans and limitations, go-slow, all the rest, with consequential
harm for large sections of the Australian community.
There has,' over many years, been a tradition of accepting arbitration
of accepting the umpire' s verdict. Now if that system, which
has worked fairly and reasonably, is to operate successfully, it
ought to work without undue pressure from any of the participants
before it. A week ago it was the Transport workers' Union. We
said what we had to say about that. The moves for deregistration of
that union were proceeding when they called the strike and their
bans off. This case is not within the Federal jurisdiction,
it is a matter for the States, but the same principles apply in
this disruption which is doing significant harm, especially to
people in the city of Sydney and get to talking about it with the
States and see if the problems can't be resolved.
Let me also say that I had some discussions with the Solicitor-
General this morning to see if a certain view that I had had
validity. But legal opinions always need to be verified
and checked, but it was his view that it is within the capacity of
the States to come to agreement amongst themselves on . uniform
legislation or licensing charge for this particular industry.
The funds would have to be related to road use and to road damage,
as the present road maintenance charge now is. But the road
maintenance charge is difficult to collect, as we know, and it can
be avoided. That worries people. A uniform registration or
licensing fee related to road use agreed upon by the States is
probably capable of implementation by the States, but they would
have to agree. This particular problem of road tax and the
attitude of the truckies has been known to the States for years
and they haven't been willing to get together and to seek, jointly,
a resolution of it. The only way they want it resolved is for
the Commonwealth to put up a tax so they could take a tax off
We don't believe that that is a fair or a reasonable proposition.
They have a capacity to act themselves. They've shown that they've
had more funds by the fact that they have reduced many taxes over
recent years. If it has been within their-priorities -they could -have
reduced this tax if they wanted to. But I am not suggesting that.
I am suggesting that there are other alternatives which would be
much simpler to administer. / 3
-3
OFF THE RECORD
It is my understanding that the truckies have significant other
complaints as well, but they really seem to have been focussed
on the road tax the road maintenance tax. They complain about
the competition they get from State railways, the competition
they get from some of the big transport firms. They complain
also about not being able to get adequate or realistic freight
rates from the people who do give them work. I think that in
part is one of the results of the sort of competition within the
industry. We know it is very easy to get finance; easy sometimes
to get hold of a rig and if people get into difficulties they
get a bit inclined to cut the rates to get work just to keep
going. I can understand all the difficulties that that involves.
But it does mean that the problems of the industry, I think, are
many-sided. I think thiat matters are focussing on the road tax which
is in fact just one element of an industry which has many more
problems that that particular State charge. But again, they
are problems that, if they are prepared to sit down with State
Governments that has the regulatory capacity and all the rest for
these things, could have been tackled long before this.
ON THE RECORD
Question Have you made a formal suggestion to the States that they should
adopt that course of yours...
Prime Minister
I have spoken to one Premier about it and if, during the course
of the day, I am speaking to others, I will put it to them.
Question Would the Government be prepared to use its powers to unclog the
roads if this thing isn't resolved within the next few days?
Prime Minister:-
The States are always telling us they have sovereign powers. This
is a dispute that is within their province. I think it is
certainly exacerbated in N. S. W. where it is worst, by Mr. Wran's
legislation knee-jerk reaction to a certain situation and I would
have believed that instead of trying to rush that legislation
through Parliament, the matter had been handled calmly from that
point, that it could well have been possible to get the trucks
as they drdw up along the main highways-' and let people police
drivers drive them off down some side road. But it wasn't handled
that way and Mr. Wran will have to try and untangle that part of
the mess for himself.
Question You said in regard to the Government's -your Government's own
position that the Government was prepared to take much firmer
action against unions which take disruptive action to settle
disputes. Can you say what that much firmer action... ./ 4
-4
Prime Minister
Yes I can. It will be an amplification and repetition of
what Mr. Street said last week. I think you will know that over
a long period, when there are bans or work limitations in place
there has been a tendency to go to the Arbitration Commission and
the arbitral tribunals, to talk about it before any kind of action
is taken as a consequence of the industrial bans. Now so far
as Government employment is concerned, and statutory organisations
all of whom have been contacted or are in the process of being
contacted when there are bans or limitations of any kind
imposed to reinforce a claim before one of the arbitral tribunals
the policy of stand-downs, suspensions, no-work, no-pay will be
applied forthwith from the outset.. It is fair enough to tell
people that so they won't be caught unawares as a result of
the change in policy. That is applying on the Postal Commis iion
over recent days, as you know. That particularly of course applies
in the Commonwealth's area of employment. Where suspension or
stand-down clauses are not in an award when this kind of industrial
action occurs and then action will be taken to get them into. the
awards as soon as we can through the Tribunals. For unions with
a long record of industrial di-* spute such as the Transport Workers
Union we will be much more ready to go down the path of
deregistration. Mr. Street has said if that c-ase is once lodged
in the Federal Court it will be pursued to the end. Work in
getting that case ready has not ceased. It is being continued.
A final judgement as to whether or not that procedure will be
taken when the material is fully ready to the satisfaction of
the Crown Solicitor. The work in getting the case prepared for
the Federal Court is quite substantial. A good deal of evidence
has to be collected in a formal way. As we know, that dispute
at the moment the Transport Workers' Union appears to be off.
In addition to this, as has been shown in the paint
dispute involving the motor industry, we have indicated that
we are prepared to reinforce the capacity of private industry to
argue by indicating that a PJT inquiry would be held on the
company's or industry's pricing policies if they themselves
unreasonably concede claims outside the Arbitration Commission
guidelines. As further reinforcement of that, so that other
industries do not have to penalised as a result, we will consider
giving permission to import under by-law conditions so that
essential supplies for other industries won't run short; the
paint industry is a classic example of that. There we have told
either the paint manufacturers or the motor firms themselves that
if they wish to import they may. I think priority ought to be
giLven to the paint manufacturers who would otherwise tend to
lose business. But if they were unwilling to import, we would allow
the motor firms to do so, if they wanted to. The principles involved
in that will also be applied as appropriate in other areas.
This indicates a significant firming of our immediate reaction to
disputes involving cases that ought to be before the wage tribunals.
Let me again emphasise, it is not saying that people cannot go
to arbitration. It is not saying that people cannot have their
cases heard. It is saying that we will do everything we possibly
can to see that those cases are heard before the Arbitration
tribunals, free of industrial pressure. If there is industrial
pressure which involves dislocation to other people in the community,
there will be consequences for the people who apply it.
Question I think you mentioned earlier that you had put a viewpoint about
solving the truckies dispute to the Solicitor-General. Can you
outline that viewpoint.
Prime Minister
I indicated what that was. I was saying that the advice I was
given had reinforced a view that I had had that if the States
agree they can establish a system of uniform licensing or
registration charge, so long as it is related to road use and
that that would be in conformity with High Court decisions under
Section 92 of the Constitution. But if the States are not prepared to
agree it will be very difficult because a State that doesn't act
would leave it wide open. An agreement with five States wouldn't
work. It would have to be an agreement with all States.
Question Would the Federal Government be prepared to pick up the tab if
all States abolished road tax?
Prime Minister
No. I have said we are not. No, because the States have made
their own priorities, own decisions about their priorities for
reducing taxes and this has not been one of them. Go through
every State Budget for the last three years. There have been
tax reductions in them or promised and therefore it has not
been in the States priorities. If they want it in their priorities
they can have it.
What I am also saying is that on the advice that I had confirmed
it was a verbal advice and obviously not formal in that sense
from the Solicitor General that there are simple alternatives
if only the States will get together and work out a scheme which
would enable them to collect a licensing charge or a registration
charge uniformly.
Question: Would you be optimistic that such a move like that could actually
come about.
Prime Minister-
Well, why shouldn't the States agree? -They say this is a problem.
If it is a problem, let them act on it.
Question: Do you believe that that would solve the dispute? / 6
6
Prime Minister
No I'd also said that I think what is going to solve this
dispute is people getting together and working out some approach
to the future and consultations between the transport operators
and the States. That will have to take place. But I have also
said that I think the problems of this industry are much deeper
than that road maintenance charge not being able to charge
high enough freights because of the intense competition; maybe
being able to buy rigs too easily; maybe also unfair competition
through some of the rail systems.
Question: What's the actual problem if five States agreed and the sixth
didn't? Why would not...
Prime Minister
I think they would all register or license themselves in the
sixth State. You've got to have them all agreed so there isn't,
in a sense, a tax haven which enables them to get out.
Question Could I clarify the Government's position on the TWU. Are you
saying, sir, that if there is any further industrial action by
the TWU,' the Government has the papers prepared and will proceed
forthwith with deregistration proceedings?
Prime Minister
The papers are not fully prepared at the moment. The latest
advice I had was that their preparation should be finished early
this coming week. What we've said to this point is that we will
make a decision when those papers are prepared as to whether they
ought to be lodged with the Federal Court or not. Quite clearly
that depzends upon the industrial circumstances in relation to
that Union at the time when those papers are available to us.
Question: But you will hang on to them in case the unions go on strike
in a week's time?
Prime Minister-
We've also made the decision that in relation to that Union, that
the documents will be kept up-dated and the reasons for that are
plain because that Union has been involved in very severe
industrial disputation and inconvenience to many different sections
of the Australia community over a long and prolonged period of time.
Question The truckies have said they would like to talk to you or Mr. Nixon.
Would you be prepared to agree to that?
Prime Minister-
This is a dispute I did see a deputation from the truckies some
7
Prime Minister ( continued)
months ago. This is a dispute ( inaudible) at the present time.
That's where the immediate situation has to be solved.
Against the background of everything I have said to you, I think
we need to understand that the Commonwealth is very firm here
no matter what the merits of the case, it is not going to
be negotiated under threat. We have no intention of doing so.
I don't want State Governments to be in a position of conceding
under threat to a particular section of the community
I am saying there are problems in the industry
but they basically stem from State legislation of one kind or
another. It has been within the capacity of States, over a period
of years, to do something about it and modify it. It has been
within their capacity over recent times to modify the actual
charges if it had been one of their State priorities, but it has
not been one of their State priorities. Now that the States are
in a degree of difficulty in relation to it, they tend to come to
us and say ' please get us out of our problems'. It's a far cry,
isn't it, from the bold days when States say they are sovereign.
If they are sovereign, let them demonstrate that they have a
capacity to solve one of their own problems.
Question In relation to Ayers Rock, sir?
Prime Minister
I don't think there is anything I can say about that. I will
be talking to the Chief Minister shortly and later I will let you know.
000---