PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27 1980
DOORSTOP, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA PROCEDURES IN PARLIAMENT ON
Tuesday, 26 February.
Question: Prime Minister, would you agree with Sir Billy Snedden that
yesterday's performance in Parliament was deplorable?
Prime Minister:
It certainly was deplorable, and I think people are entitled to be slightly
surprised.. by Mr Hayden's reaction because what I had said was
mild and extraordinarily accurate, I have made it plain that there i
thread in the Australian Labor Party which seems to want to find
excuses for the Soviet invasion-that doesn't mean to say they
approve it, but it seems to want to find excuses for the Soviet
invasion of Afghanista4 or if not that, at least find reasonsw1hy
Australia should do nothing about it. One of the odd things
I find in this whole circumstance is that Mr Hayden condemns the
invasion, he then says that a boycott of the Olympic Games would
be, if not the most effective, a very effective way of bringing the
message home to the Soviet government and people, and then he sets
about immediately, virtually, undermining the boycott that many
nations are trying to achieve.
Now, those statements just don't tally up. On the one hand he
condemns the invasion, and the second he says a boycott would
be an effective means of doing something about it, and then he
immediately sets about trying to destroy the prospects of an
effective boycott.
On trade . matters, . on economic sanctions where we have taken
some quite resolute action.-comparable with that of other countries
he almost . tkies to imply that * we. i are not doirg4enough,
but says we shouldn't do more, and ends up by saying we shouldn't
do anything. Really, I thought what he said was. the language
that comes from somebody who is very worried and very unsettled.
Question: Will'. you be raising the issue of Parliamentary behaviour in the
Party room today in your own joint Party room meeting?
Prime Minister:
It might come up we-have a short question time which is generally much
better behaved than the question time in the Parliament. What had
happened in this instance and what happened in the Parliament over the
energy matter also I was quoting something Mr Keating had said which
made it perfectly plain they were going to raise more money from their
energy policy than we raise by the oil levy, more money out of oil
producers.-I made some comments about that, but because the Labor
Party doesn't like it, because they know they have exposed their
flanks on a number of issues on a number of occasions, they try to stop
the answers being given by noise, by a row in the Parliament, by the
kind of larrikin, barnyard behaviour that we saw yesterday, led by the
leader of the Opposition, but supported by a large number of others. / 2
-2
Question: Do you think the scene has been set, Prime Minister, for this sort of
thing to continue, and not much progress on legislation?
Prime Minister:
We will make progress on legislation, don't worry about that. But,
I would hope that this sort of thing would not continue because we,
quite deliberately set about trying to establish the circumstances
where there could be a bi-partisan approach to the major international
matters that are of concern to, I think, all Australians.
Bu t that approach, if it is to work, puts certain obligations,
responsibilities, on the Opposition, and on the leader of the
Opposition himself. Those obligations would be ones which
plainly do lend a degree of support to what the Government
has done instead of trying to undercut that support, trying to
undercut the policies that we have pursued, whatever his motives
might be.
Qu~ estion:
Prime Minister, on something I know that you do feel is of fundamental
importance to Australians, and that is the question of interest rates
for home-loans. Do you think the Government can hold the line or that
you will be forced, as newspapers are saying this morning, to put up
Australian sayings bond rates?
Prime Minister:
I don't want to add -to anything that the Treasurer has said on this
issue,.. but let me only say that against the background of the interest
rates that have applied in the United Kingdom 16-17 percent, even
higher, 15-I_ percent in the United States the Australian economy
up to this point stood up to it with remarkable strength, and it has
done that because of a perception of this Government's economic
-policies, because of the strength of the balance of payments, because.
our rate of inflation has been lowerthan that of Britain and the
United States, but if there is a very substantial differential in
interest rates between those two major countries and a country such
as Australia,. it is inevitable that there will be some implications'
for us, and I think really that that is what you have been seeing
for the last week or so. But I can. t add any more to that at the moment.
Question: But do you think our strength is still there?
Prime Minister:-
The strength of the . economy is still there, but let me make the
point again against the background of the capacity of capital
to move between nations, against the background of tae kind of interest,
rates that have been present in the United States and the United
Kingdom for a very long while, it is not possible for the Australian
economy not to feel some impact, some effect, and that I think, is
what has been happening over the last week or so.
Question: Would you expect this to hit home buyers?
-3
Prime Minister:
I don't want to say anymore about this at the moment.
Question: In relation to question time yesterday, what do you have to say
to the suggestion that you weren't quoting Mr Keating in full?
Prime Minister:
Well, to quote him in full means to quote a whole article. I am
perfectly happy to have that whole article tabled in the Parliament
or incorporated in Hansard where it will show quite plainly exactly
what Mr Keating said, and he was saying that AfghanistaD was no
business of ours, who would want Pakistan, who would want Aghanistan
or whatever it might have been, indicating that he had no concern
for the issue whatever., I. just don't believe that that is good
enough. It is very much reminiscient of the kind of remarks that
Neville Chamerlain made in relation to Czechoslovakia in 1938, and
I have said on many occasions that in these vastly important issues,
as I understand President Carter's actions, as I understand the
joint declaration from France and Germany, the statement of the
British Prime Minister they are all trying to establish the
circumstan ce-in which, in the 1980s, the world does not go down
the tragic and disastrous path that'it pursued in the latter
part of the 1930s.
The tragedy of this . present circumstance is that since Mr Hayden
believes he has got to make every issue a political issue, since
he believes that there is no issue, , virtually, on which he can
support the Government, and that seems to be the way he reacts,
he therefore puts himself in an equivocal ambivalent and very
difficult position over the Afghanistan issue.
Question: On the question of Afghanistan, since your meetings with President Carte
the lack, or the activity in the Indian Ocean the American defence
activity has been confined to fleet units sailing and having itself
photographed. In . fact, what is the latest assessment? What is
happening in both. Afghanistan with the Soviet Union and Western
defence in the Indian Ocean?
Prime Minister:
I don't think I can tell you what is happening in Afghanistan much more
than you have seen over the news reports. There . has obviously been
a very unsettled circumstance in Kabul, there is obviously enormous
opposition, not only from the. alleged rebels who are fighting against
the Soviet army, but from the people of Afghanistan itself who have
been independent, fiercely proud for centuries, wanting to do it their
way and they ought to be allowed that privilege and that right as an
independent people. There are, as you know, estimates which vary
from between 75,000 and 90,000 Soviet troops in the area. There have
been some reports that there have been more troops starting to move
towards Afghanistan and I wouldn't be at all surprised in that
because I think that if they are going to stop the discontent and the
opposition, and at the same time remain in Afghanistan, they are going
to, need double the number of troops that they have got there now,
if they are really going to suppress the freedom and independence of
spirit of the people of Afghanistan. In the Indian Ocean, in the
-4
Prime Minister:( cont.
in. the northwest Indian Ocean, the United States has placed much,
much greater naval and maritime capacity and
their forces there now are really quite formidable.
Question: . the wool dispute. Can you indicate what your position would be if
the growers decided to take action
Prime Minister:
I have got nothing to add to the joint statement that Mr Nixon and
some growers put out yesterday. I would only say that the intention
there was to invite the brokers-and other parties to a meeting which
I would hope would be held today which could work ' out a strategy
for handling this particular dispute. It is a disastrous one, it is
a. serious one and one that does challenge the arbitration system.
I think the.. growers are very determined and the Government is, but
since there are discussions in progress I haven't really got anything
specific to add to that statement thiat was released last night.
4--