PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT WEDNESDAY, 12 MARCH, 1980
PRIME MINISTER INTERVIEWED BY VINCENT SMITH, 2UE, SYDNEY.
LIVE, TALK-BACK
Vincent Smith
with me, as my special guest in the studio, is the Prime Minister
of Australia, Mr. Malcolm Fraser. Mr. Fraser, thanks for joining
US. I wanted to, before you arrived in fact I was backgrounding the
situation, it occurs to me that there is a great deal of concern
in the community about the atmosphere of belligerence that builds
up in a situation like this where people are desperate for petrol,-
where people are perhaps going to become more desperate. Does the
Government concern itself with its laws having the effect of
perhaps accelerating that of belligerence?
Prime Minister
I think a Government is always concerned about belligerence and
confrontation, and would want to avoid it. You cannot always
avoid it. Sometimes the price of avoiding it is just to allow
yourself, or allow the community, to be completely run over.
That is a very high price to pay. Reasonableness is something
that you need somebody to reciprocate. That is not to say that
one party do a dispute cannot or should not be the first to be
reasonable. But, if people get back into the corners in the ring
and are only going to snarl at each other, well, you can get a
very dangerous and unpleasant situation developing. There is no
doubt about that. The Government would be concerned about it.
Vincent Smith-
Would the Government, though, not be prepared to consider amending
a law. Perhaps even a cooling-off period whereby it backed away
from some of the laws which it has been enforcing.
Prime Minister
But it depends on the reason for it. I would like to get at that
in a slightly different way if I could, because there are people
who say that law has got no part in industrial relations, that
this is a question of human relationships between management and
labour, that they got ultimately to get down and reconcile themselves
to opposing points of view and come to a negotiated agreement.
That is very often true. But we also have to understand that
trade unions have enormous power. Some of them have incomes up
to $ 8 million or $ 10 million a year. They have not in the past
been accountable for the way they spend that money. They can hold
up any industry. They can boycott any company if they determine
to. They could send any particular company or individual bankrupt,
if they determine to. If you are going to say that the trade
unions should not be subject to law in the conduct of their
relationships with the wider community, then we are saying something
terribly serious about the nature of life in Australia. I think
today any significant union has more power than any corporation
or company. Yet nobody says that company directors should not be
subject to the law. If they break the law, they are prosecuted, / 2
-2
Prime minister ( continued)
or they go to gaol. People say " they have broken the law, there
is a penalty". That is it.
Vincent Smith
Are you addressing yourself specifically, though, to Section
of the Trade Practices Act?
Prime Minister
What I am saying more specifically is that the conduct of
industrial relations has got to be held against the background of
law. You cannot just rely on reasonableness. You just cannot
rely on conciliation and negotiation, because unions have too much
power in a number of instances. If you are going to say that
people with as much power as that within our community can operate
without the restraint of law, without any framework of law,
then we are going to have an unlicensed situation where the rest
of the community would pay an enormously heavy price. So, what
I am saying is that there have got to be laws. I do not believe
that in the face of a union seeking to confront a particular law
the Government should then turn around and say " all right, we
will modify or change that law". If you basically believe in the
reasonableness of it, well then the law ought to be upheld.
Vincent Smith
or its workability and the cost of enforcing that law. Say, for
example, hypothetically, a child were to die as a result of the
petrol shortage. Would it be that child's life that is the cost.
Prime Minister
You are making that kind of judgement. Let's say a company goes
bankrupt because a trade union determines how that company does
its business, because a trade union says ' you cannot buy from
that supplier, you cannot use these truckdrivers, you have got
to use other truckdrivers, and if you do not do what we say,
we are going to boycott you completely and send you out of
business'. As a result of that, other people get hurt. The
family loses its home and all the rest. So putting up your
sort of hypothetical example against another: if you allow
a company to be boycotted and if you allow it to be destroyed as
a result of that, then you saying that can happen to any other
company. It could happen to this radio station if you do or say
things which a union does not like. Giving that kind of power to.
a body such as a trade union is something that cannot be tolerated
in a civilised society.
Vincent Smith
Even in a pluralistic society. I mean, there is no question,
the Transport Worker's Union is abusing the power which a trade
union has at the moment, because it is ignoring the Rule of Law,.
it is ignoring, I guess, logic and reason within the community.
/ 3
-3
Prime Minister
If they understood it, or the community understood it, the
argument is not an argument between unions, it is not really an
argument about rates of pay, it is an argument as to whether
which members of the same State registered union should be doing
certain work, which really makes it a total absurdity.
Vincent Smith-
They are now shifting the emphasis towards that, aren't they.
They have been raising 45D as the prime thing. Last night they
seemed to change towards their conditions of work and employment.
Prime Minister
They are still members within a union. We have all seen very
damaging demarkation disputes when it is between two different
unions in Australia. That is bad enough and silly enough. But
when it is members of the same State registered union, some of
whom are saying to others " we are going to do that work but
John Smith, a member of the same union, is not allowed to do that
work", I would have that that is a very sad, absurd basis for
an industrial dispute. If they have a quarrel about the terms
and conditions of one group of employees against another, there
are ways of having that examined: go to a tribunal, get it
examined, get a judgement. You do not have to hold up the nation
for that.
Vincent Smith-
I don't think anybody is really arguing that the Transport
Worker's Union is being totally and unutterably unreasonable
in this situation. But what people have been saying, and I am sure
I have been asking it of myself, and when my wife rang me this
morning to say that a lot of the women at the school were talking
about going and virtually panic-buying food, then we've got a
very serious situation. Doesn't it then become a responsibility
of a Government to step in and try to find ways in which it might
be defused.
Prime minister
I think it is a responsibility of Government. But what I would say
is that the way of defusing it is not to allow the law to be run
over, or not to allow the protections of the law for a particular
individual to cease. Because if you are going to say that everytime
an unreasonable union puts the community at large at risk you are
then going to change the law or modify it, you are really saying
that you will give in everytime that an unreasonable union starts
to make it inconvenient or difficult, or even damaging, for the
public. ./ 4
-4
Vincent Smith
Does that necessarily mean that?
Prime Minister-
I think it does. Because you are taking the example of
difficulty. There was a dispute in Victoria, mostly, some
time ago, and people would not deliver milk to hospitals and
all the rest. As a result of that, we gave ourselves some
additional powers under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act
and those powers are now law. If, in this dispute, hospitals
started to go short of supplies, or whatever, and the safety,
health or welfare of the community started to be threatened,
we could use those powers. If we had to, we would. But, if you
are going to say that everytime the community is put at risk that
we must give in, that the union must get whatever it had demanded,
then you are really saying that companies can only do what the
union determines, governments can only do what the union determines,
people can only be allowed a freedom within what the union itself
determines. That: would destroy the basis of Australian society.
Vincent Smith
Do you think the basis of Australian society is at threat now,
with the condition
Prime Minister
Oh no. Because I have enormous confidence in the commonsense and
the decency and the spirit of independence of the Australian
people. Vincent Smith
But isn't that at risk right now, given the frustrations and the
belligerence that is emerging in this situation.
Prime Minister
It is being challenged by the Transport Worker's Union. It is.
Vincent Smith-
But it also becoming a part of the community. People are bickering
about places in queus. People are bickering about, obviously will
be, about whether they are entitled to a piece of food on a
supermarket shelf.
Prime Minister
This sort of thing happens when there is a difficulty. The kind
of confrontation of the Australianpeople because that is what it
it that the TWU is now involved in that can create difficulty.
It can create hardship. But it will not challenge, it cannot succeed,
in diminishing or destroying the fundamentals of Australian freedom,
because these things are too deeply embedded. The wrath of the
Australian people against the union would be so great that the
members of the union itself would desert their leaders if they
pressed that kind of view too far. Ultimately, what can succeed
or not does get back in part to what a community will tolerate.
Vincent Smith
Do you accept that N. S. W. is in a crisis at the moment?
Prime Minister-
I think it is in a very difficult position. I do not like using
the word crisis because it is used for so many things that are not
a crisis.
Vincent Smith
( Inaudible) without diminishing its meaning.
Prime Minister
But not only in N. S. W. There is the potential for this dispute
spreading right around Australia. We had a long discussion
about this in the Federal Government yesterday. I have spoken to
Tony Street about it on a number of occasions. He has been in
close touch with Sir John Moore, who has not really got any
jurisdiction in relation to it because it is a State registered
union, and as I have been advised, basically operating in the
critical areas under a State award. But, in a sense, by grace,
people have been in consultation with him. Obviously we need to
hope that that can lead to a sensible conclusion of it.
Vincent Smith-
Sir John would now have some jurisdiction because the Victorians
are out for 48 hours the Victorian members of the Transport
Workers Union. We have the Federal union involved now,
through Ivan Hodgson.
Prime Minister
Whether or not he has specific jurisdiction; earlier this morning
I was told it was by grace. But this again underlines another
matter. Vincent Smith-
Can we come back to that after this news break. We have news
coming up in about 25 seconds. I would like to come back then
and discuss this a little further with you and perhaps take some
calls on 9295555, which our number. Our guest in the studio is
the Prime Minister of Australia, Mr. Malcolm Fraser. We are
discussing largely our problem with petrol; whether we are going
to see any petrol flowing as a result of discussions today. You
may have some questions you want to put to the Prime Minister on
929555. We entertain those questions after this news break which
is coming up in about 5 seconds.
( News Break) / 6
-6
Vincent Smith-
Our guest in the studio is the Prime Minister, Mr. Malcolm Fraser.
What we will do, we have a race coming up in about three minutes
and we will try to hold that race for some time and we will try
quickly to get a couple of calls in, or at least one call, before.
we go to that race.
CALLER I would like to ask the Prime Minister a question please.
Mr. Prime Minister, why can't it's two parts why can't the
Federal Government intervene, and secondly, why is it that Mr. Wran,
who never stops complaining about the unemployment in the State
of why is it that he cannot act when he brought down his
emergency legislation over the truckies dispute. I am becoming
a very confused housewife and mother, with politics.
Prime Minister
Well, I am not surprised at the confusion, because I think it is
sometimes a difficult situation. The Federal Government, as this
began, did not have much jurisdiction because, as I am advised,
all the members who were involved in the dispute were members of
a State branch of the Transport Worker's Union a State registered
union. I had also been advised that they were operating under a
State award but there is some question about that so I am trying
to check it now. In spite of that, Sir John Moore has been having
discussions with the parties. Those discussions are proceeding.
He is the highest authority in Australia so far as the
Commonwealth is concerned. So whether or not we have legal
jurisdiction, Sir John Moore is involved because of our very real
concern. Now, on the question of the State's emergency legislation,
of course it could use that legislation if it wanted to use that
legislation. There was a time earlier when the State was out of
petrol over the Kurnell Oil Refinery dispute. That was another
jurisdictional argument. The men wanted to be operating under a
State award but the rest of the industry was on a Federal award.
I think the only time the legislation has been applied, as you say,
is over the truckies.
Vincent Smith
That comes back to the proposal which you made, which was made
at the last Premieres Conference. That is, to take an approach
to try to bring all unions into one jurisdiction, so that we don't
have those. Is there any progress being made on that, Prime Minister?
Prime Minister
Not a great deal. Tony Street has been having meetings with the
State Labour Ministers. All the Premiers endorsed this examination.
There is in fact a meeting scheduled, I think, for tomorrow or
the next day. I am going to today write to the Premiers asking that
they give a new sense of urgency to the discussions, because so
many of the disputes do involve a divided jurisdiction. It is
then possible for the State to say it is our responsibility, and
for us to say " no, you ought to be handling it". I would much sooner
there was a clear jurisdiction. Even though there are real ./ 7
-7
Prime Minister-( continued)
difficulties involved, I would sooner the Commonwealth was
clearly responsible than that Governments be allowed to be in
the position of arguing " no, Mr. Wran you should be doing it", and
Mr. Wran says " no, Fraser, you should be doing it". That is a
most unhelpful situation when you have that sort of argument.
Vincent Smith-
And that does give rise to bitterness and ill feeling, that is
unproductive. Prime Minister
I think it gives rise to the sort of confusion which my
questioner admitted to. I do not blame the community for that.
Vincent Smith-
The other interesting jurisdictional question that is raised in
this whole dispute is the question of the jurisdiction of the
Federal court, which has handled Section 45D of the Trade Practices
Act, and the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Commissioner,
Sir John Moore, if he were to rule that there ought to be some
approach to Section 45D. Which jurisdiction would have precedence?
Prime Minister
I think it is very unlikely that Sir John Moore would say much
about 45D because that is part of the Restrictive Trade Practices
legislation. It is necessary for that legislation to be equal
handed in its impact. I was making the point before, companies
and company directors operate under very heavy legal restraints.
There need to some legal restraints in the union area.
Vincent Smith
I hate to do this to you, but can we cross to a race?
Prime Minister
Well, that is much more important.
CALLER
Mr. Prime Minister. Thank you for speaking to me. When Section
was put into this Act some three years ago I think, Mr. Hawke
and various other unions and employers associations, including
George Polites, said that they did not think it was a very good
idea; that if ever it was used it would be rather grim for
Australia with the unions and strikes and for the good of
Australia and the business of Australia. Two part question: if
a Liberal Government was in the State of N. S. W. now, and the TWU
took them on and struck, well they could do it. It is not just
because it is a Labor Government that we have copped all this
unpleasantness and strike. It can happen in any State. I love
Australia and what I would like to see is less stirring, politically,
and more round-table conferences. And let's get on with the job
and say because the State happens to have a Labor Government in, it
/ 8
-8
CALLER ( continued)
is the Labor Government's fault. It is the union's fault, and
that was put into this Section 45D. The court has used
it and I failed to see how, if Sir John Moore comes to a decision,
how it can be overcome because the court has ruled, in another
court not the Arbitration Court that so-and-so, the TWU, have
got to deliver petrol to this man. Now, to me it is an absolute
mess and I think it is all caused and go back to the beginning of
it, of Section 45D being put into the Act.
Vincent Smith-
I think what your question is: is Section 45D going to solve
a strike?
Prime Minister
Let me say at the outset that we shouldn't pre-judge what has
happened in the discussions with Sir John Moore. I think we should
all hope that they will be successful through consultation as
you have plainly indicated, you believe it ought to be.
I know trade unions do not like Section 45D. I am not aware that
employers had opposed it. There have been many disputes over the
last three years in which action has been commenced under 45D and
a dispute has ended. In other words, the presence of 45D has led
to a reduction in disputes in a number of areas because it has been
effective in ending a secondary boycott. The trade union movement
and Mr. Hawke, oppose any law that puts any restraint on any
trade union. It is not just a question of 45D. Those sections of
the Arbitration Act that put a restraint on a trade union, they
also oppose. If we are going to say that any law that the trade
union movement or its leaders do not like we have to alter or
abolish, then we are going to allow the trade unions, that have
immense power, to do what they like with the people of Australia,
with companies or with Governments. Under those circumstances,
Australia would very quickly become ungovernable.
Vincent Smith
Prime Minister, could I ask you a question. It is said that
elements, and the essential elements of 45D, are embodied in
Common Law and in existing industrial law and that therefore that
section is not really necessary within the statutes.
Prime Minister
I do not think, as I have been advised, that Commonwealth law
or industrial law would give the same sort of protection as
It is a secondary boycott situation. It is designed quite
specifically, to prevent, in a sense, third parties getting caught
up in an industrial dispute. Let's take another example: if
the Transport Worker's Union take a dislike to a particular
company or the way it is operating, they say that they are buying
the supplies from the wrong supplier, and they say we will only
allow you to be supplied and carry your goods so long as you
buy your raw materials from instead of buying them from
That is the sort of power that they are trying to exert. It is
not a proper use of union power. Again, we need to come back that
this is an argument within a union. All members of the State / 9
9-
Prime minister ( continued)
branch, State-registered Branch, of the Transport Worker's Union
and the union is saying " some of our members must do this work,
but other of our members should not do this work". It really
does seem to be an absurd proposition for the union to be taking.'
Vincent Smith-
But on the State branch, are not members who work for AMOCO Federal,
they work for members of a Federal union? So we really have
a jurisdictional problem.
Prime Minister-
No. I think they are under a Federal award but under a State
branch of the union. That is the latest information I have.
But I am also advised that the people that Mr. Laidley had been
employing were members of the same union, but under a State award.
Vincent Smith
Nevertheless, is Section 45D going to in fact solve a strike ever?
The last time we had a major one was the Gorman dispute in
Victoria which came almost as far as this one has gone. At that
stage Mr. Gorman pulled back from his position. This time
Mr. Laidley has said he is not going to pull back. He is going
to fight on. It will precipitate giving, and accepting all the
points you made about the principle of the individual's right to
operate in this community as opposed to the trade union. What
about my right as an individual to petrol. Does there no-, ccme a
time where a Gover-nment has to step in and say " well, look, the
reality of the situation is that the law isn't working".
Prime Minister
No. I do not think so at all. In industrial law we all know
at times there are going to be difficulties. We all know that the
trade union movement will try and challenge laws that put any
restraint on their actions. But we really do need to look at the
massive power that those unions have. If we are going to say
any law that they challenge is creating a difficulty, a hardship
for the community therefore the law must be removed, is just saying
the community can operate in the way in which the leaders of that
particular trade union determine. You are not really free if you
can only get petrol the way the trade union determines, because
you never know. You might have it this week, but they might say
next week you cannot have it. You need to be able to get petrol
and your freedom is dependent upon knowing you can get petrol,
because nobody has the power within this community to challenge or
to inhibit your right to get that petrol.
10
Vincent Smith
What I am getting at, is trying in the short term to resolve
the problem so that we can have our petrol and then get down
to the much longer term issue of resolving the question of just
where a trade union movement fits into a pluralistic society.
Prime Minister
But you see what is happening is that the trade union is using
your wish, and everyone else's wish to have petrol, and to be
able to buy it when they want it, to achieve an illicit and
improper objective. In other words, they are trying to use yours
and everyone's natural inclinations as a lever in their cause.
* This is why, for example, we introduced legislation some time ago
giving us additional powers if a union was taking action designed
to affect the safety, health or welfare of the people. If a
union was taking an action which was going to deny milk to hospitals,
to take a clear example, and therefore the welfare of children
or all sorts of people in hospitals, that affects their safety,
it affects their welfare. Then we have substantial powers to deal
with that. But just because it is a hospital and people could be
damaged if they do not get that milk, is not a reason for saying
the law should be abolished, the unions should have the power
to do what they like.
Vincent Smith-
Mr. Fraser, just before we go any further on the petrol strike,
we were talking about a story which appeared in the Financial Review
this week about Australia reneging on some of the offers you made
to the United States in terms of docking facilities at Cockburn Sound
in Western Australia. That story originated from?
Prime Minister
well, it originated from the Washington correspondent of the
Financial Review. The story is not correct. One of the things we
discussed when I was in Washington was the home porting, or base
porting, of American ships in Australian ports. They spoke about
a number of things. They spoke about the possibility of home
porting a carrier task force which would have been two or three
ships. We pointed out that a very substantial investment would be
involved; a lot of housing if families were going to be moved.
We said we were willing to examine it, make the facilities
available. Clearly, there would be investment involved from you,
there would be investment involved from us. But there has been no
firm proposal. I would be delighted to get a proposal on that
particular subject from the Americans. I would hope that it could
be accepted and worked through. The suggestion that the Americans
had had a rejection on it well, I don't know where it came from,
but it is just not true.
Vincent Smith
What in effect was that the Australian offer when you were
in Washington was a much broader one. / 11
Prime Minister-
Oh it is. We had offered the use of facilities across a wide
range of front, and the Americans are examining what they want
to pick up.
Vincent Smith-
Coming up with some specific proposals. So there has been
no rejection?
Prime Minister
No rejection in that area at all.
Vincent Smith-
Okay. Let's get back to the dispute here, which I think most
people are more concerned about.
Prime Minister-
Well, I think they are. It is a lot closer to home at the
moment. CALLER Mr. Prime Minister, the consensus of what you have said previously
this afternoon, is that virtually the unions are using the needs,
I won't say the desires, but the needs of the people of this country
to further their political or monetary aims.
Prime Minister
Political it might be because the TWU are arguing that one group
of their own members should be doing certain work, rather than
another group of the members of the same union, so I suppose that
it is a political aim in union terms.
CALLER I feel, I mean I am completely confused and a lot of other people
are in the same boat, I feel sure of that. I feel they are lacking
in positive leadership. We have had statements of, really I
consider minor nature, term it that, from Mr. Street, yourself
and Mr. Wran. Now, I just feel it is about time that someone got
up and made a positive statement of what is going to happen.
We are just muddling along. Day to day we are listening to bulletin
after bulletin on the air not knowing where the hell we are going..
Now, can we get someone to tell us where we are heading?
Vincent Smith
I think that is largely what I have been trying to get at.
Prime Minister
In the industrial arena it is sometimes very difficult. Even
though there were doubts about whether he had jurisdiction or not,
the President of the Arbitration Commission, Sir John Moore, has
/ 12
12
Prime Minister ( continued)
been having meetings between the parties. He is having
meetings between the parties this morning, this afternoon.
Obviously, the objective there is to reach agreement and to have.
it resolved. Now, while that is going on, while the parties
are in conference, it is not very helpful
CALLER ( Inaudible).
Prime-Minister
I was going to say it would not be very helpful for Governments,
whether it is my Government or for the State Government, to be
making statements about what they may or may not do. We have to
give the negotiation, the consultation, under the chairmanship
of Sir John Moore, a chance to work. Governments at a certain
stage can say that they are going to apply a certain provision
of the law. Mr. Wran could say he is going to invoke his emergency
legislation to protect the people of Sydney from the dispute.
But I do not think any of that would be helpful while there is a
consultation going on, which we all hope will resolve the matter.
Vincent Smith-
Could not for example Prime Minister, Senator Carrick, the
National Development Minister, have presented a plan which says
if the strike goes beyond a weekend and reaches this critical
stage, this is what the Federal Government would propose to do
for the emergency distribution of petrol nationally, because that
is part of Senator Carrick's portfolio.
Prime Minister
But if all members of the Transport Worker's Union are going to
go on strike al-nG not be prepared to drive petrol tankers, the
very most you would be able to do is to have petrol suppliers
distributed for the most stringent emergency services: hospitals,
doctors, this sort of thing. It would not be possible to have petrol
supplied to the general community, either for normal business
purposes or for private purposes.
CALLER
Well-, 1i' 1rP. ri .1,-e Minister, if that occurs, and it seems quite
likely tha'C mLight occur-
Prime Minister
Yes it could. ItL could.
CALLER Well, where do we go from there. This is what we are after.
Prime Minister
If you say where do we go from there, if the consultation cannot
succeed, we could be in for a long, drawn-out grind, because the / 13
13
Prime minister ( continued)
Federal Government is not going to allow the law of the land
which is designed to protect the people of Australia to be defeated
or frustrated by any particular trade union leadership. I have
said earlier today
CALLER I couldn't agree more with that, but when will this occur.
We have been years past now
Prime Minister
There have been a number of occasions when we have used pretty
powerful weapons, legal weapons, against trade unions over the
last three or four years, especially in the area of the
Commonwealth's own employment, where have greater powers than
we have in the other arenas. You will remember the Redfern
disputes and the Telecom disputes. I think it was the application
of law and the application of quite rigid penalties that
achieved a resolution of those areas. If we have to do it again,
we will do it again.
CALLER It seems like a many-headed monster, this thing. You lop one
off and the other one comes up.
Prime Minister
Well., it is. In industrial relations it is, if you like,
a continuing story of human relationships. There is no one single
head to it. You have a whole variety of unions. You have a whole
variety of companies. Some of them conduct their affairs much
better and more sensibly than others. But at any point, if there
has been a breakdown, you get the possibility of a dispute
occurring which can do a good deal of damage to the people involved
and to society as a whole. What I am saying is, that I do not
think the matter of industrial relations is a battle, if you want
to call it that, is ever won for all time.
Vincent Smith
Prime Minister, given the fact that it is one of those continuing
relationships, a continuing relationship between people, does it
not require some sensitivity, some flexibility, and even an ability
on the part of Government from time to time to say " let's question
this law, is it workable, is it going to work, is it going to
Prime Minister
We can do that, yes. But you see, I would say that 45D has worked.
I would also say that 45D has been a very necessary protection
to many industries. I was being told of a position in the United
States the other day when there was a boycott placed on a / 14
14
Prime Minister ( continued)
particular company. They went to law. They got an injunction.
The employee was fined $ 1,000 and told to be back at work and to
deliver the concrete. Because of his respect for the law, he
paid the $ 1,000 fine and was back the next day delivering
the concrete. It was on a building job. In the United States,
one of the great differences between Australia, in the United
States their trade unions expect to be subject to the law just
as companies are subject to the law. If a company gets caught
by the law it has transgressed, and directors get charged or
they get fined or the company, or somebody gets put in gaol,
nobody says that it a terrible thing, the law has failed.
Vincent Smith
It is a different system there though.
Prime Minister
No. It is not really a different system. It really is not.
Not all that much different.
Vincent Smith
There is not an industrial jurisdiction though?
Prime Minister
Yes there is. There is a Labour Relations Board. If they cannot
come to an agreement by collective bargaining, they can appeal
to the Labour Relations Board. It does much of the work that our
Industrial Relations Bureau does. If they cannot get agreement
through collective bargaining, they can appoint an arbitrator, and
I think sometimes a compulsory arbitrator. The names are different,
the terminology is different.
Vincent Smith
But it does devolve eventually to the civil law?
Prime Minister
I think so, yes. But here it can too. Yes, I think you were
asking something else.
CALLER What worries me more than anything else is the fact that we
are slowly being bled to death. I mean, you could not calculate
what a strike like this is costing this country.
15
Prime Minister
Well, you can calculate it in tens and tens of millions of
dollars. CALLER It is affecting everyone. Every business in the country
is losing money. Every worker is losing money. Every family,
Everyone is losing. Really, you say you can calculate it.
I don't think you could calculate it. I think it
Prime Minister
Well, there are ways of calculating the money lost and
CALLER ( Inaudible) if you did put it all together.
Prime Minister
We do not have to calculate it, we accept, and I agree with you,
that the cost is enormous. But I would also say that the cost of
allowing unions to operate in a unrestrained way outside any law,
no framework of law to protect the community, the cost of that,
over time, would be infinitely greater because it would destroy
the freedoms which are important to all of us.
CALLER I agree with you Mr. Fraser that this is not a crisis. of course
it will end, won't it? The petrol strike, all strikes, end.
Prime Minister
It is a question of how much damage and how many people are hurt
before that happens.
CALLER I doubt there will be an awful lot. There will be some dollars
go down the drain. But here at Castle Hill, where I live, we
are enjoying the strike quite frankly, at least I am. Our village
has become a little more peaceful. I hope you come to our Show
next weekend.
Prime Minister
I was at it last year I think, wasn't I?
Vincent Smith
Not if there is no petrol.
CALLER Well, I can lend you some petrol. I've got some and I have access
to some more. But do come if you can, it is quite charming. / 16
16
CALLER First of all, goo~ d afternoon. You have got Section 45D in the
books and both you and Mr. Street have both said that it is a
good law and it is a law and it is there and it must be obeyed.
Now, seeing that that law is there and it is to be obeyed, will
the politicans give an undertaking to obey the electoral laws,
especially would you give an undertaking to make sure they all
observe the law as far as putting their expense statement and
they don't spend beyond the amount of money they are allowed to
spend.
Vincent Smith
Section 151 of the Electoral Act. That's what I was going to raisewith
you anyway.
Prime Minister
There is more than one section in the electoral act. There are
sections which indicate that parties have got to put in returns.
Others that indicate individuals have got to put in returns and
organisations that are involved in elections also have to put in
returns. Because of the problems that occurred in Tasmania,
we are now examining those aspects of the law to try and make sure
that there is a clarity about it and that individuals and parties,
organisations, will know precisely what their obligations are.
CALLER But this law has obviously not worked, the same as 45D really is
not a law that can work.
Prime Minister
I think 45D has worked. It has been used on many occasions.
CALLER ( Inaudible) it has got to the stage where an injunction has been
put. ( Inaudible) tanker drivers out and you have crippled one
State and you look like crippling a few other States.
Prime Minister
Oh, now wait a minute. I think that you need to understand what
this is about, because there was a person who was running a small
business, it was an oil distribution business, a-d in relation to
that particular business the employer was employing people belonging
to the State branch of the Transport Worker's Union. Then he bought
a petrol retail business, was using his same drivers still members
of the State Transport Worker's Union but then the union says
/ 17
17
Prime Minister ( continued)
" tyou can't use those blokes, you've got to use other members
of the same union". In other words, the union was trying to tell
this particular businessman exactly how he could run his
business. If you want trade unions to have that kind of power,
I am afraid I do not, and the majority of Australians will not.
Vincent Smith
Now, what was your point?
CALLER My point is that this is a site that was historically supplied
by company drivers, were shut for a period of 8 months, and it
has re-opened.
Vincent Smith
But Mr. Laidley re-opened it.
CALLER Mr. Laidley re-opened it, but nevertheless he still wants to
supply a site which was historically supplied, when it was opened.
The company closed it, not the drivers, originally.
Vincent Smith
But it was closed, and it wasn't operating, and then Mr. Laidley
decided to re-open it.
Prime Minister
He was providing more jobs as a result, and they are still members
of the same union. Do you run a business?
CALLER Mr. Laidley's people get far less than what a company driver
gets. Prime Minister
Do you run a business?
CALLER Yes. / 18
18
Prime Minister
What sort of business?
CALLER Oh, a small business.
Prime Minister
Yes, but what sort, hardware, groceries or what?
CALLER No. Light engineer.
Prime Minister
Light engineer? Where do you buy your materials?
CALLER The same place as anyone else does, from the suppliers, the
wholesalers. Prime Minister
Yes, but would you like it if the union said to you let's say
the union sets up a wholesale business the Transport Worker's
Union goes into business, sets up a wholesale business, and then
they come along and say to you " you can only buy your supplies
from the Transport Worker's Union company"
CALLER But if I was continually supplied by a company driver from my
wholesaler, which I am now, there is no way in the world that I
would want to buy a truck and go down to MacPhersons and..
bring it back.
Prime Minister
That is not the point I am making. I am making the point that
if the Transport Worker's Union wanted to set up a wholesale
business and provide you with the sort of supplies that you
normally buy, and then just tell you that that is where you have
got to buy them from, would you like that?
CALLER That is not the case in point at all. ./ 19
19
Prime Minister
But it would be, wouldn't it. That is the sort of power
they are trying to use.
CALLER That's got nothing to with it. It's just playing a game on
words. Prime Minister
I do not think so.
CALLER ( Inaudible) give an undertaking that if the law is not changed
the Electoral Act will be strictly observed at the forthcoming
Federal Election?
Prime Minister
Well, the law is going to be changed.
CALLER It is going to be changed? Well, then why can't you change
Prime Minister
That was an obvious question, wasn't it? Because we believe
has been successful.
CALLER I am a businessman in the city, slowly going broke because of
these unionists. I speak to a lot of people, particularly in the
city. You would have millions of people here standing up and
cheering if you and your Government would show some backbone and
some guts and get that petrol to us, and not to the few people who
don't deserve it.. If you would stand up to these unionists, if
you would deliver the petrol and you would tell these unionists
to go to hell and leave their jobs if they are not happy with what
they are doing: why don't you help the people of Australia instead
of talking a lot of nonsense which you and Mr. Street have been
talking instead of getting down to basic facts.
Prime Minister
I do not think we are talking a lot of nonsense. The only way
that you are going to be able to get the supplies that you need on
a continuous basis, if organisations that are powerful in this
country adhere to the law which is designed to protect you and
everyone else. I do not think. anyone wants the circumstance where
20
Prime minister ( continued)
they have got to run their business -the way a union tells them.
CALLER I agree with you Mr. Fraser, but you've got the power. Put the
army in. Get the petrol to the people. Do something positive
instead of talking and talking and talking and getting nowhere.
Prime Minister
Well, in relation to emergency supplies of petrol into the city
of Sydney, it is the State Government that has the powers to do that.
If you are going to use other means for emergency distribution
of petrol, the most you would be able to cover would be
emergency supplies, hospitals, doctors, and matters of that kind.
Without people prepared to drive trucks and run them in the normal
way, you would do no more than be able to keep emergency supplies
going. You could not keep the normal business of this nation going.
Vincent Smith-
Prime minister, would you like to have a knockdown, drag-out
stoush with the trade union movement to determine this, I think
over-simplistic question, of who is running the country; the
Government or the unions.
Prime Minister
I think the price of that, in terms of hardship done to a great
many people, would be enormous. I would not want that sort of
brawl at all. But at the same time, having said that, I hope that
no member of the Transport Worker's Union will take that as showing
an lack of determination on the part of the Federal Government.
Vincent Smith-
What could that resolve?
Prime Minister
All it can do is to teach lesson; and that is, that people have
got to operate within the normal framework of law. If people have
got an industrial dispute, there are the State tribunals or
Federal tribunals to go and get it resolved and get a judgement
from a third party, from the umpire. There is not a need to have
a strike, to put on bans and limitations, and cause inconvenience
in -the whole community. It seems to me that you sometimes get
union officials who go on getting paid no matter how much harm
comes to their members because the members are on strike and losing
salary, who think that they have got to make a big fellow of
themselves by demonstrating how tough they are in terms of a dispute.
I think that is an element in some. / 21
21
CALLER I would like to ask Mr. Fraser a question with regard to the
secret ballot. Why is it that we cannot have a secret ballot
in this way: if a secret ballot or members were if it was
brought into law both at a Federal and a State level, that all
members of a union would have to vote in a secret ballot before
a strike could be called, those votes to be counted by members
of the electoral office. Now, surely, if that were to happen,
the amount of money that it costs to do this, would surely be more
than offset by the man hours which would be lost by such a strike
and the disruption to business.
Prime Minister
I think there is a good deal in what you say about that. One of
the problems is that in some unions it would be very hard to
organise from a practical basis. In the waterfront for example,
where everyone is gathered in virtually one place, it would be
much easier to organise, but in the metal trades industries where
you might have 6,000 or 8,000 shops right around Australia, many
of them quite small, employing only 4 or 5 or 6 people, a ballot
of the kind that you have mentioned could be very difficult
to organise. There is a time scale involved and what happens while
you are waiting to do that. This is a matter that the ' Covernment
has examined on many occasions. We have introduced secret ballots
for the election of union officials, and that is working well.
CALLER But the actual men there are many men who are on strike who want
to work. Their right to work should be protected. They are
afraid to vote against it at union meetings because of physical
injury to themselves, or damage to their property, which has
happened. Now, these men, their right to work should be protected.
All right, it is difficult, but in your own words " life was not
meant to be easy". I don't mean that in any rude sense at all.
I quite agree with you. But, I think we have got to try to do
something. The unions are so rabid
Prime Minister
What makes it so hard, I am not saying it is not, but what does
make it so hard for the people who want to work either to just go
to work and turn up to work, or to speak out more vigorously at
union meetings in favour of working.
CALLER But if they do speak out, they are afraid because they are men
with families. So many of them, I know, I have heard of it
Prime Minister
You mean they would get beaten up? / 22
22
CALLER ( Inaudible) physical injury to themselves and damage to their
property. Some of the union members, the active factions, they
are nothing but thugs.
Prime Minister
I think that happens in some cases. I have heard of many cases
of intimidation. That makes it all the more reason when such
people get into a position of union authority that they should
not be allowed to run over the community.
Vincent Smith
The problem of secret ballots though is an enormous one and
secret ballots in a situation like this can involve hours and
hours, days and days, of checking who is a member of what.
Prime Minister
It is one of the problems: who is eligible to vote and if you
are having a vote all around Australia it could be some days
before you get a result.
Vincent Smith
And in fact if the membership then confirms a strike, like this
one, you are stuck with something that is much stronger than you
really had intended.
CALLER What I wanted to know: if a poll was put to the people of
Australia, who are a little bit tired of being held to ransom
every five minutes
Prime Minister
I agree with you completely.
CALLER ( Inaudible) . But we are inconvenienced, sligtly sometimes, more so
at other times. It affects us financially. I think if the
average Australian was asked whether they wanted this law upheld
to make a point, you might find they would all say yes, the number
of people I have spoken to.
Prime Minister
I think they would say yes, because I believe people are fed up
with the abuse of union power.' It is not as though a lot of
people are not reasonably well paid, and it is not as though there
are normal and proper ways of trying to get a grievance heard.
There are. The message we have to get across is that there is no
need for people to lose their own wages and to damage the rest of.
the community to get a grievance heard. / 23
23
Vincent Smith
But they do damage the rest of the community.
CALLER ( Inaudible) if the hardship gets worse. I think we have reached
a stage where we can say to ourselves it might get really tough,
and if it does, if it is going -to make a point rather than have
these continuous strikes that are affecting us and taking from
our way of life, that if we have to face up if the Government
gets to the stage where they say we are not going to back down
on the law, you have got to stay with it maybe the unions
and the people will suffer. But I think in the long term we
might get a good result.
Prime Minister
I think you would get a good result in the long term, but if you
did back down on it, I think then the community would be held
to ransom.
CALLER unions are in and the Government is out.
Prime Minister
You might as well, and the community would be held to ransom.
But there is one reason why I think it is slightly worse in this
particular State. There have been at least two occasions where
there have been very significant disputes and the State Government
has in fact backed the union. In one case, it legislation to take
a matter out of the hands of the State industrial tribunal, and
there is therefore a view in N. S. W. amongst some unions that if
they make enough of a fuss and create enough difficulty, the
State Government will. give them what they want. I am quite sure
that is one of the things that has helped to contribute to the
rash of disputes in N. S. W.
CALLER State and the Liberal Government got on the same terms, faced
up to what was happening and ( inaudible) each other these.
Prime Minister
That would certainly help. I did propose to all the States about
a year ago that we should talk together about the problems in
industrial relations and try to get clearer areas of responsibility,
try and get a basis on which we can support each other instead
of having a divided jurisdiction and one that leads only to
confusion. Unfortunately, the discussions that have taken place
between State arid Commonwealth Ministers have not yet resulted
in much. I am approaching the Premiers again today asking that a new
sense of urgency be placed behind that particular examination. / 24
24
Vincent Smith
Would you expect to get some results from that Prime Minister?
Prime Minister-
I would have been hoping for results for the June Premiers'
Conference. It cannot affect this particular dispute, but
unless the rate of progress is speeded up a good deal, that
will not occur.
Vincent Smith
Mr. Prime Minister, I think one question raised by that last
caller was just how far you are prepared to prosecute Section
Will you go ahead with fining people a quarter of a million
dollars, with sending people to gaol if they don't pay?
Prime Minister-
Obviously we would hope that there will be a resolution to the
matter. It is in conference at the moment. But the Government
has made up its mind. We discussed this at length yesterday.
But we are not going to allow trade unions to flaunt the law.
The law will be upheld.
Vincent Smith
So you push it to the limit?
Prime Minister-
Just let me say the law will1 be upheld.
CALLER I have a small business in the South Sydney shire. My business
has been seriously hampered by this dispute. Now, the key figure
in the dispute is well protected by the law and ( inaudible),
loss of revenue, etc. etc.
Prime Minister-
How do you mean the key figure is protected?
CALLER Well, he has a course of redress. He is suing his particular
union for not supplying.
Prime Minister-
He has taken out an injunction. But the fine paid for that
injunction does not go to that particular person.
CALLER No. I fully realise that. Yes. I fully realise that. But now
what about us people who rely on a particular commodity, mine is
distillate. I have cgot to obtain that. It has seriously affected
25
CALLER ( continued)
my particular business. I have no course of redress and one
thing and another where I could go back and try and get any
injunction against this particular gentlemen who is the key
figure in the whole situation.
Prime Minister
Or against the trade union that called the strike on.
CALLER I think the law is wrong there. If it is a law there for one,
it should be there for-everybody.
Prime Minister
But Mr. Laidley is likely to lose out also. He is not making
any money and has not been for some time.
CALLER I fully realise that. I admire him on his stand. But then when
it comes to the crunch that every industry and people who
can ill afford to have any time off from work are being stood down,
or there is a good possibility that they will be stood down
Prime Minister
The point you are raising represents one of the tragedies of
an industrial strike, because the people who are striking, the
other industries that are hurt people like yourself the cost
is enormous. It is never made up. It is lost and it is often
lost for all time. It is all so unnecessary when all people have
to do is to go to one of the industrial tribunals and have a case
heard, so long as they are prepared to accept the umpire's verdict.
We do not solve your position, or that of other people, by giving
in to the trade unions.
CALLER I am calling regarding the petrol. I think it is time that
you should de-register the union.
Prime Minister
There is a discussion going on at the moment with Sir John Moore
and the parties concerned. We will be waiting to get a report
of that discussions, and hopefully it will resolve the matter.
But if it does not, the Government will have to look at what
options are available to it. -Obviously, de-registration is one
of the options. / 26
26
Vincent Smith-
That won't solve the problem though, will it?
Prime Minister
It does not solve the problem, but it takes a lot of protections
away from the union officials and the union members; protections*
under the law which obviously help them in the conduct of
their business.
Vincent Smith-
It puts them outside the arbitration system though?
Prime Minister
It can, but at the same time, unions have generally found that
the protections that they get within the system a very substantial
advantage. Vincent Smith-
Prime Minister, just if we can clear up the confusion that seemed
to appear earlier in the programme: the drivers who work for
AMOCO are under a Federal award, they are members of teN. S. W.
Branch of the Transport Worker's Union of Australia, and entitled
to vote on both State and Federal matters. So really members of
both branches.
Prime Minister
They are members of two unions in a sense. The State branches
are a separately constituted union, as I understand it.
Vincent Smith-
And the agent's drivers are members of the State branch only and
they are entitl. ed to vote only on State matters.
Prime Minister
Yes.
Vincent Smith-
Clear that one up. Prime Minister, thanks very much for your time
today. I know it is a stressful time for everybody in Australia.
There is particular pressure on you, because I think if there is
one thing that emerged from all those calls today, people are
looking to the Federal Government for some sort of a lead in this.
Prime Minister
They always will, even if a matter, and I am not saying it is, in
the ultimate, but even if a matter is a responsibility of a
State Government, if it is one of major national concern, they
do look to the Federal Government. That is why again, I hope, that
the States will help us in getting to a better sense of
responsibility and capacity in the industrial jurisdiction, so
that we will not have people being able to ar~ ue this is
Mr. Wran's responsibility or it is my responsibility. / 27
27
Prime Minister ( continued)
I do not mind if it is all ours, but let's at least get the
responsibility clear, so that somebody has got the capacity
to do something about it.
Vincent Smith
Thanks for being our guest today. 000---
f