PROME MINIS7ERI
TRANSCRIPT ' PRESSURE POINT' 26 APRIL 1984
E 0 E PROOF ONLY'
EVANS: Prime Minister, it's not a gala occasion, it's not a
glittering one, it's the ABC, but I'm glad you 6ould make it
to the first night of this new series of the Pressure Point
program. It's a pleasure Huw.
EVANS: Can I ask you if you're going to spell out the pattErn
of bias that you ' ye expressed about the ABC in recent times.
I'm notgoing to do anything publicly about it Huw. I
believe that perhaps the management and the board of the ABC'
may like to speak to me. If they do I'm more than happy to speak
with them. I'm certainly not in the business of applying any
public pressure.
EVANS: Ken Myer said that he's not prepared to talk to you about
a general allegation of bias. Would you be prepared to spell out
the details to him in the formal way I suppose in which
If he'd like me to' yes. That's easily done.
EVANS: Do you want him to take the initiative and ask you to?
I think there's-been some initiative already taken bu~ t
I don't think that the interestsof the ABC or anyone else are
assisted by a public canvassing any further of the issue.
EVANS: But presumably you're concerned that the issue isn't
taken to the point where you're accused of trying to intimidate
the ABC. Oh absolutely. Because I have historically been a friend
of the ABC, of the institution, of the concept. I remain so. I've
said that doesn't mean that it should be immune from criticism.
I've referred to it. I don't want to pursue it publicly. I think
it could be of assistance -if they'd like to hear my views I've got
in detail and the spelling out what I see as examples of what I've
been talking about. ./ 2
2.
EVANS: Your Goverment brought in the legislation and appointed
a Board. I've heard a senior Minister express doubts about that
Board. Do you have any doubts?
I'm not going to pursue that issue publicly..
EVANS: You've set out to bring about a . process of reconciliation
when you won Government just over a year ago.
Yes.
EVANS: Has that been accomplished do you-think?
To a large extent Australia is a much more cohesive
and reconciled community in April 1984 to the country that -we
came to govern in March 1983.
EVANS: Do you think you've got more than just good will there?
Do you think people are prepared to make sacrifices in the long
term interests of where you want to take us?
The first thing is. that they are prepared to talk and
communicate and co-operate with one another. And out of that
process will come, and has come to some extentthe sort of
concessional approach that you refer to in your question.
What Iwas trying to say to Australia in February/ March of
last year was that our capacity to develop had been seriously
diminished by the dissipation of energy and resources in
confrontation. which unfortunately had been nurtured by the
previous Government. And that I was trying to make it clear
to business and to the trade union movement that they each had
legitimate aspirations for business to increase profitability
and for the trade union movement to protect and through time
improve the standards of the people they represented. And what
they had to understand was that these are not mutually conflicting
aspirations, that indeed aspirations which were more likely to be
achieved if there was a qreater degree of co-operation.
EVANS: Do you believe people really are aware though where you
are taking us to. Imean in a sense you have calmed the fires, if
you like, but do you think that they really understand where it
is that Hawke and the Labor Government are taking us to.
No, I don't think the community yet has a detailed vision
of the future and nor are they to be blamed for that Huw.
Because these things, if they're going to work don't involve
a snap of the fingers and say hey Australia, here we go, that's
the path, there's the picture. Life isn't like that. Not if you're
.3
3.
serious. But what they do understand is that we are trying
to get together a coherent policy in which-what you do in the
general field of macro-economics, what you're going to be doing
in the education field, what you're going to be doing in the
international relations field are all melded together to try
and ensure that we get the highest possible rates of growth
and do it in a way which enmesh this country into our region
and that is necessary for the facts of geography and geo-politicS.
Now I think that we can say one very specific thing that we
have achieved in that part. YOU will recall that before we
came to office the basic debate in this whole area that we're
talking about is the extraordinarily sterile and ultimately
useless debate about protection whether we're going to have more
protection or less protection. Now we jumped that hurdle. As a
result I think basically of that recent visit to Asia there's been
an acceptance of what I've been saying that Australian industry
must restructure and through time that's going to involve
a gradual lowering of protection and the discussion now in
our country is how we go about that restructuring.
EVANS: Has it really been accepted as widely as YOU suggest it
has -Imean there's quite a lot of resistance from people in tie
heavy manufacturing sector. who fear that their jobs would be at
risk. No you're in the media you've got to make the
distinction between a person getting a headline because
he makes a reactive shout and the considered opinion of
the wider constituency of which he's part. Now true it
is that a couple of trade union people did give a knee-jerk
reaction. But the fact is that the ACTU at the Economic Planning
Advisory Council meeting after my return said there in that body
we've studied what the Prime Minister has said, we support him.
EVANS: You said you don't really approve of the Party's gee whiz
approach to where we're going.
I don't.
EVANS: But in the case of manufacturing industry, for
example, I think people would like to see some kind
of a Picture of what Australia's going to be like in five or t'en
years hence. What sorts of industries are we going to be doing
without? Where will people be working? What will they be doing?
Let me give you the background statistic so that WE: can
get the right context. In 1966 26% of employment was in
manufacturing. Now in February of this year that's down to just
under 18%, so there's been a massive restructuring and charge
in Australian industry that's-takenplaceAnd unless we understand
that the discussion is pointless. It starts from the basis that
everything has remained unchanged but suddenly we' 1re going to0 do
something different. The point Of my Government's approach is
4.
P. M. cont.: this that that change that' s taken place
has been unstructured, un-thought through, unplanned, it hasn't
involved trying to make sure that we do the things most that
we can do best. and most efficiently. Now what we;-are about is
perhaps best illustrated here by what we've done in the steel industry.
When we came to office the threat was that the steel industry
was going to disappear from this count~ ry. Now that was an
unacceptable stupidity as far as I was concerned and I said it
wouldn't happen. We would involve the'. aovernmnent in'the reStructurLr
approach. Now what we did was to sit down with BHP and the unions
and ourselves and we got a commitment from each to make sure that
the industry became more efficient. That involved the industry
undertaking a commitment to invest $ 800 milli~ n over a period of
four years. It involved the unions undertaking to change their
work practices to increase productivity and on our part it meant
assistance via bounties.. to reduce the adverse downstream cost
effect. Now in the result the Australian steel industry has
not only survived, but it's become more profitable and more
efficient. I've just recently been in Newcastle and it -was a matt,
of enormous satisfaction to me to go out to the steel mill and
have the workers and management just saying to me, the thing is
working now, it's more efficient, it's better for all of us.
bounties
EVANS: But can we afford/ for all sorts of industries if they're
going to run into that kind of problem. There are going to be quite
a few. Not necessarily. But let me give you the next example
of what we're working on.-the vexed motor vehicle industry.
Before this year is out, well before it's out, we will' have in
place a new plan for the post-84 period. And that will involve
the emergence of an industry which through time will become
more efficient, more competitive and one which will over all
contribute more to the Australian economy. And we will do that
in the same way essentially through talking with the companies anc
the unions, and John Button, my Minister for Industry and Commerce,
is just going overseas to Japan in particular to talk to the
companies over there.
EVANS: Will it involve those same elements of requiring the
industry to invest and to increase its efficiency and unions
to make sacrifices.
I don't like the word sacrifices because if you talk to
the workers up in the steel mill they won't talk about it . now in
terms of sacrifices.
EVANS: They're still in work.
They have got jobs and they are happier. I was talking to
one and he said look, my job is to be in charge of the actual
industrial relations situation in these sections. He said we
used to be having a stoppage a month. He said now we've had
twelve months no stoppage.
EVANS: Wle have been inefficient in large measure. What chance
do we have of moving in as you've suggested and enmeshing ourselves
in Asia in that particular field where! there's so much
competition?
41* 5.
We have very good chances because we have demonstrated
one doesn't have to be hypothetical about this Australian
manufacturing industry has shown its capacity to compete in the
toughest markets in the world against the toughest competition
because as Australians we mustn't get this idea that we have
some inferior capacities. Our pure research will match up
to just about any in the world. Where our problem in the pAst
has been to a large extent is in applying that researdh into
industry and making sure that we've got the infrastructure
to take advantage. But we've shown that we can do that.'
EVANS: We've talked about restructuring industry. It's going to
be a slow process, it's going to be a gradual process. But what
are the other changes in our society. I mean for example we've
got to meet our daily bills, we've got to provide our welfare-and
so on. The Australian community has invested in you, and
very obviously they have, a great deal of qood will. Are theie
sacrifices that they now need . to make in order to tide us through'
this time of change, till we reach some kind of economic equilibrium?
To somae extent. And that's happening. It's always been
the attitude, for instance, of the trade union movement that
w4& ve been fashioned in this great period of post-war years
that they could look each year to significant real increases
in standards. Now they understand I think that what we've really
got to do as Australians now is not to be in the immediate
term looking for significant increases in our standards. It's
a legitimate aim to try and maintain what we've got and that's
what the operation of the accord is about now. And I think that
their cnitnent to that accord, of not trying to use their muscle
in areas of emerging prosperity involves a sacrifice and I welcome it
as I welcome the great co-operation of the business community. In
other words economics really and economic development is about your
time scale. You have got to understand that if you are really going
to have a substantial basis upon which to get improved standards
you've got to lay the economic framework for doing it over the longer
period and that may mean postponing your immediate satisfactions.
Now, I think that essentially that is what Australia is about at the
present. EVANS: Do you believe there's a need at
this time to restate the aims of the Summit, perhaps even
focussing the public mind with a similar kind of approach.
We'renot having another Summit, but. I think we may give
some public expression to what the accord. has been about and
what it's achieved. There's been suggestions from both sides
of industry that we should do that because it's worked so well
for them both. And if I can just complete the point that I was
* making about your general question about are we now involved in
getting a new relationship the answer is yes, because you're
having industry and the unions and governments meeting together
and working together now in a way they've never done before.
And they are getting the habit of co-operation and the attitude
of co-operation and that's essential.
6.
EVANS: Do you think business has responded in the way you
wanted it to in terms of investment or is that yet to be tested?
Yes, it is the case in economic recovery and the economic
cycle that private business investment tends to omel in the latter stages
of that recovery. W~ hat we've done is create the ideal
environment for further investment. That is by bringing down
interest rates and gradually we'll be withdrawing proportionately
from the capital markets:' and our demands upon them. With interest
rates down, inflation down, unit labour costs now have com'e
down to a point where they are getting by the end of this year unit labour
costs will be down to what they were at the base period of 1966-72.
And so when you take all those things into account the environment's
there and I believe private investment will start to provide that
surge for further growth.
EVANS: To what extent do you agree with the proposition that i't
was in fact the previous government's wage pause rather than your
wage accord which. provided much of the impetus that, has resulted
in the good figures of the country's..
Well if you'Ire going to talk about their wage pause what ycu ' ye
got to remember is that it was their criminally irresponsible wages
policy in the period ' 80, ' 81, ' 82 which led to an unsustainable
wages explosion which brought about the severest recession in this
country since the Great Depression. And to talk about the pause
that they then imposed on that situation, as though that
was the stroke of economic genius does less than justice to the patterni
of their economic approach. Now we realised that what You've
got to do in government is to build a wages policy not just
for a recession, in a sense you didn't need the wages pause because
the recession would have Virtually done it anyway. What's necessary
for the future of this country is to have a wages policy for
recovery and growth. And that's what we've done. We've got the
habit of commitment of the trad dinion movement to a centralised
system which is going to./ wag s explosion because as we now come
into this high growth period which we are in, that if you didn' t
have such a policy of restraint would mean that you'd get back
to what you in 80/ 81/ 82 which would have wages going through
the roof, which would guarantee the end of expansion.
EVANS: But this high growth rate isn't going to continue next
year is it.
Of course and we've said quite clearly you can't expect
to continue 10% through the year growth, the highest in the world.
EVANS: What are we expecting for the next year or two in the growth
p. m. Well it will be a low rate of growth, but it will be a' significant gIrowth
rate which what we aim to have is high enopugh gradually to make a dent
in unemployment because you get your growth in the workforce and
so you've got to have a high enough growth rate to cover
productivity and the growth in the workforce. So you need growth
Of the order of 4 to 5 per cent to start to make that dent. And
I'll believe we'll achieve that.
EVANS: What's going to'happen at the Conference later on this year.
Have you got it all tied up so you're not going to have any
problems. Are-they going to tear themelves apart or are they goingr to
agree sweetly? There will never be, I hope, a Labor Party conference
where there are no problems. We ' d all die of heart attacks arid"
shock. But what there will be I think is a conference where the
overwhelming majority of delegates will be committed to acquiring
good sense, to recognising the very significant achievements of
this government in office and to try and far as possible to get
agreed positions. Now that doesn't mean that there won't be
some argument about issues. For instance, on uranium
I believe that the Government's position will be sustained buz,
those who don' t agree entirely with that will certainly be putting another
position. But the great thing about the end of last year and
into this year within the Party has been that this debate f
is now at a much more rational level than it's ever been before.
EVANS: You say it will be sustained but do you believe that the policy will
be altered sufficiently to allow greater flexibility On muining and export of uranium.,
Well the position that the Government has adopted will allow
the development of Ro-. cby.
EVANS: I mean going beyond that
Well, yesJ. think that the conference is really going to
be looking at this issue of uranium in the broader sense. I think
this has been reflected what's been happening in the community in
recent months. You will notice that even in the great rallies
that occurred just in the last weekend or so that the focus was
more on disarmament than on uranium as such. And that's right
because this Government has done more in its year of office
positively in the area of disarmament than any other Government's
done before and it's always been an issue of fundamental
importance to me and it is to my Ministers. So that we will be
concentrating on the need to prevent the proliferation of nuclear
weapons horizontally.
EVANS: ARe you going to get a nuclear weaporn free zone in this
area. Well we've* advocated it strongly. Last year at the South
Pacific Forum we got the support of basically the countries Of
the area. I put it directly to the President * of the United
States and his administration there that we intend to press for
it and they understand. that. We will press for that in all
relevant forums. It's not something again which you achieve
overnight. EVANS: What's a reasonable time frame? You sound hopeful.
Well I don't believe in giving people false expectationS.
All I can say is that we will raise it again at the Forum in
August of this year and I don't know how long it will take. But
in all forums, in the United Nations, in other international
meetings we will be doing what I've done during this year at
the CHOGM conference in Dehli I took a le ' ading role in pressing
the importance of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. I had
a pretty hefty' go i-n with Mrs Ghandi on this issue and they
don't believe in the non-proliferation treaties. I do and we do
and we're going to continue to press for that.
EVANS: What do you think of being called by Helen Caldicott the
most dangerous Prime Minister Australia's ever had.
I'm not going to engage in a public airing of my views about
Dr Caldicott. If she wants to do that that's her business.
EVANS: Do you expect a debate at that level at the Conferen~ e at all.
It will be, with all due respect to Dr.' Caldicott, it~ will
be a more rational and sensible discussion than she's enabled the
Australian community to have.
EVANS: The draft platform on the economy that's comre from Mr Keating for
the Conference does seem to point to a number of things
it points to restraint, it points to expectations being geared
over time, but it also points I think to the possibility of the
Government looking for more an alternative area! of taxation,
in the indirect tax field. Is that something which really aify
Government would have to fall into.
Any government which is sensible about thinking of,) the
future of this country has got to look at: the revenue base.
To assume that the mish mash of revenue measures which comes -to
make up the current total, efforts by government to get its revenue,
to assume that that is ideal is an exercise in lunacy. Of course
it's not ideal. So what we're doing within EPAC and in general
discussion in the community is try and examine where we are,
whether there are better more efficient and more equitable ways
of providing Government. with its revenue to assist the community
with the doing of the things that the community wants done.
And so we've got to get rid of this concept that we as a Government
are taxers n hr are taxpayers that pay. What Government is about. is a
transfer of revenue from the -community in various . ways so tha-:
the Government can do the things that thE! community wants. And
so the sensible thing to do is to have an interaction with the
community and its representatives to see from their point of view
how they think it's -most efficient and equitable to make tha:-
transfer so that we can do the things they want.
EVANS: A. lot of people believe that your Government hasn't really bitten
the bullet hard enough on'that in transferring, tor example, in-the
distribution of wealth. question whether you've letthe wealthy* get
Off a bit too lightly. so far.
Well you sa h s me pe ) le say that. I suppose you'll always
have some critics/ IT 9 MoM90.-All I can say is that I'm prepared
and more than happy to point at what we've done in our first year
in office in the welfare area ~ with the very stringent circumstances
economically that we've inherited. We targetted in on those areas
most in need and so you have the single dole that will have gone
up by 20 percent by May of this year, the benefit. The benefiLt
for those recipients of welfare with dependant children have gjone
up by 20 percent. So we've targetted in with our limited resources on'those
areas in greatest.. need and we are now undertaking in all the areas
of welfare and tax related areas studies as to what are the most
appropriate areas in the future to provide assistance. Ourl rec-ord
will stand up with any Government in the post-war period.
EVANS: This country's fascinated with you at the moment. Its
Popularity rating of you is enormously high. I wonder if in any
way you feel. that that gives you a leg-in, if it gives you an
advantage does it make governing easier, does it mean in a sense
that you have a responsibility to the people that goes beyond that
to the Party.
9.
There are a bag of questions'in that Well let me
say these things which I think are relevant to the various points
you raised. I guess any po~ litical leader would prefer to have
a higher rating than a low one and anyone who says the opposite, thin),
is not telling the truth. Obviously I am happy about the high
ratings, but also that the rating that the Government gets, it indicate
to me that people approve of the sort of approach that. I'm
adopting and that gives you confidence to go on with that sort
of consultative approach that I have. It gives me the feeling
that that's what they want and so in that sense it makes it easier.
It does have this aspect to it Huw that it gives you a considerable
sense of responsibility that you know that you've got that -confidence
and you mustn't abuse that it and I try not to.
There are those who
EVANS: / wonder how you'd be if you didn't have that popularity.
rating, whether you'd ' go nasty on us.
No, I'm by nature a decent sort of bloke, you know I uiLdn't do
that.
EVANS: You do think long term. You're obviously planning on being around
for the bicentennial.
I hope that our Government will be there and that I'll be
leading it.
EVANS: How long would you like to go, have you thought about that?
Well, I don't know whether most politicians think like this
but I think one of the reasons why I rate pretty well is that
people know that they can trust me and believe me and I can tell
you that I haven't thought, and don't think in terms of personal
ambitions for breaking records in office and so on. I really have
an ambition to be able to say at the end of my term of office
that we had changed this society and made it a better more cohesive,
happier, better-structured society one which is going to be better
for the next generation of Austral. ians and if that can be done
in eight years, ten year, whatever it is, then that's what I'mn about.
It's certainly encompasses the bicentennial period.
EVA~ NS: No doubt. To exceed Menzies, the single longest
of course you'd have to still be here by 2,000 you'd be over
Not a prospect? I haven't addressed my mind to that yet.
EVANS: Prime Minister thank you for talking with us on this our
first edition of Pressure Point.