TRTASCRIPT PRESS CONFERE: iCE WITH PR. IME[ M, I NISTER SUVA,
.1.00 P. 14M., 29 st 1984,
E E PROOF C: LY
Well ladies and gentlemen I've just had talks with
Prime Minister of Fiji, Ratu Mara, and members of the
Cabinet and I'm pleased to say that in the view. of both
the Prime Minister of Fiji and myself that the bilateral
relations between our two countries are in excellent shape
and I believe-that they , ill become even stronger. Not
only are our bilateral relations in good shape but we share
perceptions in regard to matters effecting the region, both in
economic co-operation and regional security terms. So this
has been a very cordial, productive meeting.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister could you refer to some
specific issues that you may have taken up with the Prime
Minister, our Prime Minister or some issues that our Prime
Minister may have raised with you.
The only matter that the Prime Minister alluded to and
which he indicated didn't need any spelling out between us
was the area of trade under the SPARTECA arrangements, and they
have some concerns in regard to apparel and the content and
origin. But that matter has already been discussed in a recent
meeting with our officials and we have an understanding that
we'll continue those discussions and I believe those matters
will be sorted out. It's not a matter of problem between us.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister you said you discussed regional
security with matters. Did the Prime Minister express any
concern thatNew Zealand's decision not to allow U. S. nuclear
ships into its ports might weaken ANZUS and therefore weaken
the position of Fiji.
I think the question of discussions between leaders
of two Governments involving other Governments, it's notappropriate
to go into those matters. But I can make the general comment
that the strength and viability of ANZUS is a matter of
interest to the Government of Fiji and so they are interested
in current developments, but I don't go to the question of
discussions between us involving other countries.
JOURNALIST: Did he ask for more aid from Australia?
No.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, the Australian High Commissioner
in Suva is to have an Australian Defence official attached to
it. Does that mean that Australia is going to somehow increase
its very sniall military invovlement in Fiji. / 2
2.
P. M. No, I believe that there is satisfaction here and in
Au trat ] a k., tthce of t2 cfn; c c o--opcr tic t st.
T--ere has nIo; incic. tionC o : ivss ". out It
sCems to be work in: well, not only directly in . he co-oer: Ction
which includes technical assistance, it includes training in
Australia. I think as of the last year there are : 49 members of the
Fijian defence forces who have been undergoing some form of
training courses in Australia. So in the direct force to force
co-operation and the training co--operation, a:' d also in particular
the co-operation which historically and currently taking place
in t he Middle . East I think in all aspects of the relationship
it is satisfactory.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister has the decision by New Zealand
to ban nuclear ships lead to a need to reassure this region
that the security arrangements under ANZUS are still in place.
I don't think it's the right way to put that there's been
a need to reassure. The only partners of the relationship,
as you know, are the three countries Australia, New Zealand
and the United States. But nevertheless you're right in
the assumption that other countries, including Fiji, do have
an interest in the effective operation of that Treaty. I think
that they have been reassured by the strength of the Australian
recommitment to the relationship. And I think they, like
Australia, are taking the sensible view that the issues that
currently exist between the new New Zealand Government and
the United States are in the process of being talked about
at a number of levels to look through. And that's the way
it's got to be and I remain optimistic, I am optimistic that
those processes of discussion will work through in a satisfactory
way. But to go into and try and analyse the stage that those
discussions have reached could be counterproductive, so I'm
not going to enter into it.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister the unemployment is a major
problem in this part of the world and in your ( country) too.
Do you think your Government will consider bringing in some
schemes to take workers from this part of the world, from the
island states of the Pacific, for short periods.
The concept of guest workers has not been accepted by
any Australian Government. It is not a concept which is
accepted currently across the political spectrum in Australia.
So my Government continues what has been a traditional view.
We have opened up Australia in the post war period in an
historically unprecedented way to people from overseas. That
has not on a guest worker basis or temporary basis, but on the
basis of permanent citizenship. The contribution that we are
making in current terms and into the future consists of these
elements. We still have an immigration component in the order
of 70,000. We make contributions to the capacity of other
countries, not merely in general aicd programs which are
calculated to try and assist economic growth in those countries
and therefore to create more employment opportunites but also
in terms of spccific education.: l. op: ortunities. These are the
ways in which meaningfully, Australia tries to do something for
those countries around us which don't have the same economic
advantages that we do. We will continue to do that as I said
/ 3.
P. M. cont.: today we have a program of $ 300 million aid in
the period up to 1987/ 88, . that five year period. And that
aid is not aid which we'determine ourselves and say this
is what should happen, but we have sought to get the vie-.' s
0œ rec: c:; t : rtries a s L ?-tc aid are
likelv to strengthen the i: frastruct.. re of tine recic. ient
countries so that there will be, as a result of the use of
that aid, the creation of miore employment opportunities
within the countries. These are the ways, the specific
concrete ways, in which we think we can be of most assistance.
JOURNALIST: One criticism has been that Australia and other
countries which take people from this part of the world take
skilled workers, professional people, which may be scarce in
this island country. Has this concern been expressed to you
by any of the island people?
No it hasn't been put to me. Obviously, if you are
talking about real assistance both ways there is no point,
from Australia's point of view, in taking components of
immigration for which there is already a surplus of that sort
of labour in Australia. That doesn't do anyone any good.
As far as the areas of skilled shortage, the facts are that
there has been a drastic reduction in Australia in those
components. We had a category of immigration which was called
the skilled shortage component now, that had a very very large
number of components, that has been drastically reduced in
recent times so that the number of people who would be eligible
to come into Australia on the basis of a shortage of that skill
in Australia is now very restricted. So I don't believe that
either from our point of view what makes sense to us internally
or what maybe seen as some sort of potential problem surrounding
countries is an issue at the moment, ir. certainly hasn't been
put to me by anyone.
JOURNALIST: That leads us Prime Minister to the Jackson Report
which recommends that the Tuvalu and Kiribati islanders have
no economic future, virtually no economic future and they should
be resettled in Australia and New Zealand. What are your views
on that report and the reconmmendations?
Well there are two things I would say about that.
Firstly, that the Government has received the Jackson Report
and there is one area of the Jackson Report concerning stucents,
overseas students, which has also been covered by another report
received at the same time, the Goldring Report. Those two reports
are with the Government and particularly in the hands of the
relevant Ministers and we will be receiving submissions on those
reports and coming to conclusions about them in the future, in
the relatively near future. But we haven't as a Government
officially considered our position on the reports. The first
thing I would say, I can't therefore add any second point I
would make in regard to your reference to Tuvalu is that having
just had the pleasure of being there, I am not sure that if I
were a Tuvaluan that I would see a net balance of advantage in
leaving that idealic situation and coming to Australia.
JOUR! NALIST: Prime Minister, you arc f -:; iliar with
Papua New Guinea and I think to the residents of this
country. las your perception of the Pacific been changed
b' wha-t you s'. w l a; 0-Q : Cur tc
t: e :-orum c. s ins i: bt in: u?
Well, let me say again, two things about that.
I believe that it was an e:: tremely useful exercise to have
the Forum meeting in Tuvalu. I think it is right to say
that there was perhaps some not apprehension is not the right
word, some sort of sceptisim about having it there, but I
believe that anyone who went there would not have remained
with that feeling. It was the most direct way in which otlers
of us who are more fortunate by traditional economic criteria
if you say fortune, can see the problems confronting the smnaller
Pacific island states. And I certainly, speaking for myself,
have a much clearer perception now of the issues confrontirg
those states than I did before I went there, so that's useful.
Secondly, I would say in regard to that part of your question
about the Forum, it confirm. ed my view that the Forum is a
useful mechanism, it's, I guess if you look at the whole range
of international institutions and gatherings, it's not one
which ranks high in terms of international recognition, but
I believe that it operates sensibly, its not a high budget
organisation, a million dollars in respect of the actual
organisation, of course there are other economic cooperaticn
elements which occur within that structure. Now it seems to
me to operate in a non-formalised way. The discussions that
are held are not bogged " down by the where-as's and recognising's
and all that perambular nonsense of United Nations Agencies.
It tends to get down to issues and fairly practical issues.
It certainly gives Australia, as the richest, most developed
nation within the Forum, a direct. opportunity to talk with the
leaders of these countries to get a direct understanding of the
sorts of problems they have got and to see for ouselves, as
political leaders, what are the sorts of ways in which our
aid is most likely to be useful. Now I regard the Forum as
very useful practical institution and I am very glad that this
meeting was held in Tuvalu.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, what value do you think the
Ministerial grouping that the Forum decided upon to approach
the Independence Front and the French authorities would have
on New Caledonia on the issue of independence in New Caledonia.
And is Australia going to be a member of that group and if not,
why not. We're not going to be a member of it. Again basically
because it's more appropriate that the countries immediately
involved or directly involved should be part of it. We have
our capacity to talk with France. What will come of it I don't
know. You would have to say that on the experience of last.
year, France wasn't particularly forthcoming when we sought to
get acreement to a delegation from Forum countries to go to
New Caledonia. So I just don't know what their reaction wil].
be. Let how: ever, make this point in regard to their
conzact of z.: is group w. ith the independence front. I hope
that the e:.: istenc: of this cru: of five to have contiruinc
contct . iCth the I. ndeendence Front m-ay be useful in dive: ing
the Front from those developments that I alluded to in Tuv. lu.
P. M. cont That the influence of these five countries of the
Pacific will be such as to persuade the Independence Front not
to co outside the r. eion and seek resort to the p: or-oes; scs of
cL~^ canc: terrmo0r. : T So i hawe t> it1L sC e (: oiiC 7
c:. t of that croup.
JOURNALIST: Do you think once a year is enough for Forum
meetings, is it sufficient or should the Forum leaders should
meet more regularly.
No, once a year is enough. We've all got a range of
responsibilities but what is clear is that there should continue
to be w: hat is-already happened and will happen more I think
a meeting of officials. The role of political leaders is
to review events of the past year, see how they've been operating,
see whether there are some new mechanisms that need to be put
in place and to maintain an interest, to have reports coming
through to you on what's happening. And then meeting once a year
is adequate in those circumstances provided you have the
commitment through at your official level, which we do have.
JOURNALIST: In New Caledonia, sir, there appears to be a very
real threat of violence in that country.
Well it certainly was put to us at the meeting, particularly
by the spokesman for Vanuatu, Father Walter Lini, that tensions
were rising and that there was this possibility. And I expressed
the view at the meeting of our concern of the reported contacts
that had been made recently with Libya. I believe that in the
analysis of recent international events and any application of
good sense to this situation would show that in the intrusion
of elements like that into the scene would be disastrous.
Now one can recognise, and indeed all members of the Forum
have sympathy with the aspirations of the Kanak people, and that
is why we expressed the view in our communique that the French
Government should seek to accelerate the referendum from the
date of 1989 that it's talking about to try and bring it forward.
Yes there is a problem, there is a danger of violence and that's
why I think there is a very considerable responsibility upon
us all to try and persuade the Independence Front not to boycott
the election but try and remain involved in the processes in
the knowledge that they do have a solid basis of sympathy and
support from the countries of the region.
JOURNALIST: Do you think the Libyan element may have been
wanting to get island leaders to apply more pressure on
France. Well I don't know. But as I said at the meeting I'm
not one who easily responds to blackmail or threats and if
people think that they're going to make Australia change its
views by that sort of tactic, then they've got a surprise
waiting. We don't respond to that sort of pressure.
JOURNALIST: Did you speak in favour of f ive ivember groulp.
P 1" !' e211 the f . emc:: brol cr-oul), I ti" Jk r3e-a1l1y1 -cVti Opecl
in so-me inI or! ri aI d iscussion, s ou t: 3.100 thI e form. a. l ses 5io n.
But when it wsbrought. to our attention a . fterl..' ardcs we-wv1ere
auie apny abuut J. L it didn ' t formi part of the actual.
V'iclw as 0 S Cf1lC f Z1 2-1, t 5. VU SOl e n ll& f CS sO
and to cret anl agreed position somelc people lilko to have anot': icr
ele--ent in it, that wsone. ,% nd when it was bi-oucjl tL-o my"
attention I was quite happy about it.
JOU. RNALIST: Have you s-poken to Mr Keating about Mr Stcone s
attack on the_ Government and do VouI be~ iv tht. r Stone
has forfeited the trust of the Gove rnenti L..
P. M. T lhe answ., er to the first part of your que. stion is no,
I haven't s-,. okecn to Kea ting. And seccondly I hae'tgot
anl" desire to enter into any public debate, about the act-ions
of MrStone. VIn much m ore intcrested ill the conl tinuina
evidenco ofL the,; strength1 anlli"! bea nature of th. e
recover y of the Atustral1ian economyw w. hich hais resultled" f rom.
the imlolementation of this cvrnit' eon icdcc; z ons.
JOURNALIST: mr H: Lewhen a Socreta-ry of the Treasury eqates
the Prime Minister w-. ith Napoleon the Plig out of Georqe Orwell's
Animal Farm, don' t you think that requ ireS aI respons-e.
P. M. : If you are a tender soul perhiaps, but you thajt I'm
not a tender soul. If one succum" bed to responidincj to that
weewould you ( let. I1 m uch moreI nLkers ted in the pub Ii c
making its judIgernents about thlt-success or otherwise of th1e
econlom-ic policies that this Governiment has decided upon, p. 1o] ici es
about hiCh we wer~ e certain, even if somite of our advisers
were: n ' t which a re work ing effective Iy Thazt ' s what the people
are concerned ( about whether the policies that we decide uponl
are wrig
JOURNALIST: Prime -Minister, Mr S tonle saciede very concerned0 ab-out
the age grotio from 15 to 19, the pcople who couldn ' t find w.. ork-.
P. M. Well he has expressed his concern. Ile is not Pobinson
Crusoe. We have a ' olitical respons. ibil ity for mzakincg
decisions w-hich are going to imiprove the conditions and the
Possibilities for those people. W've miade them and in the
relatively short p'eriod % we've been in Government the position
forthse cep1 -ihs reakby poved It will continlue
to do so.
JO0U RNA7 LI ST: Do you think its appropri-ate for public S027vanfts
to be mnaking commen,. I ts Onl policy.
P. M. W-, ell I don't rea-lly want to ( jet into this controversy'.
Mr Stone has made his deocision as to how hie should conduct
himself. Thtsfor him. I'm not going to directly or..
indirct l' er~ er that situa. tilon.
JOUP ,: ALI1, S T vou an c7Y2 that Mr11S ' Lone ' r2 comi-mer. tht im
tn~ ure~~ fJ u: 1 C ~ et n I a s Z,~ r atter of
ex-tremC concern: 1 a! C coun id ill fatL~ sustained Cconem13 C
r co \' ry. .1/ 2
JOURNALIST: Does that now mean sir that Australia can
consid erablv i nc its aid to the ; ci. fic isa
It doesn't follow as a matter of logic.
But let me say Australia's record of aid is a good one,
you've heard it welcome today by the Prime Minister of
Fiji. We know that we have done well and we're gratified
that the recipients believe that Australia has acted
within its capacities.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister, going back to the Australian
home scene, how is your relationship with Mr Hayden these
days. It's good.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, the Fijian navy has a very low
opinion of the design for the patrol boat that you would like
to present to the islands, that it's unseaworthy and too small
and they could do a far better job here. Was that discussc.
today No it was not. I mean if the feeling has been as. strong
as your questioning I would have perhaps expected it to be raised.
It wasn't.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, just getting back to that point about
the 15 to 19 age group Mr Stone was the head of Treasury
for a number of years, do you think in some way he has
implemented policy which has created that position.
Oh, I take the view that although there may be evidence
to the contrary, that Mr Stone believes in the Westminster system
and therefore it would be the case that he hasn't implemented
policies in the past, Governments have done it. Now what the
advice has been that he's given and whether that advice has
been accepted in a way which has produced adverse results,
it's not for me to say.
JOURNALIST: As Prime Minister, Mr Hawke, does Mr Stone's
No.
JOURNALIST: Do you think there's a need for setting up a
multi defence force in the Pacific, a peace-keeping force
in the Pacific
No, there is no evidence of any need to do that. I mean
setting up peace keeping forces because problems may arise may
be counterproductive, it may help those problems to arise.
JOURNALIST: Do you think the Pacific islands are taking a firm
enouigh stand against nuclear free vessels, aga. inst nuclea fr. C
testing, sorry.
Yes there are things thit .' er done at the Voru.. i
Firstly, the decision to set up a :-or-king party of officials
on the nuclear free zone concept and that w. as unanimous / 8
P. M. cont... and secondly there was acreement that ind'. vid. cal
tL. is i'sue. So tat sccms to 0 to be evid'nce of tihei
cor:' it'aent to and prep: aredness to act on this issue.
JOURNALIST: Will Australia consider easing the imnmigration
laws to allow free movement of Pacific islanders to and from
Australia? The immigration policy of Australia has been quite c:. ear
under a number of successive governments over recent years and
that is that our immigration policy will rest upon an assessment
of the economic capacity of Australia to absorb migrants that's
the basic element of it. Secondly, it will have a component: of
family reunion in respect of those people who are already
in Australia, they will have the right to bring immediate
members of the family. And third, there is a refugee component.
Fourth there is a business, entrepreneurial component. Those
are the elements, all of which have to fit within the basic
criterion of, as I say, economic capacity. Now that by
definition doesn't mean unlimited immigration.
JOURNALIST; What I meant Mr Prime Minister was that Australia
is now the only country in the Pacific where we need visas to
travel... ( tape break)
This is not a matter which I'm aware has been raised with
my Government so it not having been raised as far as I am aware
I haven't felt compelled to address myself to it.
1(
4 P. M. I'm not going to conduct my analysis in respect of
the Austra. lian econo., where it's been, :' here it is and
in Perth. It's -oi;: t:. es to do so, i ' s c t -ro. i
I will simply do as I have from the 5th of i. arch analyse
with the assistance of our range of advisers where the
Australian economy's been, what appears to be the necessary
decisions to handle those problems and to get it on a better
course. The facts show that we have been dramatically
successful in the single-minded purpose that we've had in
addressing these economic problems. There has never been
such a dramatically successful turn around of the Australian
economy as has occurred since we came in. I remind you of
the elements, the fundamental elements. Economic growth zero
when we came in, the most rapid economic growth in the western
world. Employment we've stopped the explosion of unemployment,
we've created 260,000 new jobs, we're ahead of target.
Inflation we've halved inflation. Interest rates down and
since we've been away, with a new bond tender, interest rates
down further. Now these are the important elements of the
economic situation and we have been successful on all fronts.
We will continue to be successful.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, have Mr Stone's actions presented
a case for accelerating his departure.
No, stones roll at their own pace.
JOURNALIST: Do you regret keeping Mr Stone on as Head of
Treasury. P. 1M.: No.
JOURNALIST: Why
Well for the reasons that I said at the time
I made it clear that I welcomed Mr Stone's preparedness to
express views to the Government, that if he wished to do that
then all that was required was once the decisions were made
by Government, that there'd be an acceptance of those. I
believe that Mr Stone has helped to create a very efficient
Treasury and I've had no reason to change the view that I
and my Treasurer when we came to office. Now what has happened
since is a matter for Mr Stone's decision and I've made it
quite clear throughout this questioning that I'm not going
to enter into any debate about that.
JOURNALIST: Do you think the Treasury will be a better Department
because of his departure.
I'm not going to make any observation on that other than
to say this that I believe, as I've just said a moment ago,
that the Treasury is an excellent Deoartment, there's a lot
of talent there and I believe it will continue to be an
ex cellent De artment. / 3
JOIURN2LIS'F: Mr -xn Iicjht cf Iliwat you've said( 1 wre you
surprised by the vehemenrce of his attack and secondly, 0o yIou
scond for Aniima]. r'aum.
~, as yo-u c~ n I'm fai'rly aa'io> eu t it a4ll
IMichelle. ENMD S