J -_ jAUST RALIA IPRIME
MENISTER
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
TRANSCRIPT: " THE MIKE WALSH SHOW", TCN CHANNEL NINE, SYDNEY.
INTERVIEW WITH THE PRIME MINISTER,
THE HON. R. J. L. -HAWKE, AC, LP.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, 26TH SEPTEMBER 1984
WALSH: Welcome Mr. Prime Minister, and Bob may I say that I don't
want to dwell on the family thing at all and I don't think we'll
discuss it here today excqpt to say, on behalf of all of the
Ui1-e Walsh Show viewersand myselfA that we're very proud of the way
Hazel handled it the other night and so must you be, and we feel
for your as a family. OK? That's all we wanted to say.
PRIME MINISTER: Thank you very much.
VALSH: So Okay Bob, let's get back into the ring and it's politics,
right? PRIME MINISTER: Okay.
TIALSH: We had Andrew Peacock on the show yesterday and his main
line of, shall we say, approach. seemed to be the Costigan Report
and he is playing along with that and he says that's the big issue
at the moment organised crime in this country and he quoted
Costigan himself and the quote was: " Inconsistent and disastrous
to your Government's oft-expressed desire to attack sophisticated
crime". So that's what Costigan apparently said to you when he
heard that you were winding up the Costigan Report.
PRIME MINISTER: Well that's not an accurate way of putting it,
of course, There have been discussions which went on between
Commissioner Costigan and the previous Government.
WALSH: Yes exactly, we pointed that out yesterday.
PRIME MINISTER: And with this Government. And it's been common
to both Governments that here was a Royal Commission which is not
a nomal instrument for a continuing fight against organised crime.
Let me make it clear in saying that: that that involves no explicit
or implicit condemnation of Commissioner Costigan. I mean I'm on
the public record, in the Parliament and outside, of saying he has
done a tremendous job for Australia. But what the Fraser Government
and this Government have had in common is that we always intended
that that short term Royal Commission would be subsumed into a
permanent National Crimes Authority. Now It's quite clear that there
are differences of emphasis, not only on the part of Mr. Commissioner
Costigan but of other people, as to what is the appropriate time and
form of transition. So we have been through all that and what we
S1% t1 r A & Aj Ptl J. l Wf & JLAl U. IfV
have done now is to get a position where we think that you have got
an institution which meets the three requirements that Australian
society needs in having a permanent authority to fight crime.
That is, it must be an effective instrument to fight crime,
WALSH: Well that's what he was concerned with yesterday. He said
it's a toothless tiger.
PRIME MINISTER: No well let me make these points about that and
I think this is I mean I don't want to get into talking about
Mr. Peacock for fairly obvious reasons but I think the great
disservice that is being done to this community in its fight against
organised crime and I think it goes without saying there is no one
more dedicated to getting the criminals of this country behind bars,
and particularly in regard to the major area of what we know is
involved in organised crime, than I am. I want to get every one
of them behind bars so that we can eliminate. these abominations.
Now you've got to do that in a way which is effective. Now what do
you do to ensure effectiveness? Firstly, you have got to ensure
that all the material, the faluable material, that has been got
together by Mr. Commissioner Costigan is made available handed
over to the National Crimes Athority. And that is being done
all of it not only the material and his 42 lines of investigation
but his staff, his analysts, his accountants, his solicitors all
the investigation techniques are being handed over. Now what I
was saying is that what I find so disturbing: about what is being
done by Mr. Peacock and others is that they are undermining the
integrity and the authority of the National Crimes Authority.
WALSH: Well they are implying that it's toothless, yes.
PRIME MINISTER: Well you see that means that you are saying that
Mr. Justice Stewart I mean, than whom there is no more highly
respected crime fighter in Australia that he would accept the
Chairmanship of a National Crimes Authority which is a toothless
tiger; that Mr. Bingham, a Liberal Minister from the State
Government of Tasmania, and Mr. Dwyer from Victoria who, let me
remind you, were unanimously endorsed by all the State Governments
and the Northern Territory. Now are all the State Governments,
Liberal and Labor, going to give their endorsement to an authority
under Mr. Justice Stewart and with a former Liberal Minister,
Mr. Bingham, are they going to give their authority to a toothless
tiger? It is one which carries on all the material from
Mr. Commissioner Costigan. We are not closing down the work of
Mr. Commissioner Costigan. We are doing what the previous
Government and this Government has said that you've got to set
up a permanent authority which will fight crime and importantly,
Mike, will take account of the rights and the civil liberties of
individuals.
WALSH: Well that's what's worrying me about it because there is
a bit of a McCarthyism thing about the thing isn't there?
PRIME MINISTER: Of course, look with all the depth of feeling
that I have on this issue I still recognise that the rights and
civil liberties of individuals cannot be swept aside. We are not
going to have in this society, in our unshakeable commitment to
fight organised crime and to get those people behind bars that
should be behind bars, we are not going to eliminate our concern
for the rights of individuals. We are not going to have trial by
~ i~ ii~
headlines. We are not going to have trial by smear and innuendo.
People are going to have the rights to be tried by their peers
after proper investigation. So we are going to have an effective
crime authority, we are going to protect the rights of individuals,
and importantly, we are going to have the cooperation of the States.
And that is why, Mike, we have got the situation that Special
Prose tor Redlich has said: at page 48 of his report he said
the community has debated this issue, they have taken these three
things into account; that is, having an effective instrument to
fight crime, the protection of the rights of individuals, and the
cooperation of the States. He said now those things have been
properly taken into account with the setting up of this Authority.
He said what's required is now to have the community allow that to
work. I think it's a tragedy that the authority and capacity of
this National Crimes Authority is being questioned.
WALSH: Bob if I just may make a point.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
WALSH: I think we have all seen these Commissions come and go and
you hear names bandied about I agree with you, let's not bandy
them about publicly, it's just absolutely irresponsible but there
is obviously a group of people running all these rackets in the
country heroin behing one of them and you hear all this thing
about we're going to get them we're going to get them we're
going to get them another commission another commission
nothing every happens. I mean, could you say to me in 12 months
time we'll have got them?
PRIME MINISTER: I can say this, that we're very much more likely
in 12 months to have them than we would have been before because
we will have all the work every part of the work of Commissioner
Costigan which, without any disrespect to Mr. Costigan, and he
has said this himself, contains evidence which will be admissable
and a lot of evidence which will not be admissable.
WALSH: Hearsay.
PRIME MINISTER: Now what you have got to do therefore is to have
an authority which will concentrate on obtaining sifting out all
the admissable evidence which will then go to prosectution
because that's what we've got to get under way. Now let me just
make the point about the commitmnnt to this question and the
attitude on the National Crimes Authority: r. Commissioner
Costigan brought down his most damning report in December of 1981
where be said his investigations had led him to organised crime
which he described as the fastest growing industry in Australia.
Now this was December 1981, Mike, and he said that this was the
fastest growing industry in Australia, particularly in the last
five years. That is, from 1976 to 1981. Now you know who was in
power then, and that's when it grew. Now the next Budget that
our opponents had when they were then in Government came in 1982
and they allocated $ 2.9 million for resources of the Costigan
Commission. In my first Budget the next year I more than doubled
the resources -the financial resources. I7e had doubled the resources
available to the Costigan crime commission because of our commitment
and we are going to make sure that all those resources go across to
the National Crimes Authority. And may I make this point:
Mr. Peacock is now talking about what he feels about the National
Crimes Authority it being a toothless tiger I just want to make / 4
this point to you and to the people of Australia when this Bill
establishing the National Crimes Authority was in the Parliament
in the Second Reading Speech that is when you put your position,
your view. I spoke in that debate in the Parliament. Mr. Peacock
did not speak in the debate that's how much he was interested in
and concerned with the structure of the National Crimes Authority.
He did not speak in the debate. There was not a division on the
Second Reading. They did not seek to divide the House. The Bill
went through in those circumstances without Mr, Peacock speaking
against it. So that's the judgement you can make.
WALSH: Alright. Well we'll leave that just as it is. Now we're
going to do the interview in two parts. In the second part there's
a lot of other points we want to cover but just before I get off
the Costigan report and you explained quite a lot we contacted
Senator Fred Chaney, the Leader of the Liberals in the Senate,
right?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
WALSH: Because Don Chipp had said that he was going to have
Mr. Costigan brought before the Senate. The comment from him was
that their main concern is that the Costigan Report come into
Parliament rather than Mr. Costigan himself and that there is a
chance for debate on that'report before Mr. Hawke dissolves
Parliament and goes into an election. You haven't announced the
election yet have you?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
WALSH: We'll get to that after in ten years time. ( laughs)
PRIME MINISTER: That'll be after the third Hawke Government.
WALSH: Now Senator Fred Chaney said he had had some discussions
with Senator. Chipp and they are looking at the proposal but have
not yet decided whether this step should be taken. What would
your feelings be would you be worried about Costigan going
before the Senate?
PRIME MINISTER: Not only not worried about it.
WALSH: Would it serve any purpose?
PRIME MINISTER: Tell, you talked about Senator Chipp, let me,
I think the way we can get to the point about Senator Chipp's
view on this is just to quote Senator Chipp for whom, as you know,
I have great respect in these matters. I'll just make two quotes
about it. This is from the 24th of September.: e said: " It was
always the intention even of Mr. Fraser's Government to hand over
Mr. Costigan's work to the National Crime Authority" so he says
" So I'm surprised at questions journalists are still asking will
the National Crime Authority be able to do what Mr. Costigan did?
It will presuming it has the ability to do, it's certainly got the
capacity, and I've got enormous faith in the three members of it
headed by Ur. Justice Stewart". And just again, he said this, I
think it's very pertinent because you were talking about him, he
said and this is Senator Chipp " My second information is, and
I had a courtesy call from the three members of the National
Crime Authority Mr. Justice Stewart and his two colleagues, one
of whom I must remind you is a former Liberal leader in Tasmania,
Mr. Max Bingham a man of undoubted integrity,-and they assured
me without any equivocation that they were happy with the takeover,
i~ i
WALSH: -In other words you telegraph the information for guys to
get out of the country or whatever.
PRIME MINISTER: Yes sure. Sc what I'm saying is Mr. Peacock
if he is still then Leader of the Opposition will have the
full report. The Leader of the Opposition will have everything.
We won't try and hide it, they'll have it, and the only nonpublication
of names will be to satisfy the requirements of the
investigating authorities so their capacity won't be diminished
and the rights of individuals.
WALSH: Okay, well we'll take a break there.
COMMERCIAL BREAK
WALSH: I keep bringing up Andrew's name butjl did ask him
yesterday would he like to ask you a question because Parliament
isn't sitting at the moment.
PRIME MINISTER: He hasn't asked me one when they are sitting so
he may as well do it when it's not.
WALSH: Alright, well I've got the tape here so Andrew can ask it
himself. GRAB OF TAPE OF YESTERDAY'S INTERVIEW
WALSH: Well now Mr. Hawke will be on the program tomorrow, is
there any question you'd like me to ask him for you?
PEACOCK: Yes, a whole schedule of them Michael.
WALSH: No, you've got one. I'll ask the others.
PEACOCK: I've got one?
V/ ALSH: Yes.
PEACOCK: Why does he want an early election?
BACK TO INTERVIEL1 VITH PRIMAE MINISTER
PRI! 4E MINISTER: Well the answer is very, very simplq; because I
want to save the Australian people from the insanities which were
inflicted upon them by his Goverrment. What happened is that
by calling that early election in Iarch.
W7ALSH: But Malcolm Fraser did.
PRIME MINISTER: Well Mr. Peacock aas part of the Government. One
assumes he was told occasionally what his Government did. There
the whole question of elections of the Senate and the House of
nepresentatives were put out of kilter.
W7ALSH: Oh right.
PRIME MINISTER: Now it , i: eans under the Constitution of Australia
there must be an election for half the Senate by, as we're told by
the Electoral Commission, by about April of next year. So there .1 /' 7
, asou', ' HEM MIKE WALSH SHOWPage 6
age ag
with the changeover, they had ho problems, and in fact they were
looking forward with great anticipation to the massive job ahead
of them". So the point I'm making is that here are these three
men of integrity saying and I had them in my office I said
to Mr. Justice Stewart is there any more, anything else, you
want my Government to do for the National Crimes Authority to
equip you to do your task. I said " You are satisfied you can do
the task?". He said " Yes". Now why, therefore, do I have any
concern about Mr. Costigan, or the National Crimes Authority? Let
them all say here is the National Crimes Authority saying it's
equipped to do the; task. Would I set up a body that couldn't do
the job?
WALSH: No. That's really the question, isn't it? What about
this are you going to allow for debate on the Report in
Parliament before it goes into recess?
PRIME MINISTER: Well I have said I have answered this in the
Parliament I have said that if we get it and Mr. Costigan has
asked for another extension which I have given him ' til the end of
October now I have said if the Parliament is not sitting I have
said I will'make the full report available to Mr. Peacock. There
will not be any part of that report not fully made available to
the Opposition and I will seek then to make if the Parliament
is not sitting to make it publicly releasable under the
techniques that are available if the Parliament is not sitting.
It may be that we can get it via the Speaker. But there will be
no attempt on our part to bottle up the Costigan Report.
WALSH: The thing is we're getting back to this. defamation not
defamation innuendo and the slanders that are running around
at the moment. If you release a Report like that in its full a!
lot of people who may not deserve it will get their names dragged
in the mud. I mean I was watching the Petrov thing the other night
on Nationwide where they did the very excellent coverage of it, and
you got that Document J that came out and it was just a load of
rubbish absolute rubbish but it did mention a lot of people's
names and besmirch them.
PRIME MINISTER: Pretty shabby document. It did.
7ALSH: Well is that likely with the Costigan Report?
PRIME MINISTER: No. you see what's happened with previous Reports,
and I would think it would be the case with Mr. Commissioner Costigan,
that he would recommend to the Government that names not be
published. Because you see this has happened before.
WALSH: Yes but everyone is filling in the blanks as it is, aren't
they? PRIhE IIINISTER: Well, yes, and that technique I believe is
UcCarthyist. I mean however deep one's feelings are, and no one has
deeper feelings on this matter than I do, you still have to give to
people individuals the rights of fair trial, and that's why
where previous reports have been given to governments actual names
are excluded. This is not only the protection of the individual
but it's the protection of the authority that's going to subsequently
pursue the investigations because their capacity to pursue their
investigations is limited if names are put out in advance.
sAb&. i
has got . to be an election in Australia by April of next year for
half the Senate. Then if we didn't have the Houseof Representatives
with the half Senate you'd have to have an election for the House
of Representatives about the end of next year. So what I'm
going to do is to have an election early for both the House of
Representatives and the half Senate, and at the same time I'll be
putting a referendum to the people of Australia saying now change
the Constitution so that in future the elections must be simultaneous
so we can't have this business of unnecessary elections being
imposed by the Parliament. So that if we have this election now
early for the House of Representatives and the half Senate and
then we won't have to have another unnecessary election and I
believe the people will support the simultaneous election and then
never again will a Prime Minister be able to play around with this
election timetable.
WALSH: Do you want to take the opportunity today to announce the
election date? I'll extend you this unique and rare privilege.
PRIME MINISTER: ( laughs) Mike I love you dearly, I'd love to
give you a scoop.
WALSH: Yes?
PRIME MINISTER: No.
WALSH: ( laughs) Still it was a good old Irish try though, wasn't
it? Now there is one thing I'd like you to explain your position
on because it is one that concerns me and that's the assets test.
Now Andrew yesterday I'm sorry that name comes up again but he is
Leader of the Opposition he said that this assets test is going
to cost the Government $ 55 million and in fact, you know, if you'
just gave $ 55 million away to each pensioner they'd get 350 a week.
Now you know, what is the point of the assets test? Is it to save
money? PRIME MINISTER: The point of the assets test is this, and I have
explained it very carefully and I had long discussions with
pensioner groups and I think overwhelmingly they understand it, it
is that
VALSH: Well with all due respect I don't think they do. I think
it's been it's a bit too complicated.
PRIME MINISTER: Well of course there are people who don't understand
all the fine details but the essential point is this: this
Australian population is aging und any Government is going to have
an increasing burden upon it that means the taxpayers to sustain
the elderly who have made their contribution to the society and
who deserve the support of the people in their latter years. Now
what has been recognised is that it makes sense not to pay a pension
to everyone to the multimillionaire with assets. It is just
stupid. Take a person like myself: by the time I retire I would
be in a pension, and I would be covered by a Parliamentary pension,
but I'm saying someone like myself
VASLH: If you were a businessmen earning that sort of money, ye; 3.
/ 8
c u--r~ i
PRIME MINISTER: The asset rich and income rich now it's not right
that people like that, and very, very wealthy people, should be
paid out pensions which mean that the great majority who are in
need will have less available to them. Now that's not just my view.
It was a view that was put by this gentleman you talk about,
Mr. Peacock, in September ' 81 when he was on the Backbench in
Opposition. He made a speech and then one at the Press Club in
which he made exactly the same point. He said that social welfare
payments should be means tested. Now he said it. John Howard,
the Shadow Treasurer, completely supports the concept of an assets
test. Senator Chaney, when he was the shadow spokesman in the
Senate. Mr. John Eliot, one of the pretenders to the Peacock throne,
if I could put it that way, outside the Parliament and a leading
figure of the Liberal Party, has made it quite clear that he
supports it. Mr. Alexander Downer who is a speechwriter and an
assistant to Mr. Peacock and an endorsed Liberal candidate
recently came out and congratulated the Government for its decision,
In other words there is an understanding right across the political
spectrum that if we're going to help the great majority who need
help then don't let's waste resources on the very wealthy minority.
Now, what are the statistics? The statistics are these: that out
of the whole pensioner group it's estimated that only about 2%
will be affected.
:. ALSH: Yes, and that doesn't mean totally affected
like tney get nothing there'll be those who would still get
something. PRIME MINISTER: There will be some who get something. Now I just
believe that the overwhelming majority of Australians believe
that that's fair. We ought to look after the people who need it
and that's not just people on high level income. People are going
to be able to have a very high level of assets as you appreciate.
You know the statistics their home and you know 100,000 other
assets. Now this is going to mean that the groat majority of
people aren't going to be adversely affected but any Government
in the future is going to have that much more money available
from what they've saved to give to that 98% who really do need help.
WALSH: I think what's freaking people out more than anything else
is the form that's coming out. Now as I hoar it it is about a
four-page form and an eight-page explanation to go with it
for God's sake that's really Government gobbledy-gook there.
PRIME MINISTER: No it's not, there's been a great deal of
misrepresentation. 85% approximately that's the best information
we've got wont. t need to fill in that form bacause it will be
perfectly clear that they are not caught.
? WALSH: What like you get to question 2 and then you realise you
don't have to go any further?
PRIMIE MINISTER: Yes. It's a self-assessment thing. Once it's
quite clear to you that you're not covered by the level of assets
you've got you don't have to fill in that form. The greatly
overwhelming majority of people are not going to have to fill in
that form.
WALSH: Well it's been lovely to have you with us and thanks for
giving us the time. ooo0ooo
~~~ tno~ unT LIEi MIKE 17ALSH SH017Page 8