TRANSCRIPT -PRESS CONFERENCE -8October 1984
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
Well ladies and gentlemen any q'j1estions?
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke why do you e'xpect the Australian people to
re-elect you on 1 December--
Because we have delivered the promise that we made to the
Australian people during the election campaign in February-March
of 1983. We said to a sorely divided nation which had suffered
the tragedy of confrontation that we would achieve nation~ al
reconciliation. And on that basis of bringing Australians
together again we would then bring economic recovery and
reconstruction to this country. We have been spectacularly
successful in dcing that. We've changed this country from having
zero economic growth to making the economy, which is growing
faster than any other in the western world, and we've done that: on
the basis of reconciliation. We're at the lowest level of
industrial disputation for 16 years. People now recognise in the
business sector and in the trade unions that their legitimate
aspirations for improving their profitability and their standards
are best achieved by working together co-operatively with one
another and with Government. That's the promise that we've
delivered and I believe that the people are grateful for the
change in this country. It's an infinitely better country now
than it was at the beginning of 1983.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister after this one how long before the
next election another two years. Or are you going to try and
run a full-term.
No, well you see what I've been about is to say that wit~ h
this election which is being held now to have the half Senate and
the House of Representatives together, this will be the 23rd time
in Australia's history that this has been done. We are running
with the election campaign a referendum for simultaneous elections
and I believe that in that situation, then Governments in the
future will be in a position where they will be able to avoid the
unnecessary elections that have occurred in the past. We'll have
less elections and that would mean that with the election at t1-e
end of 1984 we'd be going up to the end of: 1987 or early ' 88.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister what do you expect the result will be?
Well I believe that we will win. Now I could if I wanted
to be be excessively optimistic and talk about margins on the
basis of polls. But we will be going9 in to this election campaign
hard and fair. We'll be putting two messages across. We'll be
putting the message of our tremendous achievements in the econcmic
and social field and in the field of' international relations.
We'll be putting that positively and we will be comparing our
great records of achievement with both the record of our
opposition in the past in Government, which was deplorable, and
with what they now offer to the Australian people. They offer the
dismantling, totally, of all the apparatus which has been
foundational to the recovery of Australia._ They want to smash the
Accord, they want to get rid of the Economic Planning Advisory
Council, the Prices Surveillance Authority all the mechanisms;
which have served to bring the great interests of Australia
constructively together. We'll be pointing out to the people that
that is a miserable alterna tive.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister what are the issues, what should bE!
the issues and what should not be the issues.
Well the issues should be basically economic performance
because that is what the people of Australia are concerned about.
They are concerned about jobs, and will make the judgement about
the loss of about a quarter of a million jobs the growth of a
quarter of million in unemployment in the last twelve months of:
the previous government with the creation of about a quarter of
a million new jobs under us. They are concerned with inflation
the fact that we've halved the inflation rate from over 11% that
we inherited down to less than half that. They are concerned, I
believe, with interest rates the fact that we have brought
interest rates down from the record levels of the previous
Government. These are the basic sorts of things. They are
certainly concerned about housing, both in the private and the
public sector the fact that we'vye in the public housing sector
in our first two years given an enor-mous increase in the funds
available for public housing for those most in need, and under the
First Home Owners' Scheme we've brought about a situation which
the housing industry as a whole recognises has produced the best
situation in memory from where the housing industry was
operating at less than 60% of capacity when we came to office -to
where it's now operating at full capacity and in a way which has
brought the possibility of home ownership into the range o-f people
who before were faced with hopelessness in this regard. Those are
the basic sorts of things. But they will also be concerned with
the way in which we have made Australia's name proud in the field
of international relations. We are better regarded now in our
region than Australia has ever been before as a result not only of
the personal relationships that I've established with leaders in
this region, but also of the work that's been done by my Foreign
Minister and other relevant Ministers, including the Deputy Prime
Minister, Mr Bowen. Our relationship with the United States has
-A
P. M. cont brought about a pcsi,-ion where Australia's
relations with the United States are better and more const active
than they've ever been before. So , hether you look at these
important domestic issues or our international relationships,
these are the things of importance, these are the things we'll be
campaigning on. The last part of your question was what shouldn't
be the issues. Well I think it goes without saying that I believe
that issues of race, racial intolerance, whether it be in regard
to people outside Australia, or between black and white people in
Australia those should not be the issues. And I believe that:
the politics of smear and guilt by association should not be the
issues. And I would have thought, as I indicated in the House
today, that those on the opposite side of the Parliament should
have learnt by now that that sort of thing is not what the
Australian people want. The indications are crystal clear thait in
the attempt to go down those paths the opposition have hurt
themselves. And I sincerely hope Ehiat they will have learnt that
lesson and they'll get back on to the sorts of issues that I've
been talking about.
JOURNALIST: In that respect, Mr Hawke, it seems the Opposition is
going to pursue organised crime regardless. What damage do you
think that will do in the on-going Murphy inquiry.
Well the fact what damage will it do to the inquiry?
JOURNALIST: No, what damage do you think the Opposition can
inflict upon you in respect of the organised crime debate and also
how do you think the on-going Murphy inquiry will affect the
conduct.. Well that's the other way around. Well, let me answer the
first one on the basis of the evidence available. They couldn't
have pursued the question of organised crime more vociferously
than they have. And it's not working. And it's not working
because the people of Australia know what is obvious in a crystal
clear manner. And that is that I, as Prime minister, and my
Government have a total commitment to fighting organised crime in
an effective way. No Australian would make the judgement that I
would be other than in that position. There is no-one more
committed than I am to ensuring that we pursue the processes of
getting hard admissible evidence which is going to get criminals
behind bars. That's what I'm about and what my Government's about
and the people know that. So if the Opposition attempts to go
further down that track they will suffer further the results that
are already clear. Now in regard to the question of the Murphy
inquiry there the position is that the Senate Committee and its
processes should proceed. And I had said in regard to the whole
range of areas where criminal matters or other matters of the
inquiry are being followed, I've said and I repeat again, and I
know the Australian people accept it, let the cards fall where
they may I and my Government are not in the business of
protecting anyone, whatever their position or station in life.
Let proper inquiries be pursued and let the results then lead to
P. M. cont whatever prosecutions may be? necessary. But let me
say in all t-hat, that we are ne,. er un(' er the pressure of this
McCarthyist smear tactic of t. ie Opposition going to pre-judge
individuals because it is an enormous price! for a society to pay
that in the legitimate pursuit of organised crime, or misbehavizour
at any level of society, that in legitimately pur su4ng that course
of action which I will in every way open to me at the federal
level, that you should go to the next aind unacceptable stage of
pre-judging people on the basis of smear or innuendo or
allegations that haven't had the chance of being tested. And I
believe that overwhelmingly the people of Australia do not want
that course to be followed. It is, in other words, necessary thiat
we do the two things in this country that we gather our
resources in a way which is going to enable! hard admissible
evidence to be produced so that the courts of the land can in fact
pursue those engaged in crime and organised crime, and at the same
time as we're doing that in pursuingj it without any equivocation
we must ensure that the proper processes are available which both
ensure that those undertaking inquiries are not going to have t'.. iem
inhibited, but on the other hand ensure that the rights of
individuals and civil liberties should be protected.
JOURNALIST: Do you believe Mr Wran pre-judged Mr Briese by his
comments in London, Mr Hawke?
I am not making any comment about Mr Wran's statement
beyond what I've said in the Parliament. I've made it quite clear
what my position is in regard to that matter. I'm not saying
anything more about it.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, why do you feel it necessary to call the
election now and not next year.
Well do I need to go over the speech I've made in
Parliament again?
JOURNALIST: Well let's get in on record here.
What on your tape you mean? I see. Alright. Well let mne
make it as short as I can for your particular benefit. The
Constitutional position is that there must be an election for half
the Senate and that would have to be held by April of next year.
And there would have to be, if we didn't have the House of
Representatives election with the half Senate, then we'd have
within a relatively short time after that about the end of the
year have a House of Representatives election. Now that would
cost an extra $ 19 million $ 49 million if you had two elections
rather than about $ 30 million if you brought the two together.
The other point is, of course, that this is the normal thing to
do. It's normal to have the half Senate election at the end of
the year preceding and in the special circumstance that we've got
now with an enlarged Senate, where there are going to be two extra
Senators from each State, then those two extra Senators cannot
take their place in the Senate until the new House meets. Now if
' t
P. M. cont we 1, ave the election of half: Senate in April of
1985 ar d you didn't have the election of Tche House of
Repr'-sentatives untii' the end of that year or early in 1986, you
could have these twelve Senators there in l~ imbo for something up
to 16 months. Now it's much more sensible. therefore, to do
what's been done on 22 previous occasions n t le history of this
country, the most normal thing that is, to have the House of
Representatives and the half Senate toaether. And of course all
of that has been done in the context of the election that's going
to be held together with a referendum requ~ Iring simultaneous
elections so that in the future we'll get rid of this business of
putting elections out of kiltre between the House of
Representatives and the Senate.
JOURNALIST: During the campaign wil~ l you debate the Leader of the
opposition on television?
PM: I'm not making up my mind about that yet. I have indicated
during the campaign before that that seemed to me to be an
appropriate thing to do, but I simply say that the Leader of the
opposition by his behaviour over recent times has, I believe, put
himself beyond the pale of ordinary and recent codes of behaviour.
but I have not made up my mind about that.
JOURNALIST: In February ' 83, Mr Hawke, the Labor Party came
pretty fast out of the blocks. Mr Peacock is talking now about: a
pre-campaign. What is the idea behind the Labor Party right now?
Are you going to just have a traditional sort of start? Are you
going to start now?
PM: Well, it won't be a full blown, if you like, total campaicin,
but it obviously would be quite dishonest to say that we are not
going to be acting with a view to the election on 1 December.
That will be in everyone' s minds every party's and every
politicians' mind. But the formal campaign, the formal launching
of the campaign, will not take place until into November.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, when did you take your decision to make
the announcement this afternoon?
PM: I firmed it up really over the weekend and I obviously wanted
to await the return of His Excellency the Governor-General today.
It thought it appropriate that I should wait until his return.
JOURNALIST: In your speech to the House today you made the point
that there is a need to deal a final blow to the tax avoidance
industry in this country. It has been pointed out in the Sena-ze
by the Democrats that if you were fair dinkum about this you would
have a double dissolution, thereby bringing those bills currently
locked up there before a joint sitting of both Houses.
PM: I don't believe that a double dissolution is necessary or
desirable. I mean, we want to limit this resort to unn-cessary
elections. I would hope that after the election when' we are
returned that it may be that the people in the Senate, and we may
have a majority we will certainly be trying to get a majority in
the election but even if we don't arid the Democrats hold the
balance of power, I would be hoping that what I believe would be a
clear decision on the part of the electors about the question of
tax avoidance which will be very much ant issue in the election,
let me assure you, may lead them to support our legislation.
JOURNALIST: Having got the Senate and the Reps back in kilter,
Mr Hawke, will you give a commitment now that the next term will
be a full term and if you win that, there will be another full
term after that this is the last early election?
PM: Yes, that is what it is about. I mean, let's get the problem
of the " out of kiltedness" if I can use that rather clumsy
phrase behind us with the referendum being passed. And in that
situation, yes, is the answer to your question.
JOURNALIST: Would it really be in the interests of Australia to
have an Opposition where it is reduced to about a third membership
of the House of Representatives?
PM: Well, it really depends, I suppose, on the quality of the
opposition, doesn't it. And wae can only judge the product an-l
what we have seen and it is pathetic. It is insulting to the
intelligence of the electorate and I would think in those
circumstances you don't want more of that. So we will be going in
hard to win as big a majority as we possibly can. And I express
this hope that out of the election, however decimated they may
be, that the Opposition parties will do two things. That they
will try and get better quality people into their ranks. And
secondly, that they will review the judgement of the Australian~
people, because the Australian people have repudiated their
tactics and the concepts of what an opposition should be about.
And this, I hope, will be a learning process for them.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, as you know, a shipment of uranium
to France is due this month. Does you Government intend to issue
an export licence to allow the shipment to go ahead. If not, ' That
sort of compensation does the Government intend..
PM: The Minister for Resources and Energy, Senator Walsh,. wil * L
be, I think, making an announcement in regard to this matter, out
it will not involve an export licence to them to export to France.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, you say the overwhelming reason for an
early election is your Government's need for a new and reinvigorating
mandate. Does that mean that whenever a governmen~ t
in the future feels the need for a new and re-invigorating
mandate, they can use this as an excuse for an early election?
PM: No, I think you ought to read the whole statement throuyh a
bit more closely and you will find the answer to your question.,
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, are y(, u prel3icting an increased majority
apart from any difference made by the extra seats?
PM: I believe we will improve our majority apart from that, yes.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, do you still believe there will bE!
very little change in your Ministry after the election, if you
win? PM: What was that last bit.
JOURNALIST: He's Irish.
PM: Yes, I would think there would-be not much change. I have? to
repeat. In this matter I am in the hands of the Caucus in the
first step. They have to make a decision. I would think that the
judgement of the Caucus would be that the Ministry had done an
excellent job and therefore I would expect the Caucus to be
endorsing overwhelmingly that Ministry. So the question really
becomes would there be much of a re-shuffle. And I would think,
not a great deal because I think it has been a very successful
team.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, are you attracted to the idea of a larger
Ministry? PM: No.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, did the sort of headlines that Mr Wran was
likely to get in tomorrow's press in any way influence your
decison to announce the election today?
PM: No, it had absolutely nothing to do with it. And I would
have thought that was quite clear.
JOURNALIST: Sir, in the light of the pressures and so on that
have been on you personally in the last few weeks, how do you feel
about a campaign?
PM: I feel great. I feel great, thank you. I hope it was asked
solicitously, that is why I say thank you.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, would you be prepared to name3 a
bottom line below which you would regard it as a bad result for
the ALP?
PM: No, of course not.
JOURNALIST: Who do you think will be your opponent across the
table after the next after the next election?
PM: I think the books have the Member for flennelong at fairly
short odds, but there is just one point I would make. He has got
to win his seat first.
JOURNALIST: What role will Mr Wran be playing in the election?
PM: He is President of the Party. He will be there on the
platform at the opening of the campaign, as he was on the last
occasion and I would think it would be fairly similar to the last
occasion. After the opening I think it fairly well rolled into my
lap and I guess that will be much the same way again with support
from my Minister.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, in your statement to the House
today, you made the point there repeatedly o; f the vested interest
in undermining the new spirit of national confidence and selfconfidence.
In the very next sentence you said " I believe the
people of Australia have already realised the nature and purpose
of this campaign of denigration". Are you referring to the
denigration of yourself and identifyin': that. as the prime cause of
sel-confidence in the nation.
PM: No, no.
JOURNALIST: What is the denigration you are! referring to?)
PM: Well I think there is a whole campaign that has becn adopted
by the Opposition of insinuating against everyone in government
that there is something improper in wha they do. I mean, you take
the question of the decision that we have made to merge the work
of the Costigan Commission in with the work of the National Crime
Authority. As I said, there can be legitimEate discussion about
the timing and the process of doing that, but no room for
questioning peoples' motives, but that is what they have done.
And I would simply say, Max, that I believe the evidence is
overwhelming that this sort of approach which questions the
decencies and the motives of government to try and undermine
confidence in government is something that has rebounded against
the Opposition.
JOURNALIST: Hav2 you any more idea when the Costigan Report is
likely to be released?
PM: Commissioner Costigan has indicated that he would hope he
would have it ready before the end of October and I have no reason
to believe that won't be the case. Now, I have made it clear that
I want to see the release of the report as soon as possible. Now,
I have indicated, and I remind you, that we will not only have the
recommendations of Commissioner Costigan as to what should or
should not be published, but it will be referred in addition to
the National Crime Authority, the Director of Public Prosecutions
and to the AFP and to the Attorney-General's Department. Now, I
am not sure that I can say with absolute precision what is the
outside amount of time that those various authorities will want to
. A '? t0 4~ i* v
P. M. cont look at it and to make their recommendations to it,
but I wouldn't think it would be more than two or three lays.
So, I would be hoping that within two or three days of the receipt
of the Report that we would be in a position to make the decision
as to what parts on the recommendation of those authorities
would not be released, for the same reasons as our predecessor
government didn't do it and then we will take steps to see how
that then can be released to the public by whatever mechanism is
available to us.
JOURNALIST: Will you seek a resolution of the House before it
rises to enable the powers of privilege of the Upper House to be
extended for the Report, if that is necessary?
PM: No, there is one way in which it is suggested we may be able
to do this, Mike, and that is a mechanism via the Speaker. There
will be one of the ways that we will~ look at because it is quite
important. We want it. We want it published as fully as we can
and as soon as we can and we will just have to look at what
mechanism will be available to do that. But I don't think it is
a question of the resolution of the House in advance but I think
there may be another mechanism of doing it. There are a range of
opportunities that may be available to it. All I am saying
giving the . commitment that we want it released as fully as it can
be on the basis of the advice to us.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, given that you have had your differences
with New Zealand Prime Minister, David Lanqe, does it surprise it
that today he announced your election on November 24?
PM: Well, it is just another area in which he can have a mistaken
view of things. .1