TRANSCRIPT PRESS CONFERENCE 1 NOVEMBER 1984
E. O. E. PROOF ONLY
PM: Well ladies and gentlemen you've had the opportunity of
reading the Government's response to the final report of
CommissioneruCostigan. I simply want at the outset to refer to
that aspect of the statement which draws attention to the position
of the Leader of the opposition and . i'm certain that the people of
Australia will contrast the wild and totally baseless allegations
that were made inside and outside the Parliament by the Leader of
the Opposition attacking me and the Government, suggesting that
there was going to be all sorts of bombshells for the Government:
in the Costigan Report. The Report itself and the statements of
Commissioner Costigan expose those allegations for the baseless
things that they were and, as I say, further evidence that the
Leader of the opposition is not fit to the office to which he
aspires. I'm open to your questions.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, what do you think is the major
achievement of Mr Costigan?
PM: Well I don't think. there is one. If you'll excuse me I'll
just go to a few aspects of it. I think Mr Costigan is certainly
to be remembered for his exposure of the tax avoidance industry
the dimension of it. That commenced with his interim report. of
December 1981 and as a result of that dramatic exposure I think
the community has become aware of the fact that for a considerable
period of time they have been mulct by a wealthy minority who have
been protected by the conservatives in government and continue -to
be protected by them in Opposition. And that is a matter of
continuing substance and will always stand to the credit of
Commissioner Costigan. He has also brought new techniques to the
processes of investigation and it was for that reason that in our
first Budget we were prepared, happy to, double the resources
available to him and all those resources have been transferred
over to the National Crime Authority. So that that means as a
result of the new investigative techniques that he developed that
the permanent authority, the National Crime Authority, will be as
well equipped as I think it possibly can be. Thirdly, hehas I
think exposed the dimensions of orgjanised crime in this country.
He has I think done this signal service, there has ' bee'n a tendenacy
PM: cont... _ n th2 past to think of the criminal elements of
societ' as some shadowy, and publicly disreputable figures. What.
Commissioner Cosliga-i has done is to show that the services of a
wide range of professional people accou~ ntants and lawyers anid
directors and so on have been and continuously have been
utilised in the processes of crime. So without being exhaustive! I
would think that those sorts of things are major contributions.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke have you got a view at all on some of the
things 1Mr Costigan said about Mr Packer taking away files, being;
associated with a person who initially looked like a suicide
attempt and was murder and there should be another murder
e xam i na tion.
PM: Well let me make two or three general-~ observations and then a
particular observation in regard to the last point. I think you
will appreciate that it's made perfectly clear in the detailed
statement that you've had the opportunity of studying that he
says you will recall this in the public section of volume 1
where at the last chapter he goes to his recommendations,
including the recommendations in regdrd to the non-published
chapters page 274 of volume 1 dealing with volume 9,
unpublished, ofActivities of Ray Packer he says I recommend that
matters described in chapters 2 to 5 be referred to the Director
of Public Prosecutions. Now that, of course, has been done. The
Director of Public Prosecutions under the statute has received all
the reports, published and the unpublished. And I make this point
in regard to your question the very reasons for the
establishment of the office of Director of Public Prosecutions is
to have an office independent of Government to assess material and
make recommendations as to what should happen. And I believe
therefore it is totally inappropriate for me or for anyone else
for that matter to intrude into this area of what we have ensured,
as we should do, is that all the material goes to the relevant
authorities the Director of Public Prosecutions and the National
Crime Authority. And they will make the de! cisions which they
regard as appropriate in regard to their full assessment of the
material. And what I've said in the report. on behalf of the
Government, the response on behalf of the Government, is that it's
appropriate that all matters mentioned by Commissioner Costigan
should be considered by the appropriate authorities and that they
should take the action that's necessary. I go to the further
point which I think youi'll understand is appropriate in answer to
your question that we have the view that the existing
authorities and institutions are fully equipped to proceed with
appropriate action in regard to all recommendations of
Commissioner Costigan. I have said in the report that in regard
to any substantive decisions we are in the caretaker period and we
will not make decisions against the principles of the period of
caretaker Government, which I would remind you we as a Cabinet
acknowledged on 11 October. But I have sai~ d beyond that that if
the Director of Public Prosecutions o r the National Crime
Authority should come to the conclusion that there is some
immediate decisions that the public interest required of the
Government now, we will of course rezcoond to such requests from
them. Now I just want to miake the final point. You ref-rred to
the : c: servations in regard to murder as it's
suggested by Commissioner Costiqan, I think fairness demands the
observation that there is nothing there on the record which
involves an assertion by Commissioner Costigan that Mr Packer is
guilty in that respect. I think fairness demands that
observation.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke you've criticised in your statement the use
of some names by Commissioner Costigan. Does that criticism
include the use of the Packer name publicly or do you think that
that was inevitale after Packer's own statement.
PM: Well I was stating a principle and I h~ ope on behalf of the
Government stating it quite unequivocally. And clearly that
statement of principle embraces Mr -Packer. It wasn't concerned
with Mr Packer alone. But I think you'll remember the language of
the statement, I think at page 12, where I referred to the
circumstances surrounding the report, excuse me on page 13, where
I said " in thc circumstances surrounding this Report", therefore I
went on to say on behalf of the Government that I thought the
principles that we were putting were not capable in these
circumstances of being adhered to. But the general statement of
principle that I put there obviously includes the person to whom
you refer.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Mr Costigan's top secret memoranda
of relevant criminal activity which he says contained the various
answers it leaked to the National Times to the obvious detriment
of Mr Packer. How can the public be satisfied that Mr Costigan
isn't satisfied that references to the National Crime Authority
with a much wider distribution will not appear in the newspapers.
PM: Well that's a fair question. I can only say in response to
it Peter that the statement itself here refers to the care which
was taken by the Special Minister of State in the reference, I
think it'ls 19 October is it?
JOURNALIST: Yes.
PM: And we can only take every precaution that we can as a
Government. I'm certai'n that the National Crime Authority and it~ s
membership will itself attempt to exercise every care and I would
expect that all state Governments would do the same thing. You're
in an area, Peter, here where there's a question of human
frailties and I would be deluding everyone if I said that where
you are dealing with those sorts of things that a guarantee can be
given. I merely express the fervent wish on behalf of the
Government, the Federal Government, that everyone involved will
attempt to exercise all the requirements that go with the need for
confidentiality because I believe that' there is an acceptance in
the community of the requirement to protect two basic
considerations. One, the public interest in ensuring that
PM: cont... investigations with a view to possible prosecutions of
criminal activities are not prejudiced and at the same time, the
requirements of the civil liberc. ies cf individual-, concerned. Now
if we as a community attach significance c~ o those two criteria, as
I believe we should, then there is an obligation onl people to
exercise extreme care and I hope they will.
JOURNALIST: Will you be avoiding contact with Mr Packer?
PM: Well I haven't addressed my mind to the question of avoiding
or not. I don't know whether I have in my program in the weeks
ahead any engagements which involve . Mr Packer or not. I honestly
don't know whether I have. I am not reviewing my program. I will
not be reviewing my program. I believe that every individual in
this society is entitled to the proper processes of the law. That
applies to Mr Packer as well as to anyone else.
JOURNALIST: Just on that point Mr Hawke. Could you say whether
after you received the March 5 letter from Mr Costigan mentioning
Mr Packer whether you formed any particular attitude about Mr
Packer and whether that in any way the contacts you've had
with him subsequent to March
PM: No, I think the answer to that question, Mike, is containe, 2
in the previous answer that I gave. At all points, as Mr Costi-gan
has made crystal clear both in his report and in his subsequent
statements, the Government has acted with complete propriety in
regard to how the affairs of the Commission should operate and
that comment of his applies to the Government as a whole and to
myself personally. And I'm not in the business, I never have
been, of making judgements about people until all the appropriate
processes have been exhausted. That's always been the practice
and I don't intend to change now.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, if you are re-elected and if these matters
haven't been resolved, what action would the Government take when
Mr Packer's licence hearings come up next March and April?
PM: . You're obviously not a regular on this circuit. I don't
answer hypothetical questions.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke was there anything in the Report which you
found shocking as to either the activities of individuals or the
extent of organised crime?
PM: Yes, there is a considerable amount in all the Reports that
are shocking to anyone, yes.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, could the community feel justifiably
disappointed if as a result of Mr Costigan's investigations and
the on-going investigations of the National Crime Authority, we
don't see some very big trials of some very big criminals in
Australia, within a nominal time?
PMI: Let me make two points, and I think thlEy are relevant in
answer to that. As Mr Costigan himself say; there have been many
prosecutions and successful protecutinns that have taken place
since the inception of his Commission. Ard yu will recall he
goes out of hiis way to make it clear that he hasn't sought
continuously to claim credit or connection with those.
Nevertheless, much has happened in the area of effective
prosecution of criminal activity as a result: of the actions of the
Costigan Commission since its inception. So I make that point
simply to say we are not waiting for someth-Ing to happen on the
basis of nothing has happened already. There is a continuum, if
you like. The second point I would make is this. I believe that
in fact there will be a continuation. You will appreciate that
the reasons for the deletion of certain passages from the reports
that have been published have been clearly * on the basis of advice
to us from Federal and State authorities that the publication of
those names would in fact in some cases prejudice existing or
pending trials. So we have got what has happened which Mr
Costigan refers to, what is pending now, and I believe, yes, as
the National Crime Authority and other relevant authorities pick.
up now the work of Commissioner Costigan there will be further
trials and I think they could go to substantial matters.
JOURNALIST: Mr Big?
PM: Well you could not have heard what Commissioner Costigan has
been at pains, and I think also Mr Meagher has been at pains, to
say that there is no single Mr Big. 1 think they have said that:
on man" occasions. Rather there are congeries of, perhaps we
might say Mr Larges. We may be seeing a number of the Mr Larges
and as we are a non-discriminatory society, Ms Larges, perhaps too.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you said that the Government was
reluctant to the interregnum period, that was the
Costigan recommendations. But in fact you did make a decision In
relation to the.......... concerning the references to the National
Crime Authority. Why dild the Government consider it necessary to
take that decision now in light of the
PM: -Well, there is a cut-off point on this question of the
operation of the caretaker period, Milton. I drew the attention
of Cabinet to the conventions of the caretaker period on 11
October. It didn't sta~ rt to operate until 26 October when the
House was dissolved. From that period on the caretaker
conventions operated.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, can I ask you on the eve of the
Melbourne Cup what your..
PM: I haven't got a tip.
JOURNALIST: No, I was just going to ' ask you what your thoughts
are at this moment on Mr Costigan's recommendation for a crackdown
on SP bookmakers.
PM: Well, I don't quite see the connection. The propensity of
Australians tu, gamn) ol is not simply related to the first Tuesday
in Nov~ mber. The recommendations of '. Ir Costigan in that area
will, I believ, he aidressed by all relevant governments and. I
notice in the statement of my colleague, John Cain, that he
indicates the responses that have already been taken. I think on
recollection there is reference to fines of some $ 800,000 which
have been paid over recent periods. So action has clearly been
taken there and to the extent that this comes into the area of
Commonwealth jurisdiction which is relatively less, it is more a
State matter, then we will receive the recommendations of our
relevant advisory authorities and do what is necessary to assist:.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, what is your attitude towards Mr
Costigan's recommendations and the attack on the financial
structure and structures of criminal organisations involved in
that public disclosure also of the-criminals?
PM: If I understand your question correctly, the effect of Mr
Costigan's work in regard to the financial structure is that he
has exposed the capacity of criminal elements to use the financial
system not just the formal banking system, but other elements of
it to advance their various activities and so what is necessary
is that the governments of Australia consider very carefully those
parts of the recommendations of CommissionEr Costigan's Report
which are directed towards trying to Lighten up in that area. And
I can say as far as my Government is concerned that we will be
taking a very positive approach to that area of his
recommendations, as we will to all others.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Mr Costigan said the transition
failed and indeed that is what the Opposition Leader has said both
inside and outside the House. What is your view on that?
PM: Well I think it is necessary, Ian, to look at the totality of
Mr Costigan's statements, both in the report and what he has said
since. Mr Costigan had firm views which I think his language is
that he~ has robustly put to successive governments in which he
expressed his idea both as to the nature of the National Crime
Authority and transition and I think the position that he has put
is that there is room for legitimate differences on these two
matters. But if you look at what Commissioner Costigan is saying
in his Report and his ' Observations in the last few days, he is
making it quite clear that he believes that the National Crime
Authority is now placed to go ahead and pick up his work and he
obviously wishes it well. I am not going to expose the
confidentiality of the discussions that I have had with
Commissioner Costigan this week, but: I can say that the
observations I have just made which are based on his public
statements were fully reflected in the conversations I have had
with him.
J OU RNA; L IST: Prim--~ Minister, what is the Government's view on the
Costigz n recommendation for a new Royal Com: aission to investigate
a particular matter?
PM: No, I've simply got to say to that what I have said in my
statement that we will have consultation with all the authoritiE! s
within our direct domain and that is, let me~ list them. There is
the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Australian Federal Police
and the National Crime Authority as well as the Attorney-cGeneral's
Department. And we will be considering their advice to us on all
these issues, including the one that you put and it is
appropriate, of course, that I remind you of what I have said
about the conventions. That that will be a matter for our
incoming government and we will make the decision in the light of
the recommendations put to us.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, how does th-e Government go around about
preventing a repeat of what you obviously consider the excesses of
this Costigan Royal Commission in relation to civil liberties
questions?
PM: Well, I think, to be fair to Commissioner Costigan, you have
gtto see what I have said. I have talked about the
circumstances surrounding the Report, the fact that sections of Mr
Commissioner Costigan's work went into the public domain of itself
created an area of problem and so the observations that I have
made in regard to the principles of non-publication have been se-t
out clearly, I think, in this Report. The important point to
make, Greg, as to the present and the future is as I have pointe~ d
out in the response that the provisions of the statute under
which the National Crime Authority operates will mean that that
can't happen.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, what would the Government's reaction be to
Mr Costigan's recommendation for legislation to produce criminal
sanctions
PM: I niust give you the same answer as I just gave here.
JOURNALIST: For the extortion in the trade union area?
PM: I must give you the same answer. It's not a question of
anything other than making it clear that we must abide by the
conventions that apply In a caretaker government period now. We
will ensure, it has happened, the total reports have gone to the
relevant authorities. in that case, as well as the ones I have
mentioned there would be recommendations to us from the Department
of Employment and Industrial Relations. They would obviously have
an input in that area. Now, we will, when re-elected, we will
consider all the advice to us from thiose relevant authorities and
departments and then as the authorised government, make the
decisions which are necessary to be made. Now that is the
convention situation under which this government in this period
must operate. And the answer to you is exactly therefore the same
as the one I gave to the question before last.
JOUR NALIST: BeaLing that in mind, Prime m'inister, aren't you
sucjges'ing at the same time that the Government doesn't believe
that there is a neccssity to establish the extra investigative
framevwork that Costigan recommends?
PM: I am not saying that. I mean, I don't: know how many times I
have to say it, but I will put it again, Paul. There is a whole
series of recommendations that have been made by Commissioner
Costigan. All of those recommendations warrant and will receive
full consideration by my Government on the basis of the advice
that we receive from the range of relevant authorities. We are at
this period in a care-taker position and w. e can't make decisions.
And indeed, let me make it clear, if we started to make decisions
against the conventions that have operated for previous
governments, we would be immediately attacked by the Opposition
and they would be entitled to. But the imp: ortant point that is
made clear, and I am endebdted to Commissioner Costigan for the
unequivocal clarity with which he puts the point. He acknowledges
the total commitment of myself and my Government to the fight
against organised crime in all its manifestations. I don't have
to put that case. I have put it. ir was right. It has been
confirmed by the Commissioner. What is necessary now is that we
act with propriety at this time. We will. And I give the people
of Australia the unqualified assurance that every single
recommendation of Commissioner Costigan will be closely examined
and on the basis of the advice that we receive as Lo the wisdom of
proceeding w: ith those recommendations to achieve the objectives.
that we all share, then that will be done.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, for the pictorial record, could I
just get you to react to the news of the death of Indira Gandhi?
PM: Yes, I have now sent two messages which I am glad to takr!
this opportunity of again repeating the substance of those two
messages. The first was to the Governor General of India, and
then today to the new Prime Minister, the son of Indira Gandhi.
Those messages have been in these terms that on behalf of the
Australian people I have expressed the horror of Australians at
this monstrous and wanton act of terrorism which has claimed the
life of a person who was not only an outstanding leader of her
country, the world's largest democracy, but also a woman who
loomed extraordinarily. large in world affairs. My predecessors,
Mr Whitlam and Mr Fraser and I have had the opportunity,
particularly in the context of the Commonwealth to work closely
with Mrs Gandhi and we have been able to understand the enormous
impact that she has had upon the affairs of her own country and
the influence that she has had elsewhere. And on behalf of the
people of Australia I extend directly to the members of her family
and broadly to the people of India the profound sympathy of the
people of Australia.