J.,,_ ASTRA1(
PRIME MINISTER
FOR MEDIA 27 September 1985
My attention has been drawn to a statement issued by the
Leader of the Opposition which claims that I " wilfully
misled" the Parliament in the tabling on 19 September of
some documents relating to the Australian Bicentennial
Authority. At their most generous interpretation, the~ claims are
extraordinarily inisconceived, and at worst, they are
deliberately misrepresentative of the situation as the
Leader of the Opposition knows it.
It was never claimed that the documents which I tabled were
exhaustive. I did not claim so. In fact, it is clear
from my statement to the House that they related only to
correspondence between myself and Mr Reid and departmental
advice regarding authority for the settlement.
As for the record ( 5f the conversation which I had with Mr
Reid on 15 August, that document aas tlhc. subj. 2t of
consultation with the Leader of the Opposition in the
Chamber subsequent to tabling, because it had been tabled in
error. This consultation related to the deletion of a
segment of the record relating to a personal matter. The
Leader of the Opposition agreed with the deletion, as. tbe
media is aware.
He understood it was tabled in error, yet now accuses me of
wilfully misleading the Parliament by omitting to table a
second page of the relevant document.
If the document was tabled in error in the first place, it
can hardly be a deliberate omission to fail to table the
second page.
The Leader of the Opposition also claims that the " omitted"
section " recorded ( my) instruction to Mr Reid to secure Dr
Armstrong's resignation". What that section reiterated was
that all of the views expressed regarding Dr Armstrong could
a YJ
not be put aside, and so the matter should be looked at,
with very serious consideration being given to finding a
replacement. This is entirely consistent with the text of
my detailed answer in the House of that day.
Furthermore, nothing of what I said on 15 August to Mr Reid
can in any way be seen as an " instruction" 6As I said in my
press release of 11 September and in the Parliament, I
simply did not have the power to " instruct" the Chairman of
the Authority in this matter. Mr Reid accepted this at all
points in our discussions. That has been one of the central
problems with this matter, because the previous coalition
government estabjished the Authot-ity deliberately at arm's
length from the responsible minister, severely inhibiting
the control that the minister is able to exercise over it.
I have tried at all times to handle the whole subject of
Australia's bicentenary celebrations in a bipartisan
fashion. That is why I discussed the matter at length with
the Leader of the Opposition, and it is why I arranged for
the Leader of the Opposition to discuss the matter freely
himself with Mr Reid as then Chairman of the Authority.
The Leader of the Opposition's own handling of this matter
has been shabby and cheap. It is certainly unbecoming of
one who sets himself up so asserti., ely and sanctimoniously
as " honest".
I attach the complete record of conversation, except for the
deletion agreed to by the Leader of the Opposition on 19
September.
C" I CL or T1, Pa 164 r oi wrrq
tPA
RECORD OF COhKVERSATION BETWEEN PRIME MINISTER AND
CHAIRMAN OF ABA, MR JOHN REID, ON 15 AUGUST, 1985.
The Prime Minister said that he had received a number of
expressions of concern regarding the performance of
Dr David Armstrong, the Chief Executive of the ABA, and
indeed there had been a unaminity of view regarding his
inadequacies in this position. It had been put to him
that the prospects of success for the Bicentenary
celebrations were likely to be substantially compromised
if Dr Armstrong remained as Chief Executive.
Mr Reid put forward his reasons for believing that
Dr Armstrong should be retained. At the same time he
acknowledged problems, in Dr Armstrong's performance,
including a rather informal style of administration
inappropriate to the ABA, and a basic shyness, which
tended towards aggressiveness and was reflected in the.
use of throw-away lines in Board meetings. Mr Reid said
that he had already spoken to Dr Armstrong as a number
of questions had previously been raised about his
peformance. As a result he felt that Dr Armstrong's
administrative style had imoroved, Essentially
Mr Reid felt that the interests of the ABA and the
Bicentenary would be prejudiced if Dr Armstrong was
replaced. He also could not support the idea of putting
in a " minder" for Dr Armstrong. Mr Reid said that from
the end of 1985 he himself would be virtually a
full-time Chairman, making it easier to address the
problem. IN CONFIDENCE
The Prime Minister said that while he respected
Mr Reid's defence, he could not put aside all of the
views put to him concerning Dr Armstrong, and so he
would want the matter to be looked at, with very serious
consideration being given to the question of finding a
replacement. Mr Reid promised to get back to the
Prime Minister on this matter by the following Monday,
19 Aug4st.
Graham Evans
Principal Pr~ ivwte Secretary
19 August 1985
c. c. Prime Minister
c. c. Mr John Reid IN CONFIDENCE