7S9/ 7--,
PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF JOINT NEWS CONFERENCE WITH THE HON MICHAEL FIELD,
MLA, CITY MILL BUILDING, HOBART, 6 MAY 1989
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
PM: I'm very pleased to be over here in Hobart this morning
with Michael Field and I want at the outset to pay tribute to
the way in a very short time he's established himself as a very
dynamic Leader of the Labor Party and from what I'm about to
say you'll understand that that's not just a formal
acknowledgement of a dynamic new Leader but that there is very
strong evidence of that fact. I'm here today to say tha I'
very pleased to be able to announce that agreement has been
reached between my Federal Labor Government and Michael on
behalf of the Tasmanian Labor Party to explore the feasibility
of establishing here in Tasmania Australia's first unbleached
paper mill after the election of the Labor Government next
Saturday. Michael Field came to see me in Canberra last
Tuesday night, he brought his idea and explained to me that
idea and as a result of those discussions which he initiated,
we've agreed that a study will be conducted into the
feasibility of what we can call an environmentally friendly
mill for Tasmania to produce unbleached paper and paper
products. We had already made a decision that we were going to
be sending an expert team to Finland and Sweden to investigate
the operation of paper mills in those two very important
countries. But as a result of Michael Field's intervention and
suggestion to me we have agreed to add Lo the terms of
reference of that team of experts so that in addition to what
they were going to be doing before they will be investigating
the processes for the production of unbleached paper and also
the potential for expanded markets for unbleached paper
products. Now I want , to say that as a result of Michael's
discussions with me, we have reached the agreement, ( b)
added to the terms of reference of that team~ of experts and ( c)
indicated that rasmania's representatives will. be involved
beyond the return of that team of experts in the evaluation of'
the missions' technical report and any follow-up work that's
involved. And using data gathered by that mission, which as I
say has been upgraded in its work as a result of Michael's
reference to me, that using that data from that mission a
Tasmanian Labor Government after the next election will conduct
a major feasibility study into an unbleached paper products
plant in Tasmania. That study will cover the potential
( PM cont) Australian and international markets for unbleached
paper Products and the economic environmental and social
implications of an unbleached Paper Products Plant. Let me say
that we've agreed that industry will be invited to Participate
in the State Government's feasibility study. Importantly we've
agreed, both of us, on behalf of my Government and the
Government that he'll be forming after Saturday that our two
Government's would lead the way in using high quality
unbleached paper produced by the mill so that there would be
quite clearly a substantial market involved in that and we
would then do our best to convince Australians to choose
unbleached paper products wherever practicable and in that way
we'll obviously be creating a market for environmentally clean
processes and importantly helping to establish jobs for
Tasmanians. Now let me conclude as I began by Paying tribute
to Michael Field, as I say he's been a Leader for a relatively
short time. If Tasmanians wanted any proof at all and they
may have if they wanted any proof at all of the dynamism, the
imagination, the capacity for decisions and a commitment
tenaciously to pursue the interests of Tasmanians it's been
dramatically provided by -this imaginative concept to which we
have responded immediately and positively and one can say that
here you have the proof positive if you're Tasmanians
interested with your future welfare, proof Positive of the way
in which Labor in this State is able to work positively,
constructive and immediately with the Federal Government in a
way which stands in stark contrast with the confrontationism
which seems to be the characteristic of the Present Premier of
this State.
FIELD: I welcome the opportunity in my first discussions with
the Prime Minister as Leader, to get such a Positive result.
We're committed in Tasmania -to downstreaming our products,
particularly wood. At the moment we're exporting some three
million tonnes of wood in woodchips to Japan. Obviously that
can't go on indefinitely but we want to make sure that we have
the cleanest possible process here in Tasmania as soon as we
can but we don't want to rush into it so that we adopt
development at any price. Now with this latest advancement and
the study that's been announced today, we are going to be
certain that Tasmania will lead the world with the Pulp and
paper mill to produce unbleached paper and that to me is a
great breakthrough because Tasmania's future is producing
environmentally friendly products onto a quality world market
and this is symbolic of the direction of a new Labor Government
that will be elected next Saturday. That's really all I wish
to say in addition to what the Prime Minister has said.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister does this mean that in future you'd
be less enthusiastic about approving the construction of
bleached kraft pulp mills?
PM: Well let me say this. The mission that we had already
approved to go over was to examine those existing type of mills
because we want to have a situation where at least we are as
well informed as we possibly can be about what are the
environmentally most acceptable processes in regard to existing
types of kraft works. So it's sensible that we have that
information. When Michael came and saw me and said, " now look
can't we together look at the concept of the unbleached mill",
it made sense to do that and we will be giving priority in our
consideration to that proposal. But it remains sensible that
we look at the other area as well. But we'll give this a
priority, it's new, it's exciting, it offers all the
possibilities of environmentally acceptable standards jobs
and there is evidence around the world now that people are
looking in a variety of products for the unbleached product. I
mean let me mention this for instance in the area of disposable
nappies and tampons. There is a growing concern now that there
may be possible dangers in the bleached products and there's a
move towards considering the use of unbleached products. Some
computer operators also are looking at environmentally friendly
paper for computer operations. So it makes a great deal of
sense to pick up Michael Field's suggestion and try and get
Tasmania in at the forefront of that. We'll still have a look
at whether there are ways in which it would be environmentally
acceptable processes for the other but it's quite clear that we
just were not going to buy the sort of proposals that were put
up before.
JOURNALIST: With the marketing could the Federal Government
help the unbleached paper
PM: Yes I said
JOURNALIST: inaudible
PM: Well I've said that we've agreed there that as far as our
two Governments are concerned that we would use that product
JOURNALIST: inaudible
PM: I think in our case it's between and I say this with a
pretty wide but I think it's of the order of 10 to 15,000
tonnes as far as the Commonwealth Government is concerned. I
don't know what the Tasmanian Government would use but I would
think that if the Commowealth Government gave that sort of lead
that it would be, I think, influential in affecting other
governments and a lot of users.
JOURNALIST: As a proportion
PM: And of course could I just add to that that this would not
only be in terms of domestic markets, for exports as well and
part of the study that I've asked to be done now is to see what
the potential in the export area is as well.
JOURNALIST: As a proportion of the paper that the federal
bureacracy generates, how much would that represent?
PM: I'm saying that I'm given to understand that something of
the order of 10 to 15,000 tonnes is the paper that's consumed
at the Federal Government level.
JOURNALIST: the federal paper workers going to be
PM: I thought that was the sort of figure of total use of
paper. That was the figure that was put before me. But I
think obviously in the nature of things this is something that
would have to be looked at reasonably quickly. So I don't want
to be held with precision on that figure. Those were the
figures that were put before me.
JOURNALIST: Is this commitment independent of the
Commonwealth's commitment to write clear environmental
guidelines for future pulp mills?
PM: What we've said in regard to the drawing up of future
environmental guidelines is that I've asked my Ministers to be
looking at the question of whether there can be general
guidelines acknowledging that by definition certain
geographical circumstances by definition would'nt be replicated
in another place. So it may be impossible to have absolutely
general generally applicable guidlelines but we are looking
at that issue. Let me make it quite clear that where you've
got to see the great merit, great virtue of what Michael Field
has done is to say, well there is uncertainty in the area of
the kraft processes of the bleached product and he wants to add
another very substantial bow, a string to Tasmania's bow, and
S he's done that. Because if in fact we can establish as a
result of the expert inquiry that we'll initiate and his
Government would then follow up, that there is a substantial
market for the unbleached product. We're jumping in in a way
which is acceptable for everyone. But it doesn't mean that it
doesn't make sense to look at the other area with a view in
those areas that we can with existing product to get processes
which generally would be acceptable as environmentally
acceptable. PM: Prime Minister would you agree that there isn't a
commercial market without public education and promotion?
PM: I think public education and promotion will be part of it
but as I said, one of the things we're going to be asking this
mission to do is when they are overseas to have a look at
what's developing internationally. I mean I'm sure on what
I've seen put before me, I've mentioned this move in the area
of disposable nappies and tampons, that there seems to be a
growing concern there so we would want to look at that and as I
said I just briefly looked at any article which indicated that
the computer industry was starting to concern itself with
developing a campaign for the use of environmentally friendly
paper as far as computers are concerned. So it seems to me
without pretending to have an expert knowledge at this stage,
it does seem to me that there are tendencies developing in the
world which to me would imply the existence of a market and
when you add to that the preparedness that we'd have
governments to use such paper products, I would tend to feel
that the market will be there.
JOURNALIST: inaudible
FIELD: The situation is that the world's moving very quickly,
particularly Sweden. It's passed legislation concerning
and ommissions and that obviously there's going to be a growing
market for unbleached Paper and if markets can be shown to be
there, producers will produce. So this study in fact is
establishing the viability of such a process and if it does
there'd be interest in it. There's no doubt about that. what
they are concerned about is markets and if markets can be
provided then there'll be people who'll be very interested in
producing a world first here in Tasmania.
JOURNALIST: And would paper for the Federal and Tasmanian
bureaucracies be enough to sell it to
FIELD: No they would have to be exported as well. This is a
very large mills that produced unbleached paper would have to
export. But there's a growing export market and demand for it
because of the problem with organochlorines around the world in
terms of effluent. Some countries have already moved to it
Sweden is the most advanced and therefore it's moved very
quickly in the last 18 months and if markets can be Provided
then the product will be provided, assuming that it's
technically feasible and that's what this study is all about.
-6-
PM: Let me just say that there's one thing that's certain
about what's happening in the world today. I'd suggest that it
is that the world is becoming more environmentally conscious
and in those terms I would be confident of the existence into
the future of markets adequate to pick up the output, the
proposed output of Wesley Vale was of the order of 400,000
tonnes so to go precisely to a question given the answer I did
to say 10-15,000 tonnes of Commonwealth Government usage, you
can get some idea then that the relationship and the inadequacy
of that of itself to provide a market. But given when I say
the fact that the world is becoming every day more
environmentally conscious. I'd be confident of a future market.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke will your commitment hold for whoever
wins government after this election?
PM: Well I think that's hypothetical and I expect Mr Field to
form the next Government after next Saturday. But the point is
& O that it's Michael Field, Michael Field alone, whose initiative
it was that I've been talking with and it's a contrast between
Michael Field and his imagination and the negativism and
consultationism which is characterised over the whole period
that we've been here, the attitude of the existing Premier.
I'm expecting that Michael Field will be the next Premier.
T
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister if Michael Field can't form a
majority Government form a minority Government?
PM: Well, I'm not here to say what he should do, I'm here
to agree with what I understand, I mean if I didn't I'd say I
didn't but I do agree with what he said and that is that
he expects to have a majority, if he doesn't then there
won't be any coalition, no deal, he would form a Government
and expect in those circumstances to have support, but that's
not a coalition or a deal. But he deserves to be given a
mandate by the people of Tasmania to form a Government. He
has shown in a very short time that he's got the qualities,
the determination and the imagination to look after the
interests of the people of Tasmania.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, you expressed a view at the outset of
the campaign that you expected a minority Government
in Tasmania
PM: No, no, no I said that that was a possibility. If you
look back through my transcript I said I expected Labor to
win. I said, as a person who studies politics, that's a
possibility that you could have a situation where they didn't
have a majority, but in those circumstances I would still
hope and expect that he would form a Government.
JOURNALIST: Do you think that independents holding balance
of power in a minority Government is bad for the
Government? PM: Well, it may be made but it's not as bad as having no
Government. If we were talking totally hypothetically to
have a situation where neither of the major parties in fact
have a majority in their own right, then there's got to be a
government and I would have thought that in those
circumstances it is Michael Field and the Labor Party who
should and would govern because they've got a clear program
and one which it seems to me should be the most acceptable to
those in the Parliament, but Michael Field is right to say
there's no coalition, no deal.
JOURNALIST: One of the reasons Mr Gray gave for calling this
election was the poor financial deal he was getting from the
Commonwealth. How do you react to that?
PM: Well, I react as I normally do to just about anything
that Mr Gray says. The unfortunate thing about Mr Gray is
that he has a constitutional capacity to match what comes out
of his mouth with what are the facts. Which is a very polite
way of saying something else. Now, not too complex I hope.
The facts are, and that he's been good enough to acknowledge
at the end of Premiers' Conferences, that I and the
Commonwealth Government have declined to impose upon Tasmania
that aggregate outcome which the proposed relativity that is
suggested by independent authorities would impact upon
Tasmania. I have on each occasion been prepared to go beyond
that, to do more, because I recognise the peculiar
circumstances of Tasmania. Now I don't have to rely on
simply being here in an election campaign and naturally
saying something by way of rhetoric that would be helpful.
The facts are quite clear and again there is public
indications by my conservative opponents of the fact that
Hawke's stuck rigorously to the commitment he made from 1983
onwards. From the time of the Franklin Dam I've more than
kept the promise I made then and I have, for instance, on the
question of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation subsidy, I've
been subject to very considerable pressures from the
bureaucracy and from economic rationalists within the
Government to say the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation subsidy
should go. Now, it's because I have a commitment to Tasmania
and because it's the Labor Party in Tasmania that has really
kept a constructive pressure on us on these issues, which
kept it there. And if you look at what we put into
Launceston for the training of Air Traffic Officers, again
there the bureaucracy was saying to me and some of the
economic rationalists were saying, shouldn't come to
Tasmania, that it made more rational, national economic sense
to put it on the mainland. Now I took the view that Tasmania
does need particular consideration. In my thinking about it
I've always been pressed on that point by the Labor Party,
the Labor leadership here in Tasmania. So Mr Gray hasn't got
it right and on his own facts hasn't got it right. He knows
and has been prepared to say so privately that we have taken
into account the special circumstances of Tasmania. But I
must say that in coming ultimately to the conclusions in the
whole range of areas that I've made in regard to Tasmania and
making decisions which are particularly helpful to Tasmania,
that in getting to that position I've been most helped and
consistently most helped by the constructive pressure that's
been put upon me by the Labor Party from Tasmania.
JOURNALIST: Have Tasmanians suffered though as a result of
this posionous nature of the relationship between you and Mr
Gray?
PM: Well, when you have a situation that emerged that
because I couldn't have a one-on-one conversation with Mr
Gray, you'd have a one-on-one conversation he'd go out and
misrepresent what was said, and I've never been able
therefore, never been prepared to have discussions other than
with other people present, and that's the only Premier, the
only State Premier with whom that's happened. I mean, take
the departed but not so much lamented Joe Bjelke-Petersen,
I've had my rough times with him in private conversations,
but Petersen never went out of a private conversation and
misrepresented what happened.
JOURNALIST: But as a result of this has Tasmania suffered
PM: Well, I must say that obviously if you've got a
situation where you can't have that direct basis of
consultation then it must, the interests of Tasmanians must
suffer because they've got to ask themselves why is it that
only their Premier is at that situation with the Prime
Minister. Now, fortunately for Tasmanians, in the end they
haven't suffered but not because of that, but because the
incompetence and incapacity to conduct relations between us
that has characterised this period, has been more than
compensated by the readiness of the Parliamentary Labor Party
here to fill that gap and now you've got the classic example
of Michael Field who's come in and instead of having
stand-offs that have existed before, he's come in and said
here's a positive proposal and we've responded to it.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, how effective do you think a Premier
could be to represent us today if we have a hung
Parliament on May 13 and as a result what would that be on
the Premier's Conference?
PM: Oh well, when Michael Field is there, as I believe he
will be, I think he'll be an effective representative. I
mean I can't be dogmatic about outcomes but it's my belief
that Michael Field will be there, he certainly deserves to
be. JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, a business group has begun a
campaign in Tasmania against the independents on the basis
that they would bring unstable government. Knowing Bob Brown
and perhaps Christine Milne as you do, I wonder whether you
might give an assessment of what you think of them as
performers in that role in supporting a minority government
perhaps?
PM: Well to say I don't know Christine Milne, I may have
met her sometime in the past I don't want to be rude to
her, I'm not aware of having met her, perhaps I have but I
certainly haven't met her recently, so I can't make any
comment on the basis of knowledge about her. I've had
dealings with Bob Brown, he's a forceful advocat of his
particular views. I have to say, and I mean I'm not
disclosing any State secrets, I don't think Bob Brown would
mind me saying so, that I've had reason to think in some of
my dealings with him that in the pursuit of the things and
issues which he deeply believes in, and I respect him for his
beliefs, I'm not questioning that, I think at times that he
hasn't had a full perspective of economic considerations. I
mean the great issue facing not merely Tasmania and
Australia, but the world, is of getting a proper balance
between development and discharging the undoubted obligation
that we have to future generations to protect the environment
and our heritage. Now, my observation about Bob Brown would
be that in his single minded commitment to matters
environmental I don't think he has at all times got the
degree of reasonable balance that I think is needed. But I'm
not saying that to try and knock the man, its an honest
observation and when he's been dealing with me he's put his
point of view directly and you're never in any doubt of
what his position is. I would question at times the
appropriateness of the balance. But in the end, in the end,
the issue is this. There are only two groups in this
election that can form a Government and that is the bloke
that's been there and produced a situation where you'vye got
the worst economic performance in Tasmania of any State in
Australia, a failed economic manager, and one who has failed,
general speaking in terms of his capacity to conduct rational
relations with the Federal Government, an issue which is
of central importance to the welfare of the people of
Tasmania. So that's on the one hand, you've got that, and on
the other you'ye got a fresh new dynamic young leader of the
Labor Party whose leading a Party which has got policies
which are relevant and a capacity for co-operation and
consultation with the Federal Government which is unmatched.
In end, that's the issue.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, with due respect to Mr Field's
initiative, isn't it true that we wouldn't be at this point
without that public opinion campaign fuelled by Dr Brown and
Ms Milne? We wouldn't be at the point of talking about
unbleached paper and unbleached pulp mills?
11.
PM: Well Michael, no doubt will have something to say about
that but let me say no I don't accept that Ms Milne and Dr
Brown have any monopoly of concern about the environment at
all. I mean, just lets look at the record, the Australian
record. OK as far as this Government was concerned it
started with the Franklin and I pay clear and unqualified
tribute to Bob Brown and others down here who were involved
in that, and its no secret that the Labor Party had its
divisions and problems about that, that's a fact of history,
Brown is entitled to a significant credit for what developed
there, no question. But I've been in Government, I've been
Prime Minister of this country now for more than 6 years and
I personally have a deep commitment to the environment, no
one questions that. I have Ministers, successive Ministers
who've had that environment, I have in Senator Richardson a
man who doesn't look to anyone, whether its Brown or anyone
else as a guru, he has his own instinctive commitment to and
passion for matters environmental and you look at the record,
everything that was done, we are not a Government or a Party
which needs inspiration or direction or motivation from
anyone else. I pay tribute to all those have their deep
commitment JOURNALIST: I was referring on a State level.
PM: Yes, but on a State level, I can say before Michael goes
to it, let me make this point. When I was down here earlier
and the issue of Wesley Vale was on I didn't for instance see
Mr Brown or Ms Milne, but I had a whole lot of other people,
a range of people including for instance people from the
Farmers Federation, a whole lot of community organisations
and Labor Party people, who were pressing this issue to me.
I didn't have any personal representation from either of the
people you're talking about.
FIELD: Right, the Labor Party here has had divisions in the
past on the environment, but it was the Labor Party that
split because it wanted to save the Franklin Dam and gave the
opportunity of those groups to create a political climate
where in the end a Labor Federal Government saved the
Franklin, when a Gray Government'here was hell bent right
from the start of damming the Franklin. If you take the
Wesley Vale matter, we had a straightforward policy right
from beginning to end and that was support subject to proper
environmental control and we opposed the revised guidelines
because they didn't give that control. Now, it was the
Federal Government again that on advice to it could not
approve, given their reservations, about the fiasco that was
created here in Tasmania by the Gray Government. Now, to
explain causality in terms of a pressure group outside the
Government and give them all credit is a simplification of
history in my judgement because the facts speak a far more
complex story. Suffice to say that given our position now,
12.
( FIELD cont) this initiative will make sure that developments
in Tasmania will be clean and environmentally safe and that's
the assurance that this agreement gives to Tasmanians and
Tasmanians can be assured that, with cooperation with the
Federal Government, that it will be there for a long time.
We can get far better outcomes with far less division than
has been a feature of Tasmanian politics for the last ten
years and I think that's the message that people need to get
from today's conference.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, it's early today yet but would you
like to waive Ian McPhee goodbye?
PM: I wouldn't like to waive him goodbye but, and I don't
know whether I could get through the crowd of the reactionary
new right troglodytes in Victoria who are intent not on
waiving him goodbye, which is a reasonably felicitous way of
saying farewell to someone, but kicking him substantially in
the backside. Now they are so many and numerous clamouring
to do that that I don't know that I could be seen. But as I
say, I leave the internal affairs of the Liberal Party to the
Liberal Party. Each passing day they demonstrate their
incapacity and unfitness for office.
ends