IW2XXL t
PRIM MINSTE
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH HAYDN SARGENT, RADIO 4BC,
JULY 1990
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
HS: I liked yesterday's speech arnd I think a lot of people
feel, and have felt for a long time that Australia for a small
population on a small piece of land is crazily divided and
inefficiently divided.
PM: Thanks very much Haydn. Yes, it's a paradox because as I
said in the speech we're the only nation-continent in the world.
We've got this whole continent to ourselves and, therefore, as a
nation we don't have the problems of physical divisiveness and so
on that characterise other countries in their relations with
others, but we have imposed upon ourselves a set of divisions
which are quite stupid and which hinder our economic development.
So, what I'm really about is trying to get the States together
and without in any way seeking to impose anything upon them,
because you can't ever achieve anything that way, simply to sit
down and say well there must be better ways that we can deliver
services to the citizens of our country.
HS: I would like to see us with just a unified national program
in terms of hospitals, health, education, roads, road laws, legal
system, company law, railways I mean it's just crazy to have it
all done State by State.
PM: Well that's right and in the first area you talked about,
hospitals, r if you look at that, particularly in regard to our
elderly citizens, we have a situation where the States administer
the hospitals but we put in an enormous amount of money into them
to help them do that We have a responsibility with regard to
nursing homes and hostels for the aged and both of us also
deliver services to the elderly in their homes. Now there's
inevitably in that situation overlap, duplication not only
duplication in actual services, but in monitoring of, delivery of
services. It's very inefficient and so what I'm simply saying to
the States is well, look, let's sit down, I'll put on the table
what I think we ought to talk about which, incidentally includes
nearly all the things you mentioned, and if there are other
things that you, the States want to put on the table let's put
them down and, if it means Haydn that in certain areas that the
States will accept that the Commonwealth does it alt * ogether,
okay. In other areas it maybe that we can see that we want
certain national standards but the actual delivery should be done
exclusively by the States well okay let that be the case and if
-2
PM ( cont) s it means financial compensation from us to the States
to do that, well let's look at that. In other words let's go in
open-mindedly but with the agreed criteria that what it's about
is how to deliver more efficiently and better services to
citizens. That's what government's about.
HS; Now hopefully I think I've got a lot to gain as an
Australian from the end to all these inefficiencies. But, if I
were a State politician, Premier, Cabinet Minister, senior public
servant, I'd probably feel a little bit nervous because I can see
my job disappearing over the hill, because that surely would
ultimately would be the logical conclusion.
PM: Well, I am not proposing the abolition of the States,
that's not on the agenda, that's not realistic, I'm about making
the present system work more effectively. Now I think it is a
case that if we can get political agreement between the
Commonwealth and the States, there will be a reduction in the
number of public service jobs in total in certain areas because
you won't need the duplication of delivery mechanisms, or the
duplication of monitoring mechanisms in some areas. So, yes,
that's true. But as I said yesterday we've never had a more
propitious set of circumstances I think politically than the
present. I mean we've got, I think, now a range of capable,
committed State leaders and I'm not saying that simply because
the great majority of them are Labor, because I went out of my
way to pay tribute to Mr Greiner's positive approach on these
issues yesterday. So I think we've got the political will. Now
I don't think the fact that there maybe some lose of public
servants in certain areas will worry us.
HSs No, I just probably think that they would feel nervous
that's all, even though you don't.
PM: No no, well at the State level you see I've given an
indication yesterday of our goodwill, we'll get out of, for
instance, the bank account debits tax which is raising us some
$ 400 million. We'll take it off as State grants but the
important thing is we'll give that action area back to the States
and they'll be able to use that as they see fit. I mean it will
be their area, it won't correct entirely the imbalance between
revenue raising and expenditure, but it is another area of
opportunity for the States.
HS: That does seem a bit of a carrot though, Prime Minister, I
mean just saying well listen we'll give you that particular BAD
tax and you can play with that. In point of fact I think most of
us have come to recognise that the collection of money has
traditionally now passed to Canberra.
PM: Yes, but except in this area the States have a tax, the
-3
PM ( cont):; financial institution duty tax and we have the bank
account deposits tax and it is one in which letting the States
have that area doesn't have any adverse impact upon national
macro economic management. I mean I made clear yesterday that
the States themselves understand that if you're going to run a
national economy and try and protect a national economy, then the
central government has to have those sorts of powers. The giving
to them of this particular area of tax won't impinge adversely on
that consideration.
HS: Have you made any contact with the Premiers before
yesterday'sa speoch?
PM., Oh yes, yes, I spoke to them at the Premiers conference
that we had here just a few weeks ago. I signalled that I would
be making this speech and in broad terms the sorts of things I
would be saying.
HSI What was the reaction?
PM: Very positive and let me say that was in the pretty tough
environment of that Premiers conference where we were having to
cut their finances a bit. But, without exception very very
positive and, of course, before I delivered the speech yesterday
I wrote to them with a copy of the speech so that they had it in
advance.
HS: Now, some people are saying we've had a phone call
already this morning wait a minute, wait a minute, is this the
thin edge of wedge of Bob Hawke's desire to make Australia a
Republic? PM: Oh it's got nothing to do with republicanism, I mean you
can't really do much about some people's cynicism, it's inbuilt
and, nor their stupidity, let me not beat around the bush, I mean
that's just a stupid comment.
HS: okay, so what about the possib ility that some people say
well look we agree with this, but it's a little bit of a
smokescreen when the real problem confronting Australia today is
the economy.
PM: Again, they don't really know what they're talking about
because this is directly concerned with the economy. I mean I've
made the point that we have undertaken at our national level a
whole lot of micro economic reform, that is to try and get our
infrastructure right to give our firms the most sort of
competitive environment within which to operate. But we're now
reaching a stage in micro economic reform where we need the cooperation
of the States. For example, let's look at a particular
issue, transport. In regard to rail and road freight, we now
4-
PM ( cont) have to work together with the States to have, we
can't get uniformity of gauge in any immediate sense. But what
we can do is get a greater integration of policies between
national rail authorities to limit as far as we can the
inefficiencies that flow from divided authority. Now that
national rail freight initiative is underway and will get an
impetus from what I said yesterday. If you take the question of
power generation and distribution, the States generate
electricity but we have inefficient arrangements between the
States now for interchange between the grids. Now in that area
we need to, if we're going to have proper economic reform, we've
got to go down the path that I initiated yesterday. If you look
at the question of the waterfront. Now we've made a lot of
reforms there and are continuing to do them but a significant
part of waterfront reform is the actual port authority, that's a
matter of State jurisdiction, so we've got to co-operate with the
States to try and ensure that our ports operate as efficiently as
possible. in other words, an absolutely central element in what
I was about yesterday, was economic reform.
HS: Right. You've got a conference in Brisbane in October with
the Premiers about this issue, how soon after that conference do
you hope that some of the changes will start to happen?
PM: Quite soon in some areas. It's a very good question and I
addressed it yesterday. What I said, Haydn, is that what I do
not want is some long drawn out process in which we have a
voluminous report at the end of the process which covers
everything. I said what I want is successive decisions, matters
being dealt with case by case, considered case by case, decision
case by case, so that those things that are capable of being
dealt with fairly quickly are so dealt with. There will be
others which by their nature take longer, but what I'm looking at
is a series of decisions in the various areas. I've nominated
areas where I think we should concentrate first, but I'm not
S being prescriptive about that, I've nominated health and welfare
services, but we will be working contemporaneously on a range of
issues. Now to make that process realistic and not just sound
vague, what I've done is to invite the States immediately to
nominate a representative at a senior level I've nominated the
head of my department and that committee will be set up
immediately to prepare papers so that when we meet at that
conference in Brisbane at the end of October the first of what
I see as a series of Premiers conferences to deal with issueswe
will have concrete and well thought through working papers
which will enable us as Premiers and as Prime Minister to make
the decision which will get the process in a concrete fashion
underway. HS: Okay, while you say you're dealing with it on a case by
case basis, and I agree that that's probably the most efficient
MS ( cont) t way to deal with it, do you have a long-termi goal f or
say that by the year 1998 to the year 2000 1 would like to see
this kind of national efficiency achieved?
PM: Yes, well yes, I've really set a decade because as a student
of hiatory I know as a fact it took the 90s of the last century,
the 1890s where the representatives of what were then the
Colonies, it took them the whole of that decade to get ready for
the Federation which came into existence on 1st January 1901. So
I'm really setting a decade so that when we celebrate the
centenary of Federation on 1st January 2001, these processes will
have been paying their dividends throughout that decade. There
are two parts, of course, to what I proposed yesterday, there is
what you and I have been talking about now the rationalisationi of
services delivery between the Commonwealth and the States, that
is within the existing Constitutional arrangements; but I've also
given my imprimatur to a process of Constitutional reform
starting in April of next year which will be the centenary of the
first Federation convention in Sydney in 1891. Now what we want
to do is to sit down with the States and with lawyers and
community groups to do the very best we can to get agreement on
proposed Constitutional change. Now, for instance, I said
yesterday I think everyone virtually in the community thinks that
a four-year parliamentary term rather than a three-year
parliamentary term is better for government of this country and
I'm very pleased that Dr Hewson seems to agree with that, so what
we will do in this second category of work that is attempting
to reform the existing Constitution will be to look at perhaps
a series of referenda in this decade which will mean as we go
into the 21st century and our second hundred years of Federation
that we will be better equipped constitutionally to handle it.
HS: Prime Minister, I want to thank you for your time. My
personal view is that if in ten years time as a result of this
achievement of this greater efficiency Australians say well
S listen we really don't need the States anymore and we can do this
distribution of services at a grassroots local government level,
I think that will be a good thing, don't you?
PM: Well that's for Australians at that time to decide. I said
back in 1979 that if one were starting afresh in Australia we
wouldn't have the sort of system we've got now. But my duty and
obligation to the people of Australia is to try and work with
what we've got and make it work better. If in the future
Australians want to make that more radical change that will be
for Australians then to decide, my duty is to try and make this
work better.
HS: Prime Minister thank you for your time.
PM: Thank you Haydn.
Ends