CD
PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH MATT PEACOCK, ABC AM
22 AUGUST 1990
E OE PROOF ONLY
PM: The vision is clear for those who want to see it and
who don't put their blinkers of prejudice over their eyes
or over their one eye. What are the challenges facing
this country? You ask yourself that question then you
ask what's the strategy. The challenges facing this
country are the current account deficit, inflation and
micro-economic reform. Let me take the latter first
micro-economic reform. We've made it quite clear in the
period leading up to this budget that on our record we're
entitled to look any critic in the eye, and particularly
any hypocrit from the Opposition, and say you look at the
Hawke Government's record of micro-economic reform and it
beats the bejesus out of anyone.
PEACOCK: But in this budget
PM: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I haven't finished
my answer. We are coming into this budget with the best
record of micro-economic reform of any government in the
history of this country. Now we've made it quite clear
that we have underway, we've already announced a very
significant program of continuing micro-economic reform.
The particular extensions to that program that we'll be
announcing this year, have to wait until after the
budget, because as is well known we're going to the Party
conference to tackle there certain aspects of our policy
which currently act as some inhibition, particularly in
the area of telecommunications reform.
PEACOCK: That's the point though isn't it. In the
budget at the moment virtually it says watch this space.
Does it disappoint you that
PM: No, it doesn't. It's a very relevant budget in
terms of tackling the other two challenges that I talked
about. Now, on the micro-economic reform front it's not
as though it is simply the budget at this point. We have
continuing reforms going on in the waterfront and in the
area of road and rail reform we're working with the
States in those areas. It's simply that in regard to
telecommunications and what we may be able to do in the
airlines, on those two particular areas and those two
alone, we need to have this matter discussed in our Party
conference. I'm confident that we'll get a sensible and
2
constructive resolution out of that which will enable us,
as a government, before the end of this year to announce
further significant reforms in those areas.
PEACOCK: But at the start of this term you said you
wanted to quicken the pace of micro-economic reform. If
anything you've had to delay it, haven't you?
PM: No, on the contrary. The work is being done. It's
only in the two areas of telecommunications and the
airlines where we need the change of position in the
Party. But in all other areas the work is continuing.
PEACOCK: If I can just deal with a couple of items where
people have been critical of the Budget the situation
with pensioners. They're saying why not attack the
doctors, they're the people that write the scripts.
PM: It's not a question of attacking the doctors. In
terms of asking for some restraint from doctors, of
course we have delayed the next increase in GPs'
remuneration from August to later in the year and they've
been asked to play their part. But there's no attack on
the pensioners. What has been involved there is a very
simple and may I say absolutely necessary reform as far
as the future welfare of this country is concerned. One
of the most telling statistics in the Treasurer's speech
tonight was this, and you'll recall he said that it took
almost 40 years for the cost of the pharmaceutical
benefits scheme to rise to half a billion dollars. So
the next half a billion increase in cost took only four
years. It simply is essential that that problem be
attacked and that's what's being done with the reforms in
the pharmaceutical benefits area. But the important
thing as far as the pensioners are concerned is this
that they are not going to be paying the price. They are
going to pay the $ 2.50 per prescription but that will be
for so many of them more than compensated by the $ 2.50 a
week increase in the pension. No pensioner should be
worse off as a result of this decision.
PEACOCK: Mr Hawke, if I could move to the situation in
the Middle East. You said originally that our ships were
going to enforce the blockade. Has that changed and do
you or even they know yet precisely what their role will
be? PM: I've been quite consistent in what I've been saying
and I made it clear from the beginning that the precise
use of the Australian forces would emerge from
discussions that we'd be having with like-minded
countries and most particularly with the United States.
I made it clear that it was going to take some 22 days
for our ships to get from Australia to the Gulf region
and in that period we here would be finalising our rules
of engagement. Let me make one point on the rules of
engagement. There seems to be some stupid assumption on
the part of some members of the Opposition from some
1..
~ 4. 3
things they were saying that when the rules of engagement
were finalised that it would become a public document.
It just shows how little in fact they know about these
areas. But the point is that what we will be doing will
be playing our part with others in ensuring, as far as we
can, that those sanctions are obeyed. Now if you want to
say that's part of enforcing the blockade, it's not an
incorrect use of language. But never was I saying look
we're steaming over there to shoot salvos into shipping
or across their bows. I said we were going over there to
play our part and we will. What has been agreed is that
the most useful contribution that we can make will be one
which I've identified as having the four elements of
identification, contact, interrogation and warning. It
is clearly agreed with those with whom we talked, and I'd
say particularly with the United States who have the
largest component in the area, that this is an effective
use of the Australian naval asset.
4 PEACOCK: The United States has described the Americans
in Kuwait and Iraq as hostages. If the Australians there
at the moment are harmed, what will our response be?
PM: Well we're doing everything we possibly can to
ensure that that doesn't happen. I concede that the use
of the word hostage by the President of the United States
is an appropriate use of language. It's very difficult
to describe them as anything else. The evidence is
certainly alarming about what seems to be an increasing
dispersion of foreigners there to their various
aggressive installations. I can say at this point we
have no specific evidence of Austalians being in that
category but I must say honestly and directly to my
fellow Australians that if this sort of thing is
happening to others that we can't have any confidence
that it's not going to happen to Australians.
PEACOCK: Mr Hawke, thanks for joining us.
PM: Thanks very much Matt.
ends