PRIMEM~ I NISTE
TRANSCRIPT OF' JOINT NEWS CONFERENCE WITH PREMIER WAYNE
GOSS, BRISBANE AIRPORT, 16 NOVEMB3ER 1990
E & 0ES-PRCOF ONLY
JOURNALIST: What is the significance, Prime Minister, of
this agreement as far as Commonwealth-State relations are
concerned? PM: Well the significance is that after three years of
attempting to get a position where there would be
effective management and protection of the World Heritage
area in the Wet Tropics of Queensland, we've demonstrated
that now that; with the election of Wayne Goss and the
Labor Government in December of last year that the
interests of the people, not just of Queensland but of
Australia, have been put first. With the election of
Wayne we were able to put behind us all the negativism of
the past of t: he previous Queensland Government and we sat
down and in March of this year we reached the initial
agreement and now this is the culmination of that
agreement which we tentatively reached then and under
which Queensl1and will undertake the responsibil. ity of the
day to day = mnagement of the Wet Tropics area. Together
we will be putting in a substantial amount of money, I
think about $ 11M this year, Wayne, from the Commonwealth
and the State Government to ensure that for this and
future generations this great natural resource is going
to be nurtured and protected and made available for
enjoyment by not only the people of Australia but I think
an increasing number of people from overseas. It's a
very important day and I want to express my sincere
gratitude -to Wayne Goss and the Government of Queensland
for the fulsome cooperation that they've extended which
has enabled us to reach this important day.
GOSS: From our point of view this is a very important day
not just for Queensland but, I think, for Australia
because the ' Wet Tropics are of national and indeed
international significance and they are now secured,
their future is secured by this agreement and by what I
think is a remarkable cooperative arrangement between the
Commonwealth Government and Queensland. There are a lot
of people in the National Party who are claiming that come
this day the Wet Tropics were going to be annexed by
Canberra. well Bob's given me an assurance they're not
going to tow it away, it's going to be left in North
Queensland and it is going to be what we all want it to
be, and that is one of the most magnificent areas in the
country properly managed. I mean the past three years
have seen a brawl, they've seen the Wet Tropics under
threat, we've sQeen millions of dollars wasted on legal
challenges. The future sees those millions of dollars
going in on a joint basis by the Commonwealth and the
State to manage and protect the Wet Tropics long term.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Premier Goss has organised a
summit, an environment summit, for next year to look at
dispute settling procedures. Would you like to endorse
that summit and perhaps see any national bipartisan
agreement or any agreement might come out of that?
PM: Well there are two things to say. I mean history in
a sense is overtaking us. Firstly, that Wayne and I have
talked about this and we would want to be cooperative and
involved. Secondly, of course, at the Special Premiers'
Conference whiLch we held up here just very recently and
which Wayne and the Queensland Government did so much to
make it a success by their pre-organisation for it, at
that we agreed again on the need for Commonwealth-State
cooperation in these areas. What we have now is a
position of common ground where we recognise the
responsibility that Government have as well as for
economic development which we share. We also have a
responsibility for making the right decisions about
protecting the environment. We recognise that there are
areas of shared responsibility and we want to make sure
that we have effective complementarity between the things
that we do so that it's effective in terms of
discharging the obligation we have in protecting the
environment. And in respect of the legitimate
development which must take place in this country that we
put the least unnecessary impediments in the way by
duplication and unnecessary doubling up of processes. I
think we are at one on that.
GOSS: Absolutely. I think the other thing that you
should know is that during the Premiers' Conference I had
private talks with Bob in relation to the Conference and
secured his approval for the Commonwealth Government's
Ambassador on the Environment, Sir Ninian Stephen, and
the Federal Environment Minister, Ros Kelly, to
participate in the conference.
JOURNALIST: noisy brawls previously are now costing
Australia and Queensland tens of millions of dollars and
knocking the confidence of investors coming here
PM: I think it's true to say that the lack of there
are two things I think are relevant in answer to your
question. I think in the past, particularly in regard to
Queensland, the siege mentality that existed on the part
of the previous government who wouldn't accept the bona
f ides of the : Federal Government created an atmosphere, a
poisonous atmosphere which would certainly have worried
people who were concerned about the future, either from
an environmental sense or from a developmental sense. I
think that's true. Secondly, I would say that the rather
ad hoc nature of approach that had necessarily been
adopted in the past was something that gave rise to
uncertainty and that's why we at our level and Wayne, of
course, at his level has been doing things as well. But
at our level we've tried to introduce a certainty of
process now. There are three elements to that. We've
set up the Resource Assessment Commission so that we're
going to be able to on these broad issues give the
opportunity for developers, environmentalists, State
Governments, unions and business to actually have an
input into the consideration of these broad issues.
Secondly, we've set up the ecologically sustainable
development processes in specific sectors of industry
which will report to us by the end of the year. We've
got the cooperation and involvement of the State
Governments in that. So that at the end of that process
I hope we'll be able cooperatively to lay down clear
guidelines and principles which will be available to
everyone. The third point, of course as I've said, is
the cooperation we now have out of the Special Brisbane
Conference with the States which I think will mean that
everyone concerned in this area, both those whose
emphasis is the environment and those who are concerned
with development, will know that there is a clear cut
relationship and a complementarity between Commonwealth
and State approaches on these issues. So whether you
look at any one of those issues, the existence of a sort
of troglodyte; government in the past up here, that's
fixed. The emergence of Wayne and the Labor Government
and the actual processes have been rectified and the
basis of cooperation established.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, going soft on
environmental concerns since the election from some
environmental quarters. Can you wear that criticism?
PM: I can wear criticism which ever side it comes from.
I mean I-thirik Wayne in your now relatively short period
in Government: has come to recognise, and indeed we've
talked about it, but in these sort of areas you can never
have 100% winLS. You will never really totally satisfy
some people in the environment movement whose agenda is
almost limitless. I don't say that in a hectoring way.
In fact in respect of altoPo them I don't question their
integrity but: they do have, many of them, a fairly
elastic agenda and you will never totally satisfy them.
On the side of some people it's dig up anything, cut down
everything. Now those sort of red-neck developers,
you'll never satisfy them.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister
PM: If I could make a final point. What you've got to
do as Wayne was trying toi" do here, we're trying to do
federally, is you've got to establish a process which
gives opportunity to the interest groups to express their
point of view. Once you've established that process so
it's not just a system of ad hockery, then 1 think you're
well on the way to not satisfying everyone but at least
everyone knows where they are.
GOS8: I think what this agreement's about is that I
mean, on either extreme with the developm~ ent and the
environmental lobby you'll always get comfplaints about
governments. But by this sort of cooperative approach,
by trying to gret results, you get the right balance and
the broad pub]. ic want to see that. That's what I think
we've got to achieve as Government.
JOURNALIST: Who does more harm, the radical greenies or
the red-neck developers?
PM: I think that's a pointless question and I know
you're asking it for constructive purposes. bona
f ides in that respect. But I think in some circumstances
one would say that the position of the environmentalists
is the harder to sustain on a particular issue. On
others the environmentalists are basically right and the
developers who'll want to do that particular thing
haven't thought it through correctly. I mean there is no
overall judgexient to be made about that, I think.
JOURNALIST*. Prime Minister, what was the substance of
your talks last night with President Bush?
PM: The main purpose of my call, we spoke the best part
of half an hour, was the Uruguay Round because I wanted
to convey to t: he President the profound concern that I
feel about the sense of crisis and the reality of crisis
which has developed in the Uruguay Round talks. They
were scheduled to complete in the week commencing the 3rd
December in Brussels. That was to be the final week.
Now on the situation that's been created by the European
Community where they put a totally unrealistic offer on
the table which is totally prejudicial to the interests
of Australia 4ind the Cairns Group and particularly of our
rural producers, I was not prepared to sit by ain just say
well all is lost. The basic point that George Bush and I
discussed was the need to inject now into these latter
stages of the Round, political clout, that the
negotiating Ministers must know that at the Heads of
Government level there is a concern that we are facing
not merely a potential economic crisis but a political
crisis because if the world doesn't come to sensible
decisions to create a freed up, liberalised,
international trading system then the losses are not
merely economiLc but they will have profound political
implications. So we talked about that and how we can get
more political input and impetus to the process.
JOURNALIST: Did he give you some sort of indication that
he'd be taking some sort of decisive action to overcome
the impasse?
PM: He outlined actions that he was taking. Held Just
within the previous 24 hours, he'd had meetings with the
Lords of the European Community and the Commission and
the Italian leadership and he also indicated to me at
that time that Secretary of State Baker was going to be
engaged inbi lateral discussions with the European
leaders on this issue. So he-and I are at one on the
understanding of the dimension of the crisis and the need
to exert leadership and we have undertaken to continue to
be in contact about what comes through from these
initiatives that he's taking, the initiatives that I'll
be taking flow in contact, direct contact with European
leaders. So-we are at one on this issue.
JOURNALIST: ' Have you reached a decision on whether
you'll be going personally to Brussels?
PM: No, I won't be going personally to Brussels because
at this stage the need is to get into the Brussels
meeting and i~ n the minds of the Ministers involved, the
political concerns that there is at the Head of
Government. So we've injected that. It is possible that
if the Brussels meeting doesn't of itself generate
discernible progress that we may need to contemplate a
Heads of Government meeting subseguent to that and we did
have some preliminary discussions about that. He did ask
me what we -talked about it was overwhelmingly about the
Uruguay Round, as I've explained to you. 1, of course,
took the opportunity of discussing the Gulf with him and
we both affirmned to one another the commitment that we
have firstly -to the essentiality of the withdrawal of
Iraq from Kuwait and the release of all hostages and the
profound hope that we both share that this conclusion can
be achieved by peaceful means.
JOURNALIST: Did he seek any greater commitment from
Australia if the Gulf war eventuates?
PM: No.
JOURNALIST: And was there any indication from him that
the outbreak of hostilities was imminent?
PM: No.
JOURNALIST: Or inevitable?
PM: No.
JOURNALIST: fir Hawke, apparently last night there was a
fairly savage attack on Mr Hewson.
PM: Last night?
JOURNALIST: Or yesterday. Some parties are suggesting
that maybe you and Mr Keating were..
PM: Yes, some people would want to do that to avoid the
realities. I mean if you're on weak ground you always
seek~ to divert attention from weakness by suggesting that
there has been some lack of gentlemanliness in th~ e iftttaci
that's been made. The realities, of course, are that Dr
Hewson is the pathetically weak leader of not just an
irrelevant Opposition but a dangerous Opposition. That
has been made clear by myself and Paul Keating in two
distinct areas. In the area of economic policy he's been
exposed e a man who, as Paul Keating graphically but
rightly put it, will roar like a lion at his doorstop
interviews and say we must cut Government expenditure,
$ 3B. But when the chips are down on an issue which
would've immediately in this year saved $ 25M4 or $ 5714 in a
full year, he goes in and puts the proposition of support
for the Government in his Caucus, but then rolls over and
allows himself to be done, doesn't fight for it and
indeed so weak is his attitude in his own Party room,
that it becomeas a matter of comment to the media by his
colleagues. Now that's something that you should attack
in Government. I mean if you are concerned about
responsible economic management then you can't afford, in
our judgement, to tolerate such weakness and hypocrisy on
the part of the Opposition and its leadership. To expose
that is not going over the top, to expose that is our
responsibility. And I said there were two areas.
Secondly, the area of foreign affairs. I mean we had the
ridiculous situation which emerged yesterday that we have
the opposition in this country now attacking not simply
Nelson Mandela and those who fought against apartheid,
but we . now have them attacking the President of South
Africa and accusing him of playing favourites because he
has chosen as his interlocker, Nelson Mandela. These
things, you know, are just ridiculous intrinsically but
they are also dangerous for Australia.
PM: Prime Minister, Keith Wright this morning has said
that he will be defecting factions. Are you concerned
about what appears to be growing factionalism? I mean
that's three MPs now who have indicated
PM.-That's not growing factionalism, it's a bit of a
reshuffling cof the pack.
JOURNALIST: inaudible
Pm: It's not: unseemly at all. I mean I think that if
Keith believes that he will be more comfortable in the
Left then that's a decision that I can live with and
presumably the Left is able to live with. That's alright
with me. He will be continuing to be a good
representative for his electorate and making a good
contribution in the Parliament. You see, what we've got
in the Labor Party is a system that's not perfect. I
mean I've had my things to say about us and the factional
system has never worked perfectly. But see what you've
got to understand is the difference between Labor and the
conservatives is this; Labor is about change, Labor never
accepts that society as it is is perfect. We believe
that it always can be improved. That's why we now are on
the eve and it's appropriate to say it here in this
great State of Queensland which was in so many ways the
cradle of the birth of Labor we are now on the eve of
the centenary of the Labor Party, unchanged in name and
unchanged in comitment. That commitment is to change.
and improve society. Now when you have that sort of
Party you have within it: people who have causes and
concerns and some people will want to deal faster with
some issues thtan with others. Now the way that's worked
out is that people are in the factional groups but
they're united, united about wanting to affect a better
society. That's Labor. On the other side all you have
Is this mindless, grasping back for the past of wanting
to restore thiLngs that are unrestorable and shouldn't be
restored. So you get changes of names in the
conservatives, they change their name, change their
leaders. In a sense, nothing changes with them. I can
live with these things.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, factionalism hasn't been a
problem in the federal sphere yet it was so divisive for
the Labor Party here in Queensland for so many years.
Are you worried that it could become divisive at the
federal levell?
PM: No it won't become divisive. I mean we get value
out of the faction system. It is a way in which you know
who to deal wi~ th and instead of having to say well now
you know some people have got a different point of view
and they've got a different point view, but with the
factional system at least you've got a method of
organisation. As I say, let me make it quite clear, the
faction systemi isn't perfect and it can cause problems at
times. But we've shown now in nearly 8 years of
Government how it can be a force for good and Wayne Goss
here in Queensland is sitting in control of the
situation, he recognises that groups exist and he's able
to work with them.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, the Australian Embassy
off icial who last year apparently took to two Chinese
refugees with a stockwhip and an air pistol has been let
off withAfine of $ 350, demoted but he still remains in
the Department. Isn't that fairly lenient?
PM: It seems on the face to be reasonably lenient. I've
Just been made aware of this issue. I'll talk about it
at the appropriate time with the Minister, Senator Evans.
On the face of: it it does seem rather lenient but I would
want to know all the circumstances.
JOURNALIST: inaudible
PM: Sure. On the face a~ i~ it wasn't very acceptable
behaviour. I'm not trying to defend it in any way.
JOURNALIST: M~ r Hawke, the Charles Blunt postage problem.
Do you regret stirring up that hornets nest?
PM Do I regret stirring it up? No, I've no problemf but
I bet Charlie does.
JOURNALIST: Did you expect it to go as far as it has now
with allegations of-
PM: I'm an innocent in these sort of things. I mean I
just had a question asked of me there in Question Time.
I mean there must be a did they ask that question?
They did and so I discharged my obligations of having the
information obtained and up it comas $ 278,000. A lot
of licks.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, will you be having any more
talks with George Bush in the near future?
PM: It's quite possible. I mean he expressed his
pleasure that I'd rung him and that we'd had the
opportunity of conversation and he undertook that we'd be
staying in contact. Now whether that means any more
phone calls in the near future or handling it through our
diplomatic representatives but we are going to stay
closely in touich on the issue. It's very important for
Australia's farmers that we do.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, just back to Charles Blunt.
Is there any or any ground for legal action or
recovery of those monies that..
PM: I don't know. I haven't involved myself in that
matter. That's something for the relevant Ministers and
Departments. I haven't intervened in that at all.
ends