1~~
II. PRIME MINISTER
E & OE COPY
TRANsCRTP'T OF PRIE JMUN13TERIS ADDRESS ( QUESTIONS ANSWERS)
WORLD) AFFAIRS COUNCIL, NE WPORT DEACHI U. S. A.
WEDNESDAY, 17 NOVEMBER, 1993
Q: What does Australia think of NAFTA?
PM: Well, 1ve already answered sonmc Of thatt. There has been a discussion in our country
about whether Australia should be part of a rogional trade agreement with the United
State.,. In other words, you might remember President Bush making a speech in the
election catupaign called the hub and spokes speech whero tho U. S. was proposing makinil
bilateral trade agreements with countries of the Auia-Pacific. It was a sort of NAFTA writ
large. f-think NAFT A can wurk for the United States because there is a naturalness about
it Canada's already a large marktL and you share a common border with it. M** dco
you share it border with It and you have an Interest In lif1ting the economy mid wooyo
Mexico In terms ofi wealth. But I think a more naitural ai-rangemenct ~ s to ftee up trade
to that countries can trade with one another and not be caught up In artificial bilateral
arrangements. Theres nothing purticultrly suilficial about Mexico and Canada and the
thiac's a niaturalne~ ss about that.
B~ ut there can be an artificial quality to bilateral trade things, So. the notion that Austu alia
should be part of NAFTA is, I think, nut one which Australia would embrace, but, rather,
seeing NAk'TA part of APEC Is a more natural thing. That Is. whether the, Unted State.
trades in gin agreement with Canada or Mexico Is immxater-ial to whecther it trades into the
Pacific or whether Canada trades Into the T'aciflc or whether Mexic trades i the Pacilfc.
So, we think NAFTA Is good for the United States. It's not necessarily our ticket our
ticket is the bigger agenda of AI'EC and the U. S's Involvement In that. Indeed the NAPTA
partners' involvement in that. But, it does certainly underline, in the whole question about
American directions, that the Congress has decided with the Prcsldcnt, to look to the freer
trade path because it's only In freer trade have we seen the greut growth iincomes over
the course Of thi$ cetntury. Sol I think if' NAFTA'. a bell weather of where the Uiitod
States is going thezi NAFTA Is something to be approvad of
Q: When we were In Australia quitu rce; vzjtly there was a lot of discussion about the republic
. Inaudible.. rclationship with the Comm nwealth Inaudibhl..?
2-
I': I think hes trying to act. me Into troublel But 1' 11 happy to obli hin. Austria is a very
unusul % situation. lt a large continental land mass, were the only nation on earth With a
continent to itself, eighteen million people, we've got to consolidate the place and be part
of the region in which we live, And Australia has changed. It's not a monoculturs, it's a
diverse multicultural country. For instance, half our intake now from our migration
program comes from, Aia; theres about 150 nationalities In Australia at the momntA.
Multicuituralism hes worked there very well indeed. The toleiance and sern of
democaoy In the place Is protbund.
We think that we are a different kind of country than the one that we might have known In
the last century or even in the first half of this century. And that Australia should be
ropresented for what it is. That is. an Independent people with its own culture and its own
cultural identity and that it can't make Its way i thme world & 3 well as it might unle i t Mn
represenits itself. Just as the people of the United Stas took a decision many years ago to
manage their own affairs absolutely. This is something we are thinking of. Now, as you
know now, the Queen of Oreat Britain Is also the Queen of Australia and consftutional
head of Australia. And I have been bold enough to say that I think that constitutional
arrangement doesn't suft us anymore. And that Australians would be advantaged by
moving to a republic, with an Australian person with our Head of State so that our whole,
if you like, man~ ifestation of the place and our representation or ourselves to the world is
one a proud country which is indigenous and which is independent. And projecting that
pariciularly in the are whore we liv.
An important pan of that to also coiing to terms with oursolvcs And we are just at the
moment having our own NAFTA debate with an issue called Mabo. Which is
time name of an Aboriginal person who succeeded in having our supreme court age that
there was a native title in the common law of Australia. And I have just introduced a Bill
into the house of Parliament In Australia this wek to give an adnirativo expression,
to build a body of administration and law so that the Aboriginal people of Australia secure
land or repossess land as a common law right. A native title. And this Is a matter of great
debate, as you can Imagine, in any country. But in corning to terms with our Aboriginal
community, in seeking to let them repossess land long ago dispossessed, wc will go
forward much happier and more harmonious. But go forWard a different kind of country
than the one we used to be. And when we do that well be at our most powerful and our
most persuasive in telling people about ourselves and, I think, to be doing that we'll be
most successful. So these are the thoughts which are runnming thrugh thme mind of the
nation, These are matters to be decided but for which tlicre is already a very important
debate.
Q: Who will open the Sydnvy 2000 Olympics, the Prime Minister or..?
PM: A real trouble maker, a real trouble maker. Well, the answer is our Head Of State. My
Party's objective is to sce Australia become a republic by the year 2001 which is the
Centenary or our federation. Well that's the ItA January 2001 and the Olympic games are
e I
on in Octbcr or November of die year 2000. So theres only three months diffesrence, so
let's not haggle over three itonth, end maybo we cam get the job done before then, in
which case it would be a simple answer. B~ ut, as none of us havc a crystal bill I can nldy
say, our Head of State.
Q: As Anmemica's our best mate, OK? How do you see our trade relationship?
PM: You want me to take that. old?
C: You take Il
0: Well, we have, as I said, a great history together. I man there is genuine warmth between
the United States and Australia. Genuine warmth. People to people writh. It', not just
stylised government to government warmth it's Pot treaty warmth, It's rWa warmth. And I
think that's evident here tonight In a reciprocal way. That's the key thing, The rent of it
flows naturally.
We du have diflbrent economic interests an'd we live In different pang of the world. But
we do live In the pant of the world which Is growing the most rapidly and that's the Asia-
Pacific. sop at good Mrends of the UnIted States we've taken the, view that, Isure, the Cold
War has finished and a lot of that Cold War polarity has gone. And there may have been a
view In the United States well in that caut the peace dividend has come horne from the
Pacific. But 1 think too much of the Pacific policy has been made by die berence
Department and not enough by the Conunerce Deparunent and the State D~ cpartinent. So
what we are 3aying as Miends of the United States Is, ' Well. look we want to see the area
blossom but we want to see you in It. We want to swe you in it in terms of investme~ nt, in
terms of trade. We want to see you there culturally. And we want to see you theme
strategically. And by doing that, saying that. and arguing a case ft~ r the United Stistas pau-ticipation in
this part of the world, I think we argue the case ofa fMend, by a fiend. And themrsult will
be, I think, a much better Pacific, a much quieter Pacific ind 1a1 11re bountiftit area. Not
just for the countries of the Pacific but for the United States as well. So I'd likce to see out,
relationship grow that way In trade terms. We'll still have our bilateral deflcie, treaty but
the most important thing I'd always like to st Is more tourivin, inore visits by Americana
to Austuia and vice versa to thicken up those personal relationships which, in dwi end,
are the core relationsh~ ps on which, country to country relationshipr, exilst. And, they are
the things I think were most proud oft That boast of friendship betwumn the United States
and Australia which will remain and will provide the basis of whatever we do in trade, in
IAYCuitinn or in strategic terms.
Q: Prime Mfinister do you share any oftDoctor Mathiers concerns that the United States
inaudible.. too much powcr/ Influetice.. Inaudible..?
-4
PM; Well, there are many countries suspicious of the powcr of the United States but any
country this large and Whs successfu will always find its detractors. Rut. fhr my Wai I'm
not, obviously, because I've argued the converso cast. The key point, I think, for
countries like Malaysia which worry about it, is this: The argument runs, you take, a
country like Malaysia or any such country and put It Into APEC, it will get pushed around
by a country like the United States. But the United Statts has a greater capacity to shape
relationships thtrough bilateral ai-angements of unilateral arrangemecnts iand lea of a
cApacity in a multilateral iatructure.
So, there is a great body of opinion in the United States administration and the Congress
which says, " Don't sign up to multilateral structures. lDon't lose our right basically, to be
the top do& on the street. Don't multllateralise. ourselvcs with a set of rules." That's what.
APEC means. The U. S. Would multdlateralise Itself with a set of rules. It would give
something away. But In return it gets a much greater access and more growth in the area
of the Pacific, which can be of great benefit to it. So, for people who have fears about the
Untied States' power theres more to be feared fromi the U. S. dealing with them
unilaterally and bilaterally than the U. S. signing up to a multilateral struetuire with the
disciplinary rules and disputes settlement procedures which apply to all the member istates,
including the United Statop.
So, that's why I've always thought the case against the United States mid APEC basically,
is not correct. And the U. S. is better in APEC and were better off with the U. S. in APEC
with the multilateral struCtUre. Now. I hope that Prime Miist er Mahathir and other
people see that way over tine because I think that's as It Is.
Q' I wonder if the Prime Minister could answer why he cuddled the Queen and secondly, did
she enjoy it?
PM: I can probably do this one cold tool Well that brought mny concern for the Queen to meet
her if you like, her friends in Australia, the people slit knew, her Australian subjects as
some would put it was to spirit her through a crowd. And it led with it got III* the
salutation In the London tabloids, ' Hands orfvobbctil'. O-R-Fr. And they
apparently bclicved I wag some sort of lounge lizard so they cliristcocd mec the Lizard of
Oz. Now, I'm sure Her majesty was flattered with the attention. She has hinted that to
nie since. But T can't get the tabloids to publish a word ofit.
ends.