PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
08/11/1996
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
10160
Document:
00010160.pdf 12 Page(s)
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON. JOHN HOWARD MP RADIO INTERVIEW - 3 LO WITH DOUG AITON

Fax from: 8 November 1996
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIMIE MINISTER
THE HON. JOHN HOWARD MP
RADIO INTERVIEW 3 LO WITH DOUG AlTON
AXTON: John Howard good afternoon.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good afternoon Doug. It's great to be here.
AITON; Thanks for coming. It's good to see you. I've got to go to a news item first thing.
David Irving and Gerry Adams have been, it's been decided by your Government that
they cannot enter Australia as they had hoped and my immediate thought is that
doesn't seem to fit in. This is my first confrontational question. That doesn't seem to
fit in.
PRIME MINISTER:
I hope things improve.
AITON: Yes. That doesn't seem to fit in with John Howard's approach to free speech which
you've made fairly clear.
PRIME MINISTER:
It's got nothing to do with free speech. 68/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg:

Fax from AITON;, What's it got to do with?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's got to do with the unfitness of both of them on character grounds to come here.
AITON: Could you explain that fu~ rther?
PRIME MINISTER:
Very easily. The Minister, whose decision I fuilly support, has decided that because of
his prior criminal convictions, David Irving can't come here. Any other person would,
with that background of criminal convictions, would routinely be rejected by the
Department of Immigration and the thing wouldn't even go to the Minister.
AITON: As a visitor?
PRIME MINISTER:
As a visitor, yes, yes. That in fact to me is game, set and match. This idea that it's got
anything to do with free speech is spurious. David Irving's book is published in
Australia. He will no doubt be on television tonight, probably bagging me and saying
he's going to appeal and do all sorts of things. So nothing stops his views comning out
here but any government has got the right to say to somebody who has got a record of
criminal convictions, you can't come here. As far as Gerry Adams is concerned, hie is
the head of Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein is the political mouthpiece of a terrorist organisation.
There's been a breakdown tragically in the peace negotiations in northern Ireland. I
would have thought that was also an open and shut case and once again has precious
little to do with free speech. The movement of people in and out of Australia is not so
much a question of free speech, it's a question of whether the Government of this
country has the right to decide at all times who should come here, even for temnporary
purposes. AITON: Do you think they, notwithstanding your explanation, do you think they'd do any
harm? PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think that's quite the point. These things always... Fafrft08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 2

Fax from 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 3
AITON:. But it's the question.
PRIME MINISTER;
No they always establish precedenynd governments do have a right to have a look
at the background of people in order to make a decision so the Minister in my view,
and it was his decision, I certainly support it very strongly.
AITON: Particularly in the case of David Irving, I object to his views very strongly. I mean, I
thin... PRIME MINISTER:
He's a crackpot historian but it doesn't alter the fact that he was convicted in the
United Kingdom, he was convicted in Germany, he was convicted in Canada, and two
of the offences as I understand it are related to passport, immigration or visa issues.
That record, if it had been, dare I say it, John Howard or Doug Aiton or any one of
your listeners, it wouldn't have even got to the Minister. People with that background
are being routinely rejected by the Department all the time so to let Irving in in those
circumstances would have required us to give him preferential treatment, preferential
treatment. We would have been required to discriminate in favour of him.
AITON: Yes I understand what you mean but I still don't think he would have done much harm
and I think it would have been handy to know what people think from, or what our
own people think, Australians from having a flutter like that let loose, if you like.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's really a question of applying the law in a consistent fashion. There have been
some very unusual people allowed in to come to Australia in the past. I've known a
few heads of government who have come here. They've subsequently turned out to be
very unusual, so unusual at the time that their unusualness was demonstrated later like
the late Romanian dictator, Ceausescu.
AITON: Yes, that's a little bit of a pot shot at Bob Hawke, is it?
PRIM MINISTER:
No it's not. I think in fact he was invited to visit Australia by one of Bob Hawke's
predecessors. No it's not a pot shot at Hawke. It's just an observation on some of the
difficulties and choices you have to make when you're in those situations.

Fax from AITON: You've been Prime Minister for eight months now I think. The greatest flak you've
taken by far, as far as I can see, is regarding Pauline Hanson, The flak seems to be,
you seem to be puzzled by it, you seem to say, look, I don't share her views but I
regard her freedom to speak, to make them important but the flak seems to be
perception to me. People think that you're not strongly enough opposed to her in your
heart? PRIME MINISTER:
That's wrong but my reac tion to that whole issue is not so much one of puzzlement, it
is one of the very strong belief that if the rest of the Australian community, particularly
some sections of the media, had taken the view to that speech that I took, I don't think
we'd be even talking about it now. I went to Indonesia and Japan. Two weeks after
the speech had been delivered I addressed the largest press conference ever addressed
by an Australian Prime Minister in Tokyo. The issue was not raised in Japan. It was
not raised in Indonesia. It never occurred to me to raise it myself because it never
occurred to me that the views of one person would be taken as representing the views
of the Australian Government, let alone the Australian people. If a member of the
national assembly of Indonesia or Malaysia or New Guinea for that matter, one
member made a speech which was violently hostile to Australia, I don't think we
would get ourselves into a lather of sweat about it. I don't think we would assume
that that meant that the Malaysian Government or the Indonesian Government disliked
us. So I took a deliberate decision. I don't have a racist bone in my body. I abhor
discrimination against people on the basis of race or background or colour or creed but
I also know that an obsessive and disproportionate preoccupation with the speech of
one person can produce consequences that are not in Australia's interests and I do
think that there has been an obsessive reaction by some sections of your own employer
in particular and by the Sydney Morning Herold. I single those two out as having
really sort of gone overboard on this issue.
Now they have a right to do that. haven't rung up the editor of the Sydney Morning
Herald and complained about it and any view I have I express publicly because I do
believe that people have got a right to criticise me. I am the Prime Minister. I know
that in the line of duty you're going to cop a lot of flak. I have resolved not to change
my handling of the matter because I do believe it's correct. I spoke to Tim Fischer this
afiernoon. He's just come back from a visit to Asia and he said that the position of the
Australian Government and the Australian people is well understood and I think in a
couple of months' time we will look back and we will say, gee, what was that all
about?
AITON: Well I'm not so sure. I've spoken with people such as Malcolm Fraser and Philip
Adams and... Faxfro00/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 4

Fax from PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Phillip Adams is an occupational critic of mine. You know that. I mean I don't
say that with any anger but Phillip Adams is. the opportunity to have a swipe, and he
has got a right to do that. He is exercising his free speech.
AITON: I wasn't talking to him about you, I was talking to him about Pauline Hanson. He and
I shared the view that we were both rather almost frightened. Malcolm Fraser that said
things along the same lines, but for what it's worth, Malcolm Fraser, Phillip Adams and
myself all believe that Pauline Hanson has caused an incredible amount of damage and
that I believe that you as Prime Minister could have at least deflected it further than
you have.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that's a view, particularly coining from you, that I respect but it's a view which I
disagree. I believe that if the same appropriate level of indifference had been extended
to that speech by others as was extended by me then I don't think we would be talking
about it now. Now we have to agree to disagree on that I do think that you have to
understand the very simple fact that there are a lot of people in Australia who have felt
over the years that discussion on some things has been too bottled up and there has
been this pressure cooker atmosphere develop in the community and there has been in
the community developed a view that there is an elite that really thinks that the
Australian mainstream can't be trusted to talk about certain subjects and I very widely
quoted a comment of Bob H-awke's that has been quoted by a number of people where
he sort of argued that attitudes on certain issues because they had been common
between the government and the opposition had really been maintained against the
strong body of opposite opinion in the Australian community.
Now in some circumstances that is an appropriate boast for a former Prime Minister to
make and in some circumstances that can be appropriate. In other circumstances it can
be very conceited, it can be very arrogant and it can be very insulting to ordinary
Australians and I do think there is a feeling in the Australian community, there was a
feeling in the Australian community before the last election, that they were being told
to what to believe on certain subjects rather than being encouraged or having a point
of view advocated towards them, so that was one of the considerations that 1 had in
mind. I do believe that if people had given the same level of disdain, displayed the
same level of disdain, now, I accept that people of great decency and good will have a
different point of view. I wear that, I wear that as part of the job and nobody likes
being criticised or bucketed but I don't complain and I accept the right of people to
criticise me in the most virulent fashion. I'U just argue back when I have the
opportunity of doing so I hope in a good tempered fashion.
AITON: What do you think of the 1950s? Fa8x/ f1rm1/ 96 19: 36 Pg:

Farxom 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 6
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the 1950s was the decade, I guess, in which I grew up. I turned 21 which was
the adult age in 1960. 1 think it was a period of enormous stability. In reflection it was
a period of great prosperity. It was very different. I would not like to go back to it.
AITON: Why not?
PRIME MINISTER:
To start with, you can't ever go back. Nostalgia is a nice thing but it ought to be kept
in its place.
AXTON: But do you yearn for the 1950s?
PRIME MINISTERNo
I don't, I don't yearn for the 1950s. I know.
AITON: You are accused of this you see.
PRIME MINISTER:
I know that but I mean it didn't work very well. I mean the first poster that the Labor
party produced about was one that was resplendent.
AITON; The picket fence.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no the picket fence and the FJs and the Morphy Richards toaster and the Bob
Menzies and the FJ and all of that, but it didn't work. I mean, in the end I was
autographing them as fundraisers, they were really very good. I think you have to
have a broad view of our cultural history. That was a period that had great stability
and strength, but very low in unemployment. When I left school unemployment was
less than On the other hand, medical science was nothing like it was today, we
didn't know as much about the rest of the world. 1 don't think that women felt
perhaps then they had as much choice as they do now.
Fax from

Farxom 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 7
AITON: Censorship? PRIME MINISTER:
There was more censorship. We probably had a narrower view in certain respects
about the world and about other countries in other races. We, for example, had a
white Australia policy which now people would regard as a complete anachronism. So
like all of those things there were pluses and minuses and when I talk about that period
I think, in fact, it was on your program I made a comment about the 1950s that
provoked the Keating attack and it was probably the genesis of that poster. But the
point I made then and I make now is that there were certain features of that period
which should not have been completely ridiculed and dismissed but there is a balance
sheet in all of these things. It is like the balance sheet of Australian history. I think that
shows a profoundly benign balance in our favour as a people. That doesn't mean to say
there aren't black spots in it and it doesn't mean to say that there aren't things that we
should as a community be thoroughly ashamed of.
AITON: Have you every entertained Aboriginal people in your house?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think I have entertained Aboriginal people in my home, not that I can
recall. Look, I may have. It's not a question I have every been asked before and I'm
57, 1Ijust don't know. I grew up in a part of Australia where I didn't as a young
person come into much contact with Aboriginal people. I grew up in the inner southwestern
suburbs of Sydney and it wasn't because of any positive decision on my part
or that of my parents but I just didn't come into contact with many of them.
AITON: Have you every entertained any Asian people in your house?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes, very early stage, yes, of course, I had a couple of class mates of mine, both at
primary and secondary school. Yes, from a very early age.
AITON: What do you want to be remembered for as Prime Minister? Are you able to say that
after eight months in office?
Fax from

Fax from PRIME MINISTER:
Well the thing that I'm proudest of over the last eight months was achieving uniform
gun laws. I think that has done more to turn around the atmosphere and the ambience
of our community, it will over time anyway, than anything else I've done so far. It will
give a safer Australia, it wvill make women in particular feel more secure, it will give a
safer atmosphere for a lot of' women and children and I am very, very proud of the fact
that people will stop me in the street and say " look I didn't vote for you and I probably
never will but I really did agree with what you did on guns"
AITON: Well you certainly did it very fast.
PRIME MINISTER:
That's particularly with women. That's not the only thing that I'm proud of. I'm
proud of the budget that Peter Costello brought down. I think it was a very strong but
fair budget and I'm very proud of the fact that we have been able to negotiate a good
understanding with the Australian Democrats about the Workplace Relations bill. It is
not everything we wanted but we could never get everything we wanted once we
didn't control the Senate but we have made giant strides and that Bill wvill over time
change for the better, forever, the Australian workplace system.
AITON: The two issues that continue to be a thorn in the side of Australia over not only
different governments on different sides of the fence, but also over the decades, it
seems to me anyway, Aboriginal welfare and tax evaders of a rich nature and I don't
think you have got any further that anyone else with either of those matters.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well give me time, I have only had eight months and as far as Aboriginal policy is
concerned as far as Aboriginal policy is concerned I want to be, when the time comes,
to remember me as distinct from experience ex-Prime Minister, I want to be
remembered as somebody in the Aboriginal affairs area who made a practical
contribution towards addressing the modem problems of the Aboriginal community
and that is their depravation in areas of health and education and employment and
housing. I see reconciliation as best being expressed through remedy and disadvantage
and it's not easy. Things like the Hindmarsh bridge fiasco tainted the cause of sensible
reform in the area of Aboriginal affairs and it will be hard and I'm not makcing any
& andiose promises but I don't want people to believe that just because I'm doing it
differently from my predeessor that I am any less committed. It's very important, and
there has been a tendency for us to be criticised, because we're doing it differently
from the Labor Party therefore we are less interested that's not the case at all.
Fafxo/ m1 1/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 8

Faxom 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 9
AITON; What about rich tax evaders who no-one seems to be able to stop?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't entirely agree with that, I think when I was Treasurer I introduced a lot
of measures which cut tax avoidance. If the complaints of those affected were any
guide they certainly hit the mark because I suffered an enormous amount of abuse and
criticism from some people all those years ago. And some of the measures, let me
frankly say, introduced by the former Government some of the base-broadening
measures made a contribution to eliminating some things and there are certain things
they introduced which we may have been critical of at the time which we haven't
reversed and we don't intend to reverse. But I'm not quite as pessimistic on that front
as your question indicates you are.
AITON; Did you have to grit your teeth when you handed Andrew Peacock the plum of..
PRIME MINISTER:-
No, no I did it with enormous pleasure. Andrew and I mellowed towards each other a
long time ago. We buried the hatchet, smoked the peace pipe, toasted each other
whatever metaphor you want to use quite a while ago and I really enjoyed being able
to offer Andrew that position. He will do the job brilliantly and I'm delighted that he
accepted. He understands the American political scene like no other Australian I've
ever known. He has superb top level contacts with both sides of the hill. And I can't
think of anybody to better represent the interests of our country in the United States in
the second term of a Clinton administration.
AITON: Well what was the problem, just that you both wanted to be Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
You could say that. Perhaps we both, on that particular issue, matured late,
AITON: Did you have a lot of confrontations with him, just the two of you?
PRIME MINISTER:
We had our share of arguments.
Fax from

Fax from 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 103
AITON: Did you shout at each other?
PRIME MINISTER:
Occasionally yes, but we ended up getting both of us got very tired of being blamed
for all the then perceived ills of the Liberal Party and some of the criticisms of both of
us and whenever you have something like that each has got to carry a fair proportion
of the blame. But in the end if something went wrong in the Liberal Party they'd say,
oh that's because of the Howard-Peacock rivalry. It would have nothing at all to do
with us, I mean, it would have to do with local dispute in Western Australia or
Queensland and they'd say well, if Howard and Peacock both got out, this problem
wouldn't arise. Now we sort of became the whipping boys for every perceived defect
in the Liberal Party and both of us got pretty tired of that a few years ago and we
decided over time to do something about it.
AlTON: When you draw down the blinds and close the curtains in your private home, perhaps,
or your office and talk to a close friend, what do you really say about the ABC?
PRiME MINISTER:
I say that I think the ABC is a terrific Australian institution. I think its political focus is
too narrow. You mentioned Phillip Adams, I think the ABC would do itself enormous
credit if it had a right wing Phillip Adams.
AITON: Yes, I think Gerard Henderson would be good.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the assumption behind that is that Gerard Henderson is a critic of the Labor
Party. I've read one critical comment, seriously critical comment of the Labor Party,
by Gerard over the last four years. I mean, he worked for me ten years ago.
AITON:
Yeah, I know.
PRIE MINISTER:
And I'd be fascinated to know what his political leanings are now. But that's his
business and his right. I wouldn't quite see him as fitting that bill.
__ 1

Fax from 08/ 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 11
AITON: Okay, you mentioned Phillip Adams, but do you really think the ABC is personified by
Philfip Adams?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think on a lot of issues the ABC is the spectrum of view is too narrow.
AITON: You mean, left wing?
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean, areas of, well certainly left of centre and certainly in the area of what you
might loosely call politically corr ect issues. I mean, the ABC has a fairly predictable
reaction on most issues. One of the strengths of any broadly based news outlet is to
have a range of views, a montage of views. I think, for example if I may quote a rival
outlet, one of the great improved strengths of the Sydney Daily Telegraph over recent
years as a tabloid newspaper is that it's got a range of columnists and they have
unpredictable and different views and I think that is a very, very good thing. I think
the ABC would do, if I may say you asked me the question I'll give you an honest
answer I think it would do better if it did that. And I try to sort of encapsulate it by
making that commuent that I do about Mr Adams, Now I'm not anti the ABC I listen
to the ABC still more than any other radio. I was brought up on the ABC. I learnt to
love cricket when I was a young child by listening to the ABC broadcasts. I learnt to
listen to rugby league broadcastings, forgive my Melbourne audience for quoting my
home town football. So I have no dislike of the ABC as an institution, I think it's a
terrific institution.
AITON: Well why don't you fix it instead of smash it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Fix it, that's the very antithesis of what it claims to be and that is an independent. You
say fix it.
AlTON: I think the Government is entitled to fashion the ABC, any Government Labor or
Liberal, the way it sees fit. I think that would have been better than... NA

Farxftf08 / 11/ 96 19: 36 Pg: 12
PRIME MINISTER:
No I don't agree, you see this is where I disagree. I mean, I think once you start even
giving a cent, I mean if I said yes to that a lot of your colleagues in the ABC would say
Howard wants to draw the teeth of the ABC, he wants the ABC to be a faint echo of
the Government, I don't want it to be a faint echo of the Government. I just want it
to be a reflection of the fact that it is funded by all of the Australian tax payers and all
of the Australian tax payers, they cover the whole spectrum and I don't think they get
the whole spectrum. I'm not saying they shouldn't get the spectrum that I think they
get a lot of, I'm just saying they should also get the other spectrum.
AITQN: What about the Republic, can we say goodbye to that?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think so. I think there's still a lot of blatant support for the Republic. I'm
not a Republican, but I'm not going to allow my anti-Republican views to stand in the
way of a full and free expression of the Australian people if that's what they want in
favour of a Republic. The only other comment I'd make is that if it is to happen. I
want it to happen in circumstances that unite the Australian people. I want it to be a
unifying event. Now that may mean that it comes a little later than some people would
like, but I can't think of a worse outcome that to have a referendum on the Republic in
a short number of years where it was carried by 5 1% to 49% or lost or even worse,
lost 5 1% to 49%. Better, if it is to come, that it be a little bit later but the margin in
favour of it be much stronger.
AITON: Yes I think it should be a thumping majority in favour of it. But are you going to go
ahead with the measures you said you were going to go ahead with?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there's still very strong support in the Coalition to have some kind of convention,
yes. We're discussing that issue quite a bit at the present time and I think we'll
probably have something to say about it before too long. But there is a view that we,
having said we're going to have a convention, that we should have a convention and
then there will be a vote on it. I mean, I just want people to understand that my views,
I'm not going to force my views on the Australian people but equally I'm not going to,
sort of haul down the flag on my own views just because the latest polls say that it's a
minority view. I am not going to let my views stand in the way of a full and free
expression. People knew that when they voted for me and it remains my position. I
haven't changed but I want the Austrlaian peopel to think about it, tWk about it,
ultimately vote about it, but in circumstances where, whatever the result is, it's a result
that everybody can feel comifortable with and that it's a chain of events that binds us
together ever more closely as Australian people.
Fax from

10160