Fax from
MAR 30 ' 97 04: 07P 38/ 03/ 97 28: 52
Mairch 1997 TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER
THE HON . JOHN HOWARD MP
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE LUNCHEON, SHANGHAI, BEIJING
E O E
Question: Mr Prime Minister ( inaudible) Air International. There has been a lot of discussion here
about Australian businesses and their future in China, I think Australian businesses show
the same tenacity and determination to never say die, the ability to comeback from
nowhere as you have in your political career then they are guaranteed-of success in China.
Would you agree?
Prime Minister:
I've never met him before in my life.. I promise you that. Yes.: of course I do.
Question: Stephen Morgan from the University of Melbourne. We've talked a bit about services
and the importance of promoting Australian services and technology, Quite clearly there
are opportunities here. What do you think are the prospects for, say the insurance sector,
in the near future ie Colonial Mutual or National Mutual winning a ( inaudible) operating
licence? Prime Minister:
I have to say they are good. hi fact I hope they are very good. And I will certainly be
pursuing that cause in Beijing in the discussions that I have with th Premier and-also
with the President, most particularly with the Premier and with the Vice Ptemier and the
other leaders with whom I will be having a dialogue. I think the importance and the real Pg: 1
P. 1/ 4
Fax fromt 30/ 03/ 97 20: 52 pg: 2
significance of the fact that this is a combined grovernment and businiess mission to China
is that it demonstrates the commitment of the Australian government to the cause of
Australian business in China. The seniority of the bxisiness delegation demionstrates the
seriousness with which the business community in Australia views that association and
also very importantly it communicates to the Chinese government the fact that we are
Working together and I think that is important. Sometimes in the Austral 1an context there
can be the view that the goverrnent aind the business community is not always working
together and sometimes It's a good ideafor the business community not to hear anything
from the government for a while because sometimes goverments gei in the way of
business. But when you are dealing with other nations with other societies, when. you are
deulina with systems that are differentr and have their ow, n pm-ticular way of doing things,
it is important I think to communicate that mnessage that we are looking at China together.
We won't always agree with everything that is put forward by a constituent part of the
business coiz'unity and it may in turm not always -agree with every sigedecision the
government has taken but what has pleased rme inunonsely about what wve have been able
to put together over the last little: while and is represented here x'~ ry much in this room, is
a determined partnership between the two of us to do something for the national ii~ terest
and we are certainly not going to leave any stone unturned in trying to achieve that goal.
Question: Prime Minister, Serena Lilywhite from ( inaudible) University. I am very encouraged by
your governxnents commitment to-the Asia Pacific region. However, I would like to har
from you as to howv you believe the possible demise of Radio Australiamay be
interpreted in this region and I certainly hope that it doesn't happen. Tiank you.
Prime Minister:
Well, that is a decision that will be.* taken ultimately will be taken in a sense in the
context of our Budget preparations but the option of phasing down Radio Australia is an
option that emerged initially fromn within the ABC as a method of achieving the
expenditure savings that had been fixed by the Expenditure Review Committed of our
Cabinet. We did, in Australia the new Government did inherit a underlying deficit of
billion and with one or two exceptionas tvery iector has hiad to make a contribution and
the ultinmate decision is really a question of priorities itot entirely or certainly not alone
within the government but also within the ABC itself and I understand the importance,
attached to Radio Australia by some parts of the Asi4 Pacific region. I also recognise that
in oqter parts the type of service offered by Radio Australia has been-to a significat
dcgrce replaced by different technology and different delivery systems. Now I know that
doesn't apply to some of the remoter areas of China and I know it doesn't apply in Some
of the other remoter areas of the region but cert ainly the advances that have occurred in
rcwnt years have dramnatically altered the relative significance of Radio Australia. So
that is the background and we will be taking a decision in discussion with the Australian
Broadcasting Corporation but you must understand that the initial impetus for it was as an
option developed within the ABC as a method of achieving the savings.
Fax from 00/ 7205 g
3/ 63/ 7 2: 52 Pg: 3
Question: Mr Prime Minister Glenn ( inaudible) Shanghai ( inaudible) Automotive Suspension
Components. The way You opecaie i this -part of thc world or anywhere else joint
ventures depends largely on the' strength of our holding cdrnpanies back in Australia. We
in the automotive industry here in Shanighai are particularly interested in the direction of
tbe automotive industry and-the future of it in Australia. Would you care to comment on
where you see that going and the future of that industry please.
Prime Mihister:
Yes, I would be very happy to. We -have* a Productivity Commnission fitial report due in
about two months time and the government will then,, I expect quite quickly take a
decision in response to thiat report. And there is a debate about whether and at what rate
there should be further tariff reform in Australia. I've said a number of things which have
put down some principles about how we would approach it. We'll endeavour to take a
decision which is in the overall interests of the Australian co mmnilty and the Australian
economy. We will also be very mindful of the hipoitunce of preserving a stiong motor
manufacturing capacity in Australia. I have said on a number of occasions in the past. and
I amn very happy to iepeat it'here, I can't envisage Australia without an effective and
strong motor manufacturing capacity. Now you are aware and all the Austxaiians in the
room arnd I'm sate all of the Chinese peopic in the rooin are equally awNare that the debate
about tariff reform and change aud the contribution it makes to employment is an old
debate and its ani ongoing debate. There is littki doubt in my mind that Australia has
enormous benefits to reap from greater trade liberal isation. It's always bard to sell in a
political -sense the broader benefits of trade liberalisatian because what you're really
talking about is the movement of capital into areas which it is not previously been
invested and it is a lot harder to benchmark, to measure and to say weU,. as a result of this
decision we've created 500 jobs. It is always a l ittle easy to say if there is an industry
protection change made or a tariff chanige wnade. As a result of that a certain niumber of
jobs have been lost but I think it is imaportant to remember, particularly in the context of
the Asia Pacific region that trade liberplisation underpins APEC.
Without trade liberalisation and the common commitment of dhe mnemnber states of APEC
to trade liberalisation, we won't achieve those goals and we won't get tho jobs that new
investment in industries, itew industries will provide to the populations of those
countries. These decisions are never easy and you can never reduce argumnents about
industry protection to simplicities but we ' ll1 endeavour to take a dccision that fits those
broad criteria and I want to see a motor manufacturing capacityv in Australia. I think the
quality of the Australian motor industry has improved enormously oVer the last 20 years.
It really has and it's achieved things, particularly in the export area that a lot of people
didn't think possible. Some of that achievement has been the result of competitive
pressures of industry policy anid wv've got to bear that in-miad so it's rcally ia question of
marrying all of those considations up but I can assure you that we're not. going to a sort 3
Fax from of a slash a burn approach to tariff policy. ccrtainly not. On the other hand 1 don't think
it's something that can be reduced to simplicities and if the ultimate. goal is a more, a
greater degree of liberalisation, particularly in the context of APEC than obviously you
have to keep that goal firmly in front of you. 38/ 83/ 97 20: 52 Pg: 4