E&OE...............................................
O'BRIEN:
Australia's Prime Minister John Howard of course has been
following the progress of talks in Baghdad closely over the weekend
and today and he joins me now from Canberra. John Howard, what is
your immediate reaction? And how closely have you been briefed on
what has gone on behind the scenes?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well my immediate reaction is one of hope. I think that is the
immediate reaction of all Australians. Nobody wants war, nobody
wants bloodshed. My next reaction is, that if miraculously we do
have something that is enduring out of this meeting then it will
have been as a direct result, I believe in very large measure, of
the leadership that the Americans have shown in making it plain
that if the Iraqis were not prepared to comply with the United Nations
resolutions then they would have paid a very heavy price. And I
think that ought to be said at the outset.
Now, I haven't seen the text of the agreement and until I
do, and I understand at this point the Americans haven't either,
I can't make a judgement. Obviously if unrestricted access
is to be made available then that is a big breakthrough. I do believe,
however, that the printed word and the promise of Iraq has to be
put to the test. And if there is something that is worthwhile persevering
with then maybe a number of inspections should take place to find
out whether the Iraqi leadership is as good as its word. And the
idea of there being any troop withdrawal or any military run down
until the veracity of the agreement has been tested by an actual
inspection would, I think, be unacceptable.
But I am not able to make a judgement on behalf of my Government
and therefore on behalf of the Australian people until I know the
wording of the document. I am aware that there were discussions
between the Secretary General and the United States Secretary of
State and that they were moderately positive. I also know that there
were discussions with the British Prime Minister with the same outcome.
Of course, until those two Governments actually see the document
themselves they are relying on the interpretation of the document
and the gloss put on it by the Secretary General. Now I am not accusing
him of any bad faith but we are dealing here, and I speak of Saddam
Hussein, with somebody who has been fairly indifferent in the past
about repudiating undertakings.
And whilst along with everybody else in the world I would sigh
an immense relief if we can be spared military action, having gone
through what the world has gone through over the past few years
with this man it will take more than a piece of paper to persuade
me that a genuine agreement has been reached and there has been
a change of heart. I want to see the results of an inspection. I
will want to see an independent adjudication before I would feel
that we had a proper deal.
O'BRIEN:
I can understand your caveats, Prime Minister, but would you agree
that given that the UN Secretary General is as seasoned a diplomat
as he is with the weight of office that he has with him, and given
that he has been dealing at such a high level with the Americans
and the British, that he would be unlikely to sign off on a deal
like this unless he was confident that it did meet the conditions
that have been pre-set?
PRIME MINISTER:
One would not think so but stranger things have happened. But I
would just make the additional point, Kerry, that it may well be
that everything in the agreement is acceptable. It maybe that everything
is acceptable to the Americans and the British and to us and to
others. But until you actually carry out the inspections which are
provided for in those agreements, then you are entitled to have
reservations. So I am not looking around for a reason not to accept
it, quite the reverse. I mean, everybody wants to avoid bloodshed,
everybody, every decent man and woman wants to avoid bloodshed.
But you are dealing here with somebody who has repudiated agreements
at will in the past, and I just want to be, and I am sure most Australians
would agree with me, want to be satisfied that the proof of the
pudding is in the eating.
O'BRIEN:
Do you agree that in all the circumstances it is now highly unlikely,
even if America wants to take at least days to really examine the
fine print of this, that the immediate heat is off?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, immediate in the sense of the next 24, 48 hours, but until
I have actually seen that agreement I don't want to sign off.
Look I am hopeful, I am immensely hopeful, everybody is entitled
to be hopeful and I agree that it would be extraordinary if a man
of this diplomatic experience had gone so far out on a limb as to
so compromise himself. Yet sometimes in the transmission of one
mans interpretation to another of a document that the other has
not seen there can be misunderstandings. And until that document
is actually sighted and is analysed by the Americans and the British
and by us, then you can't really sign off on it.
And then there is also the question of what steps are taken to
put to the test the offer which has apparently been made, or the
agreement which has been conceded by the Iraqis of inspection. I
mean that is what it is all about. It has been the objection hitherto
of the Iraqis to allow in a proper, foolproof inspection, particularly
of the Presidential sites, that has caused the trouble.
Now, I have got to be satisfied and I am sure the American and
British leadership will want to be satisfied that not only has there
been an expression of willingness to allow that, but it does, in
fact, take place so that we can be satisfied it is a genuine agreement.
O'BRIEN:
And just on your concern that the military presence should remain
in the Gulf, how long would you be prepared to support an allied
presence in the Gulf while an inspection process presumably resumes?
Would you like to see that for some months?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I am not going to put a time on it but I am going to describe
what I would like to see. And I would be happy to support a continued
presence until such time as we can be properly satisfied that this
is an agreement that is going to be honoured. Now that maybe if
possible within a short period of time, it may take longer, but
I think most people would agree that there would be nothing more
absurd than to have some kind of military withdrawal and then to
discover that something was not being delivered.
Now it is just a question of a commonsense approach. If we have
got an agreement, and I can't say that until I have seen it,
but if we have, let's assume we have, then we want to be satisfied
that it is going to be delivered on. It is a question of it being
signed and sealed and we want some evidence that it is going to
be delivered.
O'BRIEN:
And I assume that you would agree, given the kind of fragility
of feeling particularly in the region, but also American public
opinion and international public opinion, that if America did decide
that its interpretation of that document was not the same as Kofi
Annan's and that, in fact, it was going to proceed with military
action. Kofi Annan's support of this agreement diplomatically
does make that, that next step much tougher for America does it
not?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Kerry that is an entirely hypothetical proposition at the
moment and we are dealing with the sort of issue about which I don't
want to respond to hypothesis.
O'BRIEN:
Ok. Can I ask you to wait there because we have one more story
from our correspondent in Jerusalem that I would also like to get
comment from you on.
[BREAK]
O'BRIEN:
Prime Minister, how do you react when you see that kind of sentiment
expressed, those perceptions, at least, of double standard, within
the Arab world?
PRIME MINISTER:
You have got to look at the history of the Middle East for over
40 of Israel's 50 years of existence, there was almost a united
Arab view that the country should not even exist and, in fact, several
attempts were made to destroy Israel as a political entity. And
secondly, you have got to bear in mind that, unlike Iraq, Israel
did not, in an unprovoked fashion, invade and occupy a neighbouring
country. Thirdly, Israel has never used chemical warfare against
a portion of its own population. Fourthly, for all that is hurled
at Israel by its critics - and Israel is not without blemish, let
me make that very clear and I'll come back to that in a moment
- Israel, at least preserves the basic democratic traditions of
government and elections and an incorruptible judiciary.
So, I think there is a lot that can be said which clearly marks
out a country like Iraq from a country like Israel and I think the
charge, against those sort of considerations of double standards,
is unfair. But let me make it clear that Israel has not been without
blemish and it is certainly the policy of my Government to try and
encourage, as best we can, the peace dialogue to go on. We do support
the aspirations of the Palestinian people, they are legitimate and
they are proper. And I hope that one day they can be realised in
harmony with a secure Israel, within borders that everybody continues
to respect and honour, something which did not exist for more than
four fifths of Israeli existence since her creation in 1948.
O'BRIEN:
Do you believe that the pressure is now much more strongly on the
United States to, in-turn, increase its pressure on Israel to do
more to accommodate a genuine, lasting peace?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think all of us who are friendly towards Israel and respect
what Israel has achieved in the last 50 years have that responsibility
and the Americans, in particular, and the Americans are endeavouring
to do that, and I think what President Clinton made plain to Benjamin
Netanyahu, when he went to the United States a short while ago,
bore that out. The Americans have made it clear, to be fair, particularly
the current administration, that it is a two-way process in the
Middle East and that America is not just there to do the bidding
of Israel.
But, you have to take that longer view. And you must understand
the history of that period that for a long time it was the declared,
united, unmitigated policy of the Arab States to destroy Israel
and you can therefore understand, against that background, some
of the defensive action that Israel has taken.
O'BRIEN:
Ok, if we can cross our fingers now and hope that this is a genuine
breakthrough in the Middle East, if I can bring you back to some
domestic issues. On your plans to change the tax system and introduce
a new goods and services tax, you have been looking at this issue
for some time now, in detail. When can we expect to be able to share
in that detail? When can we expect you to conclude, complete, your
tax reform policy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Kerry, I can't give you an exact time but I can assure you,
and through you the Australian people, that there will be adequate
time between the release of our tax policy. And it is not, as your
question may have implied, just about an indirect tax, it is a total
change to the tax system, including major changes and improvements
to personal tax. I mean it is a total change to the tax system,
including major changes and improvement to personal tax.
There will be adequate time for people to look at the package,
assess the reform, see how it affects them before any election.
We certainly don't intend to drop it the day before the election.
O'BRIEN:
So when you say adequate time, do you mean at least a couple of
months before?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I am not going to try and sort of define that, but adequate
time. There is nothing in it for us to play around with the Australian
people on this. I wouldn't insult the intelligence of the Australian
people by not giving them proper time to have a look at something
like this and I think they will like it, because deep down people
realise our present system is inadequate. The wholesale tax system
is out of date, the personal tax system is unfair and they want
a new and better deal.
O'BRIEN:
And when you say adequate time, you mean you will complete a policy
and you will present a total picture with detail of the various
elements?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, of course. Yes, that's always been or intention. I mean,
the Labor Party wants to block tax reform, they want to stop it.
I am very interested that Gareth Evans said today that if we did
put forward a new plan and we won the election they wouldn't
oppose it in the Senate. Well, I will remind Mr Evans and Mr Beazley
of that quite a bit between now and the election. But I think, deep
down, they would want to fight a negative, political campaign which,
sort of, doesn't offer any kind of hope or inspiration about
the future. I want this country to go into the 21st Century with
a modern, better, lower tax system and it appears the Labor Party
just wants to preserve a system that had its roots in the Great
Depression.
O'BRIEN:
But at the moment, you have also got the possibility that business
itself will not embrace this with open arms. You have got that broad
coalition of business groups that have been very carefully going
through what they regard as the right kind of tax reform and tax
mix. They have been in discussion with the welfare lobby as well.
Both of them have expressed opposition to the idea of using your
GST to pay for the tax cuts, the income tax cuts, that would go
with it. Now that must concern you?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it doesn't. What I have seen doesn't concern me.
We've talked very regularly with the business community about
tax reform and also with ACOSS, representing the welfare sector,
and we will go on doing that. At the end of the day, of course,
we are there not to do the bidding of this or that interest group,
we are there to present a package which we think best helps the
totality of the Australian population. I am pretty confident that
what we ultimately produce will draw very strong support.
O'BRIEN:
Very briefly, on Telstra, the Treasurer, Peter Costello, said today
that he saw no logic in the public owning one third of Telstra and
the Government owning two thirds. Do you support that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I certainly support selling a lot more and I have been on
record for a long time as believing that privatisation of assets
like Telstra makes a great deal of sense, full privatisation. But
I am also on record as saying that if we are going to sell any more
we will first seek the support and the approval of the Australian
people before we do that. So that if we are going to do more, it
would be part of our policy for the next election and the Australian
people can then make a judgement, as they did last time. And I think
they will judge us pretty favourably because the Australian people
have done very well out of the sale of one third of Telstra. There
are 600,000 Australians who have bought shares for the first time
in their lives, in Telstra. Ninety two per cent of the employees
of Telstra bought shares and the mums and dads that made investments
have now already enjoyed a capital gain of about $1,000 per shareholder
as a result of the increase in the share price. I think they will
line up in thousands to buy a further slice in this great Australian
company.
O'BRIEN:
John Howard, thanks very much for talking to us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Pleasure.
[Ends]