Subjects: shooting galleries; heroin trials, digital TV, gambling, cricket.
E&OE..........
LAWS:
Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello John.
LAWS:
Why didn't Bob Carr or John Della Bosca or somebody check with the narcotics
control board and the United Nations before they started on this?
PRIME MINISTER:Well I guess you have to ask them that. What happened
was that they, or Della Bosca wrote direct to the Board which itself is
a bit strange. It's normal when State Governments want to deal with an international
body to go through the Federal Government because international bodies relate
to the national government not to the state governments. Not surprisingly
the Board when it responded sent its reply to the Federal Government and
that is how I got hold of the letter. I didn't know about the correspondence
prior to that.
LAWS:
Is that correct protocol?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it probably isn't correct protocol. But I am not going to stand on
ceremony with the New South Wales Government.
LAWS:
No, but it would have been easier if it had have been done the correct way.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it would have been easier but the substance of the matter is that
we do have this convention. I don't know at this stage whether what the
New South Wales Government proposes is directly in contravention of it.
What I have said to the New South Wales Premier is we have this letter it
raises concerns it says there may be a breach, please halt the plans for
the injecting rooms until the Federal Government, and the New South Wales
Government, and indeed the Victorian and the ACT Governments have had a
chance of looking at it. Now everyone knows that I am against injecting
rooms..
LAWS:
Yeah.
PRIME MINISTER:
.as I am against heroin trials. But everybody should also know that I have
accepted that health matters generally are the responsibility of the States.
And there is no direct federal authority whereby I can stop these activities
going ahead. And that if State Governments want to go ahead with them well
they are accountable to their own constituencies, but because of the action
of the New South Wales Government in writing to this board - Mr Della Bosca
wrote directly to them - I have now been put on notice that there could
be a breach and we are going to have a look at it. And I would like the
New South Wales Government to desist and I would like them to talk to us
about it and to see if there is any ongoing problem. There may not be, it
may well be that the Board's interpretation is an exaggerated one and that
there is no breach. I am not saying there is, I am merely reporting to the
Premier of New South Wales that the Board has told me in response to a letter
from his own Minister that it believes there is a breach and that we ought
to talk about it. Now, that is not an unreasonable approach to adopt and
I would imagine Mr Carr being a reasonable man will see the commonsense
in at least talking to us.
LAWS:
When you were talking about that Work for the Dole Scheme .
PRIME MINISTER:
Mmm.
LAWS:
That was in breach of the United Nations Resolution, wasn't it? But
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, no, people alleged it was but we never received to my knowledge any
advice that it was. People used to argue that it was in breach of some ILO
convention but I never saw any evidence to that effect. I mean you are dealing
here with, and I know where you are coming from in asking that question,
but you are dealing here with a convention on illicit traffic in narcotic
drugs which deals of course with a whole series of understandings and laws
that are designed to prevent the trafficking in drugs. Now all I can say
is that as a result of an approach made by the New South Wales Government
itself, not through us but directly, the Board has said that it thinks it
might be in breach. And what I am saying to the New South Wales Government
is can we have a talk about it to see if that is correct.
LAWS:
But, are we able to, it seems to me you've said that you know where I am
coming from. Where I am coming from is to try and find out area we able
to ignore United Nations resolutions.PRIME MINISTER:
Oh well you can ignore it if you choose to.
LAWS:
And you did choose to in the Work for the Dole.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no well my advice at the time was not to the effect that that was in
breach. Some people argued that.
LAWS:
Yeah.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I don't recall getting any advice that it was actually in breach. That
was an old view that it was in breach, but .
LAWS:
What about Jabiluka? I mean the delegation was pretty critical about the
decision on Jabiluka.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, it was pretty critical, but once again, our advice was that it was
perfectly in order.
LAWS:
I see. So, you can ignore the United Nations' Resolutions if you choose.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you can ignore any United Nations'. you can ignore your obligations
under an international treaty if you choose to.
LAWS:
Yeah.
PRIME MINISTER:
Of course you can.
LAWS:
Because, obviously.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, can I just finish John the reason why you can ignore them is because
in the end there is no sanction against you. Other than the sanction of
being seen as having potentially breached some agreement that you have signed.
I mean, what is at issue here is whether we might go outside the terms of
an agreement regarding drug matters that were signed back way back I think
in 1961. We are not dealing here with something that.we are dealing here
with the single convention on narcotic drugs signed in 1961. Now, many people
would see conventions relating to things like drugs in a different light
than they would see conventions relating to issues such as the environment
and so forth which are the subject of far more vigorous debate and dispute
within our community.
LAWS:
Yeah, the point I wanted to make though was simply this, and I understand
exactly where you're coming from because you feel very strongly about the
drug issue and many people do particularly the people who feel they are
going to be affected by it in Sydney and Canberra and in other places as
well. But what is going to be said is that you chose to ignore the United
Nations in relation to the Work for the Dole thing and that was okay and
the Jabiluka thing but because the drug thing is close to your heart, you
choose not to ignore it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, people can argue that but I can reply by saying that in relation to
Jabiluka our advice was not that we were in breach.
LAWS:
Yeah, well anyway, that's what could be said. But .
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean what can be said in reply is that it is not an accurate allegation.
I mean if it were true that we were in breach, clearly in breach and we
had advice to that effect then that would be a justifiable juxtaposition
for you or anybody else to put.
LAWS:
Yeah.
PRIME MINISTER:
But that is not the case. I mean the advice in relation to that Jabiluka
issue - and I know exactly what you are saying - was not that we were in
breach. That was not the advice we had from our people. Now what I have
said in relation to this is a simple thing. We've got a letter from an international
body which says there could be a breach. What I have asked to happen is
that there be a meeting between the Commonwealth and the States for us to
find out exactly what the state intends to allow to happen and then we can
get legal advice as to whether there is a breach. If we then have that legal
advice we then decide if it is to the effect there is a breach whether we
propose to do anything about it. Now we haven't taken that decision yet
but I think it would be very odd indeed for the Prime Minister of this country
to get a letter saying that we are, in the view of the people writing the
letter, in breach of something that we as a nation have signed with the
rest of the world community and then do nothing about it. I mean I can't
do that.
LAWS:
No no. Well obviously you can't do that. If New South Wales or any other
States go ahead with the trials that you find offensive, and again let me
say a lot of people do, would you be prepared to use the external affairs
power?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh look, that's too far down the track. I'm not threatening anything at
this stage. That's not my game on this. I think it's something that..I'll
deal with that issue if and when it arises.
LAWS:
But you do feel very strongly about the drug issue.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I do feel very strongly about injecting rooms and heroin trials, and
there are a lot of people who agree with me, there are a lot who disagree
with me. It's a hard issue.
LAWS:
Very difficult issue.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I'm not saying that everybody who's in favour of them is coming from
a wrong position or an impure motive. I respect the fact that it's one of
those issues that produces strongly divergent views within the community.
There are people in my own party who disagree with me on this, and there
are people in the Labor Party who agree with me on this. There are many
people I know in the Labor Party who are very uneasy and very uncomfortable
about what the New South Wales Government is doing. I know that for a fact.
But I have an obligation of conscience to tell the Australian people where
I stand on social issues.
LAWS:
Absolutely.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I took the view four years ago that whenever these difficult issues
arose I would not hide under the carpet, I would not say well that's a State
matter don't ask me. I'm always willing to state my view on these issues
and I accept that a lot of your listeners will disagree with me.
LAWS:
I think a lot will agree.
PRIME MINISTER:
And a lot will agree with me. And all I'm trying to say to the Premier of
New South Wales on this issue is I'm not pulling out the big stick, but
there could be a breach. Why don't we talk about it and we can work out
what the situation is. And I mean, I repeat, this all arose because his
own minister wrote to the United Nations. I didn't write to them.
LAWS:
That's true. I know you're pretty close to a decision on digital TV. Can
you guarantee people won't have to buy expensive new sets to deal with the
change?
PRIME MINISTER:
We are trying to produce an outcome that will stop that happening, yes.
I think as you know..
LAWS:
It's complex.
PRIME MINISTER:
It certainly is. You can keep your current set and you can buy one of these
little decoder boxes and put it on the top, and that will give you through
your existing set, that will give you access to digital. And if you have
an approach whereby both the high definition and the standard definition
signal is carried, than you can have a box that sort of covers both and
that's not going to put a big hole in your pocket. You should also bear
in mind that over time the price of new television sets featuring new you
beaut technologies will obviously come down with increased consumer demand.
LAWS:
Yeah, always does.
PRIME MINISTER:
But our aim, you put your finger on the goal we have. The goal is to have
a policy that suits first and foremost the Australian consumer. We're interested
in the Australian consumer ahead of anybody else.
LAWS:
Just a couple of other issues if you've got just three more minutes. Is
gambling out of control in your mind in this country?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think we have more than enough gambling.
LAWS:
Is there much you can do about it?
PRIME MINISTER:
There are limited things governments can do about it. They can not endorse
new gambling facilities. For example I had a proposal put to me a couple
of years ago that would allow gambling on international airline flights
in and out of this country, and I said no. And they won't happen while this
Government is in office. And there are a lot of areas where I think gambling
has gone much too far. Now once again these are difficult issues. If people
who can afford to gamble and afford to lose, I don't care. They can do whatever
they like with their money. That's their business and they can afford it.
But there are a lot of people who can't. You know that and you know their
families suffer and they suffer, and businesses they buy from suffer. And
if we can try and ameliorate that in some way that can be a help.
LAWS:
I suppose it's difficult in as much as it should be individual responsibility.
Some people can't accept that individual responsibility. But if you do that
for gambling I suppose it should be done for alcohol for those who have
the same penchant to consume excessive amounts of alcohol.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have in some respects done that. I mean we now, 20 years ago, 25
years ago we allowed people in affect to drive cars even though they were
heavily influenced by alcohol. We are much tougher on that now because we
see that they can do themselves and others a lot of damage. And I've no
doubt that the major reason why the road toll in this country is half what
it was 30 years ago..
LAWS:
You think that's got a lot to do with it?
PRIME MINISTER:
It is. We have random breath testing. I mean it's as simple as that. You
know that 30 years ago many people drove when they shouldn't have. And all
of us. I mean, you know, none of us are exceptions to it and it's quite
different now.
LAWS:
Okay, probably the most important question of the lot that I have to ask
you. I hope it doesn't embarrass you.
PRIME MINISTER:
It doesn't.
LAWS:
Should Mark Waugh stay in the Test team?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh look, I would give Mark, I would certainly want to see Mark have another
couple of opportunities. Look he's having a very bad trot.
LAWS:
He sure is.
PRIME MINISTER:
But others have done it. I mean Greg Chappell went through a very bad trot
at one stage in his career.
LAWS:
Mark Taylor too.
PRIME MINISTER:
Mark Taylor certainly did. Mark Waugh has given an enormous amount to Australian
cricket. He still remains in my opinion the most graceful batsman to watch..
LAWS:
Beautiful.
PRIME MINISTER:
..beautiful, of the current era of players. He is having a rough trot and
of course nobody has a permanent hold on a Test cricket place. But given
his part service to Australia, it's a matter for selectors of course, I
would hope that they gave him a go certainly for the remaining two Tests
of this series. But you know, John,...
LAWS:
I'm the same.
PRIME MINISTER:
In the end that's a matter for the Australian selectors and whatever decision
they take, like another cricket follower I will accept.
LAWS:
Yeah, well I do think if a bloke gets the Prime Ministerial stamp of approval
selectors might have a closer look at him.
PRIME MINISTER:
No no. We're a very egalitarian country and I wouldn't want the selectors
to take any notice of me if they had another view. But you asked me..
LAWS:
Was Tendulkar out?
PRIME MINISTER:
I didn't see the second one. I saw the first one.
LAWS:
Well I think he got a rough deal in both actually.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah I thought he was out in the first one I've got to say. I had a vigorous
debate with one of my sons who was also watching it at the time. He had
a different view.
LAWS:
Well I have his view. I think he got a raw deal on both occasions frankly.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I didn't see the second one. I had that described to me. But I was
busy at a Cabinet meeting I'm afraid.
LAWS:
Even more important than Test cricket. Just could I ask you this, do you
think that we're sort of overdoing these replay things on television with
people drawing little pictures on your screen where the ball could have
gone and.?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look John, it's very tough on the umpires..
LAWS:
Very, very.
PRIME MINISTER:
.but you know, it's inevitable that we do it. We have this tremendous technology
and I think the presentation of sport on free-to-air television in Australia
is probably the best in the world. We have pioneered techniques in sport
in this country on free-to-air that.all television for that matter but most
of us watch it free-to-air, which are better than any in the world.
LAWS:
I agree with that.
PRIME MINISTER:
But it is very hard and you have to be a much, you know you have to be really
on the ball. I remember the rugby league grandfinal when Bill Harrigan gave
that extraordinary, you know that terrific, that decision which I must say
when against my own team, went against St George in favour of Melbourne.
But it was a very courageous decision and..
LAWS:
And he was right was he?
PRIME MINISTER:
And he was right. And when you saw the replay and you realised what incredible
skill he had brought to bear in taking that decision, and what extraordinary
responsibility he took on himself to do it, I have great admiration for
him. But it puts those blokes under a lot of pressure but it's unavoidable.
I mean we as consumers love it. I mean you say it's being over done but
gee we all watch it don't we.
LAWS:
Yeah. I just think I'd rather they had a half hour late at night when they
went back to all these things in slow motion and different camera shots
so we could all analyse them then because I really do think it's pretty
tough on the umpires.
PRIME MINISTER:
It is very tough but it's part of the customer service.
LAWS:
Yep. Okay John, I hope you have a very happy Christmas with your family
and a wonderful new year.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you. And you too John.
LAWS:
And it was good to talk to you.
PRIME MINISTER:
And to all of your listeners.
LAWS:
Thank you very much.
[Ends]