PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
19/03/1999
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
11074
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP RADIO INTERVIEW WITH JOHN FAINE RADIO 3LO, MELBOURNE

E&OE.............................................................................................

FAINE:

Good morning to you Prime Minister.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good morning John.

FAINE:

Thank you very much for coming in. The drug debate has been raging

now for a good six or so months. Like every other media outlet we

have been running endless numbers of stories and hearing from parents

going through agonising times. I understand you have recently been

talking more to parents instead of just to policy makers and people

who are working in the field, the professionals.

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes, well yesterday one of the good things about the venue for the

announcement, which was the Anglicare headquarters here in Melbourne,

was that there were a lot of parents and addicts, or former addicts,

who were actually there and I talked to them for some time afterwards

and they detailed their experiences. And some parents still struggling

with the problem because their children are still on drugs and they

are trying to get them off them. Others who had gone through the programme

offered by Anglicare very successfully. One really quite inspiring

story of a woman and her young son and the boy had lost his father

through a heroin overdose some years ago and his mother had had a

problem as well but she was now rid of it and the boy was doing spectacularly

well at school. And to talk to him and to hear that story is very

encouraging because you do tend to get all the dismal stories and

there are a lot of dismal stories. I talk to a lot of parents in my....I

have talked to parents in my electorate office in Sydney who grapple

with this problem and there is as much division as to what you ought

to do from the parents of drug victims as there is within the general

community. Some of them say we should be even tougher. Others say

we should be very liberal. There is no one single message that comes

out of those discussions except the need for more treatment facilities.

And what was good about yesterday was that it was a total emphasis

on treatment facilities. Now, yesterday wasn't the beginning

and the end of our response it was just but an element. However, the

good thing about yesterday is that we have helped about 50 treatment

facilities around Australia. These are organisations that actually

help people who want to break the habit and it is just inexcusable

for us to have a situation where people who want to break the habit

can't get help pretty quickly because as one person said to me

yesterday if your child makes the decision that they want to break

the habit it is critically important that there be help available

as quickly as possible.

FAINE:

And one thing you could do straight away is make Naltrexone and other

similar drugs cheaper by subsidising them.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, we are perfectly happy to fast track that and I have made that

clear before. There is a procedure, the thing has to be checked by

the I think it's the NHMRC. There is an established procedure,

you can't have prime ministers saying in a random unscientific

way because I am not a doctor as to what should or should not be on

the list. But as far as the Government is concerned we will fast track

that to the maximum extent we can. We do need the cooperation of the

manufacturer and I just want to make it very clear that if it passes

the clinical hurdles that any drug seeking a subsidy or manufacturer

seeks a subsidy must do then we will be only too happy to make it

available.

FAINE:

Not that Naltrexone is a magic bullet.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, there is no magic bullet in this whole thing.

FAINE:

And that's what we are all learning.

PRIME MINISTER:

We are. And it is a war of attrition and you have to try treatment,

you have got to try education, you must, of course, put more resources

into enforcement. It's a three-pronged attack and perhaps in

recent weeks there hasn't been enough focus on the treatment

side of it. And that is an area where everybody agrees whether you

are for or against a heroin trial, you are for treatment. Whether

you are for or against something else you are for treatment and the

more treatment facilities that are available the better.

FAINE:

Prime Minister, the $20 million allocated yesterday does not seem

to be uniformly distributed around the country. An analysis that's

been done of allocation of the money shows that Victoria got only

about 13 per cent, 13.5 per cent, of the grant money even though with

usual health funding we get about 25 per cent and, of course, we are

about that proportion of the population. So I think.....

PRIME MINISTER:

...well, there were previous allocations. There was about $30 million

announced in September of last year. So you have now had announcements

of about $50 million and I would imagine that when you aggregate two

of them together you have a reasonable distribution. But I will have

a look at that. That's the first time that has been raised with

me but I would ask those who may be concerned about that to factor

in the $30 million that was announced last year.

FAINE:

We actually got less money than Queensland. Of course we have a much

larger population.

PRIME MINISTER:

But you are just talking about yesterday....

FAINE:

Yesterday's announcement.

PRIME MINISTER:

But I am just saying to get a fair picture you have got to factor

in the $30 million last year as well. So there's a total now

of $50 million that has been allocated. So before people make pejorative

judgements about distribution then let's do the calculation involving

the money that was allocated last year.

FAINE:

The amount allocated across the board seems to be either $237,000

to an individual organisation, or a multiple of that, the vast majority

of the grants having looked through the 40 or so pages of the details.

A lot of organisations got $237,000. Now, we had a chance yesterday

to talk to two organisations and they said that they didn't actually

submit for $237,000 or any other sum and it seems as if someone has

decided that that's how much they'll get without looking

at any submission from them, so what was the process that was used

to allocate this money?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, the process involved reference groups at each State level. It

involved people who are on the Drugs Council and it also involved

the ‘experts' in the field and also had to be approved in

the end by the Council, and by the Government, by Dr Wooldridge and

myself. I am not aware that we set out to have an average of 237.

I looked at a lot of the grants, I looked at most of them, and they

were for different amounts, I mean, some as high as $1.5 million.

FAINE:

Certainly there are multiples of that sum but we were wondering if

it was the old Ros Kelly whiteboard technique and saying, look we

have decided to allocate $20 million and we'd now have to find

as many organisations that are ready to receive it as we can.

PRIME MINISTER:

No because there were many more organisations who wanted funds who

missed out. I mean, there was one organisation that came along to

the launch yesterday that said they'd put in and they missed

out and they hoped they would be considered in a future application.

I don't think there's any whiteboard element because one

of the very supportive phone calls that my office got yesterday was

from a Labor frontbencher representing a seat in the Hunter Valley.

We made money available to a programme in Cessnock which is in a Federal

Labor seat and the federal member for that electorate rang my office

and spoke to the adviser on my staff who deals with this issue and

wanted to express his gratitude for the fact that a group in his electorate

had received a grant and generally expressed support for yesterday's

announcement which I think is a good thing because I am not seeking

to politicise this issue in any way. He is a Labor member, he is a

Labor frontbencher, a Labor federal member and he expressed a lot

of satisfaction. So we clearly haven't sought in any way to politicise

the grants which was a criticism that could legitimately be made of

Ros Kelly's whiteboard. I mean, most of the money went to Labor

electorates, I don't think you'll find any substantial allegation

that this money has gone to the friends of the Liberal Party, heavens

above no.

FAINE:

I am sure you have seen the front page of today's Age

newspaper and The Financial Review also, pictures of the jewellery

that the Australian Olympic representative, Phil Coles, says he hasn't

got and has never seen and has never seen his wife wearing. There

was a picture on the front page of the Age of Mr Coles and

his wife together at a function and she is wearing the jewellery that

Mr Coles says he knows nothing about. For how long do we sit by as

the Australian people and do you as the Prime Minister sit by and

watch the Sydney Olympics being dragged through the mud like this?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, it's a difficult question to answer in just a few words

because I can't presume without having heard all sides of the

story to make judgements which reflect on somebody's character

and reputation. It's very easy for people in a different position

from me to make those judgements. I do carry the responsibility that

if I say something that is highly critical of a person's character

it carries the weight of being words spoken by the Prime Minister

of the country and I don't think that should be...that authority

should be used lightly.

FAINE:

But even overnight from Lausanne, Dick Pound the investigator brought

in by the Olympic movement says it's a new fact that we will

have to investigate....

PRIME MINISTER:

However, I mean, having made the comment I did, however, everybody

recognises that the last few months have been extremely negative for

the whole Olympic Games process. It is very regrettable and it has

done damage and I think everybody involved, everybody involved with

responsibility for organising the Games has to examine what has happened.

It is not just the responsibility of one person and I can't issue

instructions to do this or do that....

FAINE:

But you have a lot of influence.

PRIME MINISTER:

I have influence but you would understand that the best way to use

that influence is not by making random public comments.

FAINE:

But aren't you getting to the stage now where surely you want

to see this scuttlebutt put to rest, you want to see the Sydney Olympics

getting on with the main game which is putting on a fabulous carnival....

PRIME MINISTER:

And I believe that will happen. I certainly do believe that will happen.

FAINE:

Well, while all this is distracting them I am sure it's a hindrance

they'd rather do without.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, of course they would rather do without it but, John, bear in

mind that it's downtime at the moment and although these are

very negative happenings and they have detracted from the reputation

of the Olympic movement very seriously, not might I say at an Australian

level so much as perhaps at an international level, the reading I

get from the Australian community is that it's the international

the more world-wide body that is more heavily criticised rather than

the Australian one.

FAINE:

Why do we need Phil Coles?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, John, you are asking me to make a judgement as to whether he

should or should not go and I am just not prepared to do that in a

random way, I don't think that's an appropriate thing for

a Prime Minister who can't in any event affect the membership

of SOCOG. I don't control SOCOG, I have two representatives on

it. I do think the legal arrangements that were entered into at the

time it was established gave extraordinary power to the Australian

Olympic Committee, I don't think there is any doubt about that,

quite extraordinary power. But I was not in any way, I was not responsible

for that nor, indeed, was the Federal Government. It was an arrangement

concluded by the New South Wales Government.

FAINE:

Although now with hindsight can we say that it's never a good

idea for any government to give a body that much power?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I don't think it's ever a good idea to give anybody

the power of veto over something which involves the public interest

to the extent that the successful staging of these Games do involve.

There is a public interest, there's an Australian national interest

in these Games, not just a Sydney interest. This is an Australian

event more than it's a Sydney event. It's being held in

Sydney but it goes to the reputation of our whole country and there

is a public interest in the process and, I think, with the benefit

of hindsight that was an error.

FAINE:

You'd like them to clean it up?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I want the Games to be very successful. Of course I want the

thing to be done well. Of course I want the focus to be on what an

incredible opportunity to showcase our country these Games will be.

FAINE:

And our highest ethical standards.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, we all want high ethical standards. There are very high ethical

standards demanded of people in public life. There are levels of accountability.

I mean, politicians lose their positions if they breach certain rules.

FAINE:

If Phil Coles was a member of your Cabinet would you remove him?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, he's not and that's a hypothetical question, good

try.

FAINE:

All right. Moving on to the announcement yesterday also that it seems

Australia is to get another uranium mine. Now, on my count this will

be our fourth mine, we've gone from two to four in the space

of a short period of time. This is an odd business decision from what

I understand and what I read in the business pages. The price of uranium

is at a bit of a low point at the moment so why are we opening up

another uranium mine when uranium sells for only $10 a tonne when

it used to sell for $30 a tonne.

PRIME MINISTER:

But, John, it's not the role of the Government to decide whether

a company is making a wise business decision. It's the role of

the Government to agree to something going ahead.....

FAINE:

I should say that's a pound rather than a tonne....

PRIME MINISTER:

...It's the role of the Government to agree to something going

ahead if the rules have been observed. It's not, it's not

for me to say as Prime Minister whether you are making a wise business

decision in opening a shop or buying a piece of real estate or investing

in a holiday home, that's not for me to decide. It is for me

to decide, or Premier or Prime Minister, to decide whether or not

you have complied with the law relating to the opening of shops or

buildings or buying holiday homes. So the fact that the market may

not be beckoning at present is a risk that the entrepreneur is taking,

it is not something that the Government should take into account.

We should take into account environmental safeguard and all other

regulatory requirements.

FAINE:

And indeed you also need to take into account the political realities

of it which we'll come to in a moment. But we've also got

the situation where we've got apparently a consortium in the

States wanting to declare Australia to be the world's uranium

waste dump. So if we're opening new mines now where do we go

in arguing that we don't want any responsibility for nuclear

waste? If the world identifies us as the site for a dump.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well they're two quite separate issues. Just as we can decide

to allow a new uranium mine to open we can decide whether or not waste

is dumped in this country. And we have done that. We have made it

absolutely clear that that will not be allowed.

FAINE:

And opening a new mine doesn't in any way influence world opinion

on that?

PRIME MINISTER:

It doesn't. World opinion doesn't matter. It's the

decision of the Australian people that matters and the Australian

people through their government have said we won't be a nuclear

waste dump full stop.

FAINE:

Alright but at the same time the Democrats leader Senator Meg Lees

said the decision to approve the mine is absolutely stupid and the

assessment process she describes as shoddy and this is the same Meg

Lees, leader of the Democrats, with whom you'll have to do some

intense negotiation when she holds the balance of power in the Senate

in a couple of months time.

PRIME MINISTER:

John, good government is about making the right decision according

to the merits of an issue and if we are to make decisions based on

how people in the Senate holding the balance of power will vote on

other issues we won't make good decisions.

FAINE:

The Senate and the role of the Senate is going to be absolutely critical

in the next phase of your Government's life. You want to get

through your business, GST tax reforms. You want to get through industrial

relations reforms. You've got a very short period of time to

get anything through between now and the end of June and then you've

got to deal with the Democrats.

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes. I'm very much aware of that. Very much aware of that.

FAINE:

Well it's not the time to go around antagonising them is my point.

PRIME MINISTER:

But come. Are we going to have a situation where you just trim your

sails on good policy in the hope that the Democrats or anybody else

will look favourably upon you? The Democrats have made it very clear

that they are not going to support the tax package in its present

form. Their position on uranium mining is well known. So is ours.

We went to the last election with the policy on uranium mining that

we are now implementing. Everybody knew that we were against three

mines policy for uranium. Everybody knew that our attitude was that

subject to environmental safeguards and safety standards and all the

other things that have to be applied we would allow further uranium

mines to open. Now that is what we are doing. We are implementing

our policy and it's just not acceptable to trim that policy,

which is good policy in the resource sector in our view, in the rather

vague hope that in some way that might influence the Democrats in

re

11074