Subjects: Warren Entsch; tax package; family policy
E&OE................................................................................................
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, is Warren Entsch safe on the frontbench?
PRIME MINISTER:
Warren Entsch has not done anything wrong. I've had a very careful
look at this. He was doing the right thing by his constituents. He
declared his ownership of his land both to me and to the register.
And if you take a common-sense approach to the conflict of interest
principle it doesn't arise because the possible benefit he might
get if a whole lot of things happen is very remote because it would
depend upon a whole lot of decisions being taken by a number of agencies
over which he's got no control. And on top of that of course
any gain might be, would be enjoyed in common with potentially hundreds
of other people in the district. I mean what the Labor Party is asking
us to accept is that a regional member who has an asset in the electorate
he represents can't argue in favour of some kind of policy change
by government that could potentially in the long term enhance the
value not only of his land but also of the land of a lot of other
people in that district. Now that is ridiculous and it fails the test,
the common-sense test. It fails the pub test. It's not reasonable.
It lacks commonsense.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, if people believe nonsense then you can believe anything. But
there is no evidence of a conflict of interest in the sense in which
that is properly understood, where the gain is personal and peculiar
to the member or to the minister. It is akin to a member making a
representation for say a road to go through a particular part of a
country town which would lead to an enhancement of property values,
to flood mitigation funds. What Warren was doing was addressing a
serious environmental problem. The possibility of that bridge being
built has been around for years. He didn't disguise the fact
that he owned the property. Heavens above he was doing his job as
the local member. I've had a very careful look at this and I
think to argue that this is in the properly understood sense of the
word a conflict of interest is just crazy.
JOURNALIST:
But don't you think that the public would be suspicious about
some of these activities in talking up the development?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, they shouldn't be if they understand the facts. I mean if
they're not given the facts correctly anybody can be suspicious
of anything. But when you look at the facts Louise, he has not sought
to secure a personal individual gain for himself. What he did was
the sort of thing that any energetic local member would do. I mean
the environmental degradation of this land is very severe. It's
a problem that this land has suffered in common with land in coastal
areas of Australia for generations as the result of too much land
clearance. That's well known. The CSIRO report started I think
in 1995 when the former government was in office. I'm not, you
know, putting any special significance on that. But it had been around
for a long time and it wasn't unreasonable that the local people
should want the report released. They made approaches I understand
to the Queensland Labor minister responsible for either environmental
or development matters. Entsch had put his ownership on the register.
He bought this land at public auction, public auction. I mean I think
we are getting into the theatre of the absurd. And what you have here
is while we get on with governing a country reforming tax, reforming
environmental laws, tackling family policies, the Labor Party throws
mud. I mean we are into policy and reform and making Australia better
and stronger. The Labor Party throws mud. That is their only response.
They don't have a policy response to the GST, they don't
have a policy response on the environment. All they do is throw dirt.
JOURNALIST:
Can you understand that other ministers who lost there jobs though
might [inaudible]?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I look at each thing on the individual merits Aban and that's
my only response to that. I don't accept that at all. On the
merits, and I've looked at the merits, and as you can tell I've
carefully examined the circumstances of this. I didn't know anything
about it. Why should I? I don't carry everything around in my
head when I was asked about it yesterday. I said I would analyse it.
I have analaysed it. And I don't think on a common sense application
of the principles of conflict of interest there's an issue. He
was doing his job as a local member. He was doing it openly and fairly
and properly as a local member. Environmental degradation is a problem
in coastal areas of Australia. People have known this for years. This
talk about the bridge has been around for years. His land ownership
is on the public register. I don't know what the issue is about.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, Mr Kennett has launched another broadside against the GST
deal today. He says it's now the Democrats' tax system,
not yours. That it's too costly and that governments, whatever
there political persuasion will alter it because it's now a complicated
system.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he's said all that before and I don't agree with him.
I think he's being negative and backward looking, but there's
nothing I can do about it and I'm untroubled by it because the
legislation is going to go through and the Australian people will
see the enormous benefits of tax reform. It's 85 to 90 per cent
of what we wanted and what he supported at the last election. So I
don't think his attack has any real substance and I'm quite
untroubled by it.
JOURNALIST:
Senator Harradine's just welcomed your package. How much input
did he have [inaudible]?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he didn't have any specific input of which I am aware. But
you've got to remember that a lot of people have similar views
on a lot of aspects of family policy. And there's a strange notion
around this building that when anything is done in this area, if Brian
happens to agree with it then it was his idea. There are a number
of us who independently have arrived at the same conclusion on a number
of issues. Not all issues. I share views similar to him on a number
of issues, not all issues. And the same could be said of him in relation
to my views. There's a happy coincidence of attitude between
the Government and Senator Harradine on quite a number of issues.
And I don't make any bones about that and I don't apologise
for it. I'm glad he supports it. It's a good policy.
[Ends]