27 August 1999
E&OE……………………………………………………………………………………….
PEACOCK:
Mr Howard, you told the House yesterday that there was nothing wrong with changing your mind unless you were moving to a less worthwhile position. Lowitja O’Donoghue says you may have gone on a spiritual journey. I mean, have you moved and why?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I guess I have. I also guess people like Lois and Aden Ridgeway have also moved. The important thing is whether what was passed yesterday best gathers together the collective view of the nation on this subject. That’s what matters. It’s not a question of analysing how far Howard’s moved or somebody else has moved. I mean, the political analysts will do that. I’m not going to do that. I think what was done yesterday was something that will make a huge contribution to the cause of reconciliation. It expresses the collective spirit of the community on this issue. It’s not totally satisfactory to each one section but collectively it’s much more satisfactory and acceptable than any other formulation.
PEACOCK:
Some of your friends have told me that you bitterly regretted that moment at the Reconciliation Conference and how it deteriorated after you’d given your own personal apology. Has that sort of simmered away inside you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don’t know about simmering away but if I’d have had my time over again I probably would have reacted more calmly to what, at the time, was not criticism of my response on the so-called apology issue but I was reacting to criticism of our position on native title. But I have wanted to make a contribution towards reconciliation. I committed the Government to pursuing reconciliation the night that the Government was re-elected in October of last year. I believe that this resolution will make a huge contribution towards the cause of reconciliation. It does not, as a resolution, impose a blame or a guilt on present generations for past misdeeds but it does recognise the truth about Australia’s history.
PEACOCK:
It doesn’t say sorry.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, well, it…
PEACOCK:
Is that important?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, look, what is important, Matt, is what is positive out of what was passed yesterday. I am not, like Aden Ridgeway, I’m not going to get hung up about this or that word or this or that expression.
PEACOCK:
But, I mean, there are others who’d say that’s exactly why we’ve had this controversy about sorry because….
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, they may go on saying that.
PEACOCK:
…you’re insisting on deep and sincere regret.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I have got and the Government has produced and the Parliament has endorsed a motion. And I don’t think there’ll be much sort of support in the Australian community for a continued debate about words and about what ought to have been or might not have been or should have been or could have been. You’ve got something that is, to use a collective expression of regret and acknowledgement of historical truth and reality.
PEACOCK:
Do you think most Australians, non-Aboriginal Australians, would accept the proposition, to quote your motion, "the mistreatment of many indigenous Australians over a significant period represents the most blemished chapter of our national history"?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think most Australians probably would, yes. And that’s something I’ve said before and it’s something I believe. And I think the scale of the Australian achievement and what this country has achieved has been immense but just as you salute and express pleasure about what you have achieved you should truthfully recognised mistakes. And I’m sure that that language is historically accurate and I believe most Australians would probably accept it.
PEACOCK:
Yet despite that major blemish there’s no mention of restitution or compensation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it’s not appropriate in something like this.
PEACOCK:
It’s purely symbolic.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it is symbolic, yes, it is. When you say purely symbolic is to discount the value of symbolism.
PEACOCK:
Well, I mean, you can have a pure symbol but the point is it has no, it’s like the preamble, no legal meaning at all.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it doesn’t have any legal effect, no, and it’s not meant to. It’s meant to be an expression of national sentiment and a deliberative acknowledgement of what occurred but in the context of it being not a legally binding thing. I mean, the question of whether rights have been infringed is a matter for the law and the courts, not for the Parliament in something like this.
PEACOCK:
Now, the resolution’s all about past generations and yet, Kim Beazley pointed out in his speech, some of this stuff did not happen all that long ago.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don’t, I mean, I don’t this morning…
PEACOCK:
I mean, it was your generation and his generation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don’t accept everything that Mr Beazley says about that.
PEACOCK:
Do you accept that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don’t accept his analysis. I do accept that the practises went on for a considerable period of time. This motion does not specifically refer to the stolen, so-called stolen generation issue or the separation of children issue. It talks generically about past practises and there’s good reason for that.
PEACOCK:
But that’s a bit of a cop out, though, isn’t it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it’s not a cop out.
PEACOCK:
Past practises, it wasn’t us.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I’m sorry, it’s not a cop out. It is achieving a balance that the great majority of the Australian community can support and accommodate. I am the Prime Minister for the whole country, not just for one section. And in phrasing something like this you must pay regard to the sensitivities of many people who in the past thought they were doing the right thing in being involved in policies and practises affecting indigenous people, which by today’s standards are no longer acceptable and, indeed, are regarded as quite unacceptable.
PEACOCK:
Do accept that members of your generation were responsible for these blemishes?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don’t believe that the collective responsibility for these past deeds should be accepted by the current generation, no.
PEACOCK:
But they are people that…
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Matt, you’ve asked me the question and I’ve given you the answer. I don’t agree with that proposition and I’m not going to alter my view.
PEACOCK:
Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.
[Ends]