Subjects: Referendum, Constitutional Preamble, Defence Minister
E&OE.............
PEACOCK:
Prime Minister, thanks for joining us. You've said that we're a good and
decent country and still will be on Sunday no matter who wins either the
football or the votes and you're also saying that Australian voters are
always right. What will that then mean if they vote no to your preamble?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I will have to accept that like I will accept a yes vote to the republic.
The point I am.
PEACOCK:
What would it say about Australians if they voted against something like
that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it would say that they either haven't had enough time to consider
it or they wanted it expressed in a different way. But I hope they don't
vote no to the preamble. I hope they vote yes to the preamble because the
preamble is the one thing tomorrow that all of us can vote for irrespective
of our views on the republic. The great thing about the preamble is that
it can unite all Australians behind a common set of Australian values. We've
heard a lot about symbols during this whole debate on the republic. In many
ways the things that bring Australians together most of all are the values
that we hold in common. When I think of Australia I think more of the things
that we believe in, our equality, our origins, our common commitment, our
mateship and all of those things that we have endeavoured to encapsulate
in the preamble. And, of course, most importantly, this preamble is the
first opportunity that Australians have had for 100 years to put something
in the Constitution which is decent and positive and noble about the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander people who are the first peoples of this nation.
And it would be a great shame if that opportunity were passed up. But I
hold to the view that in a democracy the customer is always right and that's
an attitude of mine that I would encourage those who have an opposite view
to me on the republic to accept if the verdict should go against them tomorrow.
I don't know what the result's going to be tomorrow on either question.
I hope the republic is defeated because I think the model being proposed
would leave us with a less secure, less stable arrangement than we have
at the present time. I hope the preamble wins.
PEACOCK:
What about your argument with the preamble that you use on the republic,
if it ain't broke don't fix it is your slogan, why fix this in the Constitution
when some lawyers at least do say that it has legal implications?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Matt, that really is not a very good analogy because there's no separate,
free-standing preamble at the moment. The only preamble is the.
PEACOCK:
But why tamper with a good Constitution?
PRIME MINISTER:
The only preamble at the moment is the ordinary recital which is contained
in the British Act establishing the Constitution. And what I'm asking for
for the first time is to put an authentic, indigenous, Australian set of
words in the Constitution itself. I'm not proposing you throw something
out that works. I'm proposing something to add something which will make
what now works work even better because it will contain a statement of the
aspirations of the Australian people.
PEACOCK:
Isn't it really a symbolic change though as you acknowledge, just like replacing
the Queen with one of our own?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, they're two entirely different propositions. The republican proposition
tomorrow is that you replace a Head of State arrangement which has worked
brilliantly over the last 100 years with an alternative which would leave
the President far less secure than is the Governor-General at present and
would not guarantee that you would get the same depth of talent available
for the presidency in future as is now available for the governor-generalship.
One of the great advantages of our present system is that it enables the
best and the brightest and those who can contribute most to be asked to
accept appointment as Governor-General and come out of their existing positions
without fear that some kind of nomination process will compromise them in
their existing positions and, therefore, discourage them from making themselves
available. I don't think you would get the same quality for President under
the proposed model as you now have for Governor-General.
People have said to me a lot during the campaign they admire the current
Governor-General, they admire the job that previous Governor-Generals have
done and I think it highlights the fact that if you depart from the present
system I'm not sure that the President, under a future arrangement, would
necessarily be as good as the Governor-Generals we have at present, have
had recently and have at present.
PEACOCK:
Now, you've quoted Lee Kuan Yew as dismissing the view that this will make
us the laughing stock overseas. But various people, including Dick Woolcott
who's just been to Singapore and says senior Singaporeans hold a different
view, Henry Kissinger, Rupert Murdoch, all say it will for the same reason
that symbolically it will be a vote that says we're more British than Australasian.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think that's a ridiculous argument. And I quoted Lee Kuan Yew because
he's the elder Statesman of Asia. He put it very nicely. What he said was
that he didn't think there'd be any different attitude and I'm sure that's
right. Matt, I've travelled Asia as a Minister, as an Opposition Leader
and as Prime Minister. There's never any doubt that Australia is seen in
a clear, distinct light. I mean, one of our strengths in Asia is that we
are seen as Australian and we are now. And we are seen as, sure, having
associations with Europe and North America and why shouldn't we be seen
as having those associations because it's true but we are seen as bringing
an Australian perspective. Now, I went through the whole of the East Timor
saga and negotiated with the leaders of countries in the region and around
the world and the most intense negotiation that any Prime Minister of this
country's been involved in since World War II. It's absurd to suggest that
the outcome of that would have been any different if we'd been a republic.
It is absurd to suggest that I went to those negotiations limited and enfeebled
by our existing constitutional arrangements. I mean, it is a ludicrous proposition.
PEACOCK:
Just on that subject, Prime Minister, and a slightly separate matter, how
embarrassing would it be for us in the region if your Minister for Defence,
Mr Moore, was dumped in a pre-selection? Will you do anything to save him?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it certainly is a separate matter. Look, the pre-selection choices
are a matter for the Party organisation. Can I say I have great confidence
in him as Defence Minister.
PEACOCK:
Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.
PRIME MINISTER:
You're welcome.
[Ends]