PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
19/04/2000
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
11477
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP RADIO INTERVIEW WITH ROSS PEDDLESDEN, RADIO 7ZR & 7NT

Subjects: Kosovo refugees; salmon imports; Family Court;

Yassar Arafat; industrial relations; Telstra; GST

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

PEDDLESDEN

And time to introduce my special guest. Good morning,

Prime Minister John Howard from his Sydney office. Prime Minister good

morning.

PRIME MINISTER

Good morning Ross, very nice to be with you and your

listeners.

PEDDLESDEN

And it's our pleasure and we've got plenty

of questions so I should get straight into them. We've heard this

morning on the ABC program ‘AM' the story of the Becker family,

the Kosovo refugees going back to basically nothing, three days in a transit

camp and a burnt out home. Some in Tasmania will feel that the government's

been unsubtle and pre-emptive in dealing with the Kosovo refugees sending

families back to basically nothing. What is your response to that?

PRIME MINISTER

Well, my response is to say that I understand why people

might think that but I ask them to remember the circumstances in which

the Kosovars came here last year. They came here as a safe haven when

their lives were at risk, when there were no NATO forces in Kosovo, when

they had been driven out of their homeland by the Serbian forces. Now

however unhappy they may be with their lot back in Kosovo an enormous

amount of that has changed. There are now tens of thousands of NATO forces

in Kosovo. There has been a complete change in the security situation

and I ask people to remember that they were invited here and Australia

responded far more generously than most other countries given that we're

a long way from Kosovo and we're not a European country and we had

no direct stake in the conflict. We did respond none the less very generously.

And I ask people to remember that they came here on a certain basis, we

fulfilled our end of the bargain. If we had decided on an adhoc basis

to allow all who wanted to stay beyond the safe haven period to stay then

we would have been putting them ahead of others who've been patiently

waiting in the queue, whose humanitarian claims on a place in our refugee

program are as great if not greater than some of the Kosovars. You've

got to remember that there are people whose lives are at daily risk around

the world and we have to take those people into account. Well now it's

never easy and I can understand why in individual circumstances people

say oh gee why can't they stay but you have to take into account

the impact on the program.

PEDDLESDEN

And of course you've got an individual circumstance

of one lone young man, 19 year old, Akeif Ludvia who's on the run

in Hobart because he's got nobody in Kosovo and he's basically

saying he'll only go back to Kosovo in a coffin. I mean that's

extreme but that's the way he feels. He's been apparently tortured

while he was there. In that circumstance, that sort of circumstance, can't

you simply make an individual exemption?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well there are lots of people who claim individual exemptions

Ross and once you make one exception you have to make a whole lot of others

and I repeat, the circumstances in Kosovo even though they're far

from ideal and they're not the sort of circumstances that anybody

is happy with they are infinitely better, more secure, more protected

than what they were when we first took the refugees and that is the valid

comparison.

There are desperate situations all around the world and

there are competing claims on the available places in Australia's

humanitarian program and we have to make judgements. And it's very

easy to just look at it in isolation but a government doesn't have

that luxury. We have to ask ourselves well if we make an exception in

relation to this person then somebody else who can claim equally desperate

circumstances but at the moment is kept out say, what about me?

PEDDLESDEN

On another issue, the Tasmanian government is absolutely

adamant that it will retain its state ban on imported salmon. You've

been critical of that. Will you take the Tasmanian government to the High

Court in order to protect Australia's status with the WTO?

PRIME MINISTER

Well the thing that I'm most concerned about is

the overall trade interests of Australia and the difficulty that we as

Australians face is that if we don't take appropriate notice of the

World Trade Organisation position we risk a ban being placed on our exports

into other countries.

PEDDLESDEN

So to pre-empt that will you take Tasmania to the High

Court?

PRIME MINISTER

Look please let me finish. That is our position. We are

concerned about preserving Australia's international trade and I

would say to your listeners that we have more to lose than we have to

gain by ignoring the World Trade Organisation on this issue because the

rules of that organisation which we didn't write were really forced

upon countries like Australia by the larger trading groups, they're

not particularly benign towards Australia but I have to deal with the

reality. All parts of Australia export a great deal to countries like

Canada and if we don't take some notice of the World Trade Organisation's

position then we will end up suffering more than we will by taking notice

of what they've got to say. I mean we, Tasmania potentially could

lose exports if the attitude of the Tasmanian government on this issue

prevails. Tasmania will be worse off if the attitude of the Tasmanian

government prevails. That is the point that I don't think Mr Bacon

and others, they just focus on one issue, they forget that Tasmania exports

things other than... I mean there's more in it than just salmon

there are other exports as well.

PEDDLESDEN

So in practical terms what will you do?

PRIME MINISTER

Well in practical terms I like to keep discussing these

things with state governments and not get drawn into provocative declarations.

PEDDLESDEN

In practical terms let's talk about Bass Link. There

are very practical plans now being drawn up for Bass link. They include

above ground pylons in south Gippsland which the proponents say are essential

to the viability of the project. One of your ministers has had a very

vocal campaign against those pylons in a situation where you promised

to expedite the project. Where do stand on it?

PRIME MINISTER

Well the government supports Bass Link.

PEDDLESDEN

Including the above ground pylons which the proponents

say are vital.

PRIME MINISTER

Well whatever is needed we support.

PEDDLESDEN

So you're prepared to go against the campaign by

one of your ministers?

PRIME MINISTER

Oh look...

PEDDLESDEN

Well he has been very vocal.

PRIME MINISTER

I know, well look I've given you the indication

of the government's position OK.

PEDDLESDEN

OK another resource issue is the gas pipeline which the

government will be making an announcement about today from the Bass Strait

basin to Tasmania will you also expedite that project?

PRIME MINISTER

Well I'll wait and see what the Tasmanian government's

got to say. I'm not... I mean...

PEDDLESDEN

I mean in principle are you supporting those sort of

things? It is regarded as vital for Tasmania.

PRIME MINISTER

Well we have been through a whole range of programs incredibly

supportive of Tasmania. I mean Tasmania has done better out of the sale

of the first two sections of Telstra than any other part of Australia.

I'm regularly told that by other state premiers as recently as the

Liberal Party Convention at the weekend. I mean if Mr Bacon and all those

Labor members from Tasmania who sit in the federal parliament really care

about the future of Tasmania they would be whole heartedly in support

of the sale of the rest of Telstra because Tasmania's done extremely

well out of the sale of the first two bits of Telstra.

PEDDLESDEN

All right that's something we'll come back

too. But let's go to calls. And our number is 1300 36 1688. If you

can't get through keep trying because we'll try to get through

calls as quickly as we can. And Peter is first. Good morning Peter.

CALLER

Good morning.

PEDDLESDEN

Yes go ahead.

CALLER

Ah, Mr Prime Minister you have introduced a plan to help

families more. I think the first thing that should be the first cab off

the rank is the Family Court, it is destroying families. Prominent solicitors

make huge profits out of it. It is generally anti-man and they're

making laws, which are often against the constitution and against international

law. Now this is because one man plays God and often there is an attempt

to force bankruptcy by back door means. This has happened in my case.

The system needs to be scrapped. Solicitors need to be put out of it.

Let them do the property conveyancing they make plenty of money out of

that. Do it by tribunal so you don't get one man playing God and

the Judge sitting in as an advisory... in an advisory capacity. Now

when are you going to do something about this. Stop fooling around with

minor issues and get onto the major one or is everyone in parliament too

frightened to prod the sacred cow.

PEDDLESDEN

Thank you Peter. Prime Minister?

PRIME MINISTER

Well I understand there's a lot of unhappiness with

the Family Court. I would offer the view, Peter I think it is that no

matter what system you have because marriage break down involves very

strong human emotions on both sides you're going to have people unhappy

with the system.. For your information when the family law act was first

put through parliament, it was just after I came into parliament and we

had a free vote on it and it wasn't just Labor against Liberal it

was a mixture of Labor and Liberal people supporting the new family law

act and a mixture of predominantly Liberals and Country Party people and

some Labor people opposing it. I was one of the people that opposed the

thrust of the family law act, I still think there were errors contained

in that legislation. You ask me whether we're going to change it.

We normally deal with these things on a free vote issue. I don't

think it's simply a question of replacing one system with another

and imagining that you're going to abolish human unhappiness with

family law procedures when you have a breakdown of a formerly loving relationship

and you have personal emotions involved people lose reason and you do

have very unhappy outcomes. I sympathise with you but I don't think

there's an easy way out of it by just changing the way you deal with

it.

PEDDLESDEN

Thank you Peter. Tony's next.

CALLER

Oh good morning Mr Howard.

PRIME MINISTER

Yes Tony.

CALLER

You'll probably get a lot of agro here this morning

but I can tell you there are a lot of people out here who've been

applauding your team, you've done a wonderful job since you came

into government.

PRIME MINISTER

Well Tony that's very nice to hear that, it's

really nice indeed.

PEDDLESDEN

Did you have another issue to talk about Tony.

CALLER

Well I was thinking in terms of such things as the gun

laws and Timor, funding to Tasmania, industrial relations and tax reform

and even what's been brought up today, the Kosovars. I think we've

done the right thing. They made an agreement and our people, Mr Ruddock

have been firm and fair.

PEDDLESDEN

All right Tony thanks very much.

PRIME MINISTER

Can I just pick up one thing that Tony mentioned and

that's industrial relations. This is an area where I think the government's

reforms have been very beneficial. I mean apart from anything else unemployment

has gone down. Tasmania on a trend basis has the lowest unemployment now

for ten years. We've generated throughout the country 660,000 more

jobs. I noticed this morning in the press that Mr Beazley has announced

that if he becomes Prime Minister he's going to abolish individual

contracts. Now that represents a weak capitulation to the influence of

the union movement on the Labor Party. We now live in a society where

approximately 20% only of workers employed by private companies in the

private sector belong to a union yet effectively Mr Beazley wants to hand

100% of the industrial relations power under a Labor government back to

the unions. Individual contracts are an important choice now available

to Australian workers and after a big battle inside the Labor party the

unions have won, Mr Beazley has been rolled, the attitude of people like

Simon Crean the former president of the ACTU has triumphed and this will

be a very important issue for the Australian people to contemplate over

the next eighteen months. I mean when the Australian people are turning

their backs on unions Mr Beazley is wrapping his arms around them. I mean

it doesn't make sense.

PEDDLESDEN

Let's move onto another Tony, this time in [inaudible].

Hello Tony.

CALLER

Hi Ross, hello Mr Howard.

PEDDLESDEN

Hello.

PRIME MINISTER

Ah Tony.

CALLER

About four years ago Mr Howard you made a speech where

you said you know there was more room for free speech in Australia and

less political correctness and I agreed with that entirely but soon after

that you denied, you and your government denied David Irving and Gerry

Adams access to this country on the grounds that they were allegedly of

bad character. I think not too long ago when Mr Adams visited here you

refused to meet with him and yet we've heard in the media about how

you're willing to meet with Yassar Arafat who has been one of the

masterminds behind the PLO and their atrocities including the cowardly

massacre of Israeli athletes and coaches at the Munich Olympics. I'm

just wondering if there's a logical argument.

PRIME MINISTER

Well I think there is a logic in that. We did deny Irving

a visa for character reasons and that position continues. Adams did come,

I didn't see him. The reason I didn't see him was a personal

decision on my part, I took the view and I think it's been vindicated

by subsequent events that the peace process had not moved far enough in

Northern Ireland to... and certainly his role in it had not been sufficiently

positive to justify my seeing him.

I have a great admiration for two figures of the Northern

Irish peace movement, the Catholic leader John Hume and the Unionist Leader

David Trimbull. They were the joint recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize

and I think they've contributed an enormous amount to the peace process

in Northern Ireland and I hope and pray like most Australians that we'll

finally have a positive outcome.

But on the subject of Arafat a few years ago I wouldn't

have met him but times have moved on.

PEDDLESDEN

He is now a head of state of...

PRIME MINISTER

Well no he's not quite a head of state, he enjoys

the status as the leader of the Palestinians and they're not an independent

state yet but he talks with the Israeli government on a regular basis.

And the gentleman who asked the question reminded me of the slaughter

of the Israeli athletes at the Munich Games and I remember that tragic

event very well. But I'd also point out to you that I have been encouraged

by local Jewish leaders in Australia to see Arafat and when I announced

on Melbourne radio that I was going to see him during my visit to Israel,

and that was queried by the interviewer, later on the same program two

leaders of the Jewish community in Melbourne went on that programme and

defended my decision and said it was entirely appropriate that I should

go to Garza and see Arafat because there is now a welcome improvement

in the peace process in the middle east. But the Israeli Prime Minister

and Arafat have met on a number of occasions and there is a recognition

in Israel of his role so there's quite a logic. I understand the

question and I am grateful for the opportunity to explain my position

because there is a lot of logic in the attitude I've adopted on all

of these issues.

PEDDLESDEN:

All right, lets move on to yet another different issue

from Josephine. Hello Josephine.

CALLER:

Good morning. Prime Minister I would like to ask you

about Collins Class Submarines. First of all, how did we get into such

a mess with it? And secondly do you think the time has come for Australia

to switch to nuclear powered submarines?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well the Collins Class Submarine project was first established

back in 1987, when I think Mr Beazley, the current Opposition Leader was

the Defence Minister and we've had a lot of difficulty with that

project, and a lot of people argue that the concept was too ambitious

to start with but as a nation, as a result of that decision we've

sunk billions of dollars into the project and the Government wants it

to work for the benefit of the country and for the benefit of our Defence.

And we are embarked upon a process of getting control of the project to

ensuring that they are bought up to operational readiness and that they

can make a very significant contribution to our defence efforts. It's

very important that in the sort of strategic arc above Australia, we have

a capability of this... of some kind and the decision was made some

years ago. And you can understand with these big defence projects that

once you make a decision if you want to change it it's like trying

to turn around an ocean liner ten times the size of the Titanic.

PEDDLESDEN

So have there been times when you wish you'd never

heard of the Collins Class Submarine?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh well look it's been a very, very tragic, I mean

there's been a litany of errors and difficulties yes and the government

is very unhappy with the way the project has gone. But I am interested

in the now and the future as well as in the past. I mean it's a very

interesting debate as to whether the original decision should have been

taken but that was not taken by this government it was not... it was

taken 13 years ago when Mr Beazley was Defence Minister.

PEDDLESDEN:

Lets move on to Jim in Alderston. Hello Jim.

CALLER:

Oh good morning Ross. Good Morning Prime Minister. My

question is on the GST [inaudible] in to place by Morgan and Banks, about

four thousand people. How many of these people who have been employed

that are over 50? Why have accountants, tax officials and businesses been

overlooked in the over 50 bracket? And is it not true that many of the

people employed are under 30-35, have only got bank or commercial experience

and no legal or accounting qualifications?

PEDDLESDEN:

OK Jim... Prime Minister?

PRIME MINISTER:

You're talking about the people employed by the

ATO aren't you? I thought you said Morgan and Banks?

PEDDLESDEN:

Yes I thought I heard that as well.

CALLER:

Morgan and Banks were the agency they used to employ

them through.

PRIME MINISTER:

Who the Australian Tax Office?

CALLER:

Yes.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well look I am not sure that your figures are correct.

I'm not saying they're wrong. I don't have the details

of the age profile. We certainly don't have any policy I can assure

you, promise you of discriminating against people over 50, certainly not.

People over 50 have an enormous amount of experience to contribute that

people under 30 and 35 can never remotely have. So let me assure you there

is no policy of doing that. As to the details of the age profile, I don't

know without asking the tax office about that because the tax office is

an independent unit of the government and we don't monitor their

day to day decisions on employment practises.

PEDDLESDEN:

It is though a reminder of the situation which you do

face. You've spoken to your backbench about the difficulties leading

up to the 1st of July and presumably after. The whole idea of the GST

was that you had a simpler and easier to administer tax system. Since

you compromised with the Democrats, there've been a range of amendments,

there've been tax rulings and apparently that process is likely to

continue. What happened to your simpler system?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, there's nothing inconsistent with having a

simpler system and the introduction of it being a major exercise. I mean

it's what happens after it, years ahead, months ahead that will determine

whether it's a simpler system.

REPORTER:

And years ahead, months ahead will you still be having

rulings as to you know whether cooked food is under it...

PRIME MINISTER:

I don't think you'll be having it years ahead.

No, the point I make is, look it could have been simpler still if the

Senate had not rejected what the people voted for. It wasn't only

the Democrats, I mean the Labor Party voted against every single thing

that the Australian people had voted for in relation to the GST, yet they

are going to keep it. I mean this is sort of the great fraud of their

position, they're saying it is terrible, and it's shocking and

it's confusing and yet they are going to keep it.

REPORTER:

Well they said this morning they will roll it back subject

to the situation of the budget, which Simon Crean says, is precarious.

PRIME MINISTER:

11477