Subjects: Defence Discussion Paper
E&OE...
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister what's the point of asking the public to decide where Australia's Defence Force should go when no other department's done it? And this is a particularly specialised area.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we're not asking them to decide. We're asking them to express a point of view. And I think it's a fairly sought of narrow, dare I say, elitist view of policy making to suggest that there's something wrong in consulting the Australian public. I think the Australian public should feel greater ownership of areas like defence and foreign policy. It doesn't mean that government in any way surrenders the ultimate decision making process and doesn't accept 100% responsibility for the decisions that are taken. But I think a process that gives the public an opportunity to express a point of view is bound, in most cases to produce an outcome where the public will embrace what the Government has done a lot more readily and I think that's important.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard is the results in the consultation produced a picture which is different from that which the Government believes is the appropriate one for defence policy. Are you willing to fly in the face of public opinion to pursue the national interest as you see it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh we'll take what the public consultation process throws up into account. I'm not going to be so presumptuous as to try and pre-judge what that is. But as always we will, having listened to people, make our decisions, take our stance and if that proves to some people to be less acceptable than it might be well that's the nature of politics. But we rather think there could be some harmony between public perceptions and what is good policy. I wouldn't start this process with the negative frame of mind suggesting that in some way the public's going to be over here and the Government's going to be over there. I don't have that view. I think the public is very capable of making a common sense contribution and I will welcome it.
JOURNALIST:
Can you give a guarantee Prime Minister that the outcome is not pre-ordained?
PRIME MINISTER:
Of course it's not pre-ordained.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard you said that we may need to spend more on defence, it's a matter of getting our national priorities correct. Does that mean that you're going to raise taxes or alternatively will you cut spending on health, education or rural??
PRIME MINISTER:
Gee, that's a 1970's question if ever I heard one.
JOURNALIST:
But it seems to be? I mean there's only a net Government budget. Where's the money coming from?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we will be explaining all of that in the normally transparent way, which is a characteristic of this Government.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister could you tell us how much you'll be involved in this process itself?? [inaudible].
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think Mr Moore indicated that since I became Prime Minister I've taken a very keen interest in defence. I don't think it's any secret that the views I expressed on the subject of defence spending approved material in the original decisions of the ERC back in 1996 and I'll continue to take a very keen interest. I obviously won't be able to devote as much time as the Minister who will give total and effective leadership to the whole process. But I am very confident that the process we've established will be beneficial. I don't know that I'll be going to all of the regional meetings that Andrew and co are going to be going to.
JOURNALIST:
Will you go to some of them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it depends where they are and where I am at the time. But I do have a very keen interest in this but I don't want to make any commitments about that.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard you've talked about spending more. What are your priorities for defence?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it's entirely inappropriate on the eve of the launch of the discussion paper process for me to be saying what my priorities are. I obviously have views but those views are capable of change and of being moulded and of being defined.
JOURNALIST:
So you're not going to take part in this debate?
PRIME MINISTER:
Not going to take part in this debate? I'll take a very big part in the debate but I'm not going to sort of go along to the meetings.
JOURNALIST:
Can we ask you then, what are your views?
PRIME MINISTER:
My views will be contributed in the appropriate forum for a Prime Minister.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard you talked about stability in the post Cold War world. Do you believe that Australia is a more secure or less secure place now than it was 20 years ago?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think Australia has always been a very secure place. The question of whether we're more or less secure is almost, it's a very, very hard question to answer in that sort of comparative way. But we've always been a very secure country because our domestic institutions are strong and we've had good alliances and we've followed very positive policies with our neighbours. The point I sought to make in my introduction to the paper was that the world in which we live, the region in which we live is suffering a certain degree of turmoil that it wasn't suffering a decade ago.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister a number of areas identified in the paper of spending options [inaudible] involved many millions, billions of dollars. I know you won't put a dollar figure on it now but could you say that defence spending would need to be increased by at least a significant amount.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look I simply make the point that we have to spend more on defence. I made that point before and I repeat it today. It has to assume a larger place in our spending and national priorities. As to exactly how much and where I think is something you determine further down the track after you've gone through this process. And I'm not going to start throwing any figures around, that's pointless at this stage. I've simply put, as it were the Government and the community on notice that I believe from my position that we do have to make a greater provision. And I don't mean, I don't define that increase in defence spending in sort of nominal or derisory terms. I think I'm willing to go that far.
JOURNALIST:
Would you like to see, Mr Howard that at the end of the process there is new support for your views? increase defence spending?
PRIME MINISTER:
Paul, I suspect there's community support for that view now.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard you say again we've got to increase the amount of money we spend on defence. Where is the money coming from? It's got to come either from an increase in taxes or from another portfolio surely. Is that not the case?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the budget's in reasonably good state at the moment and I don't think the taxation reforms that are to come into operation on the 1st of July, but more about that on Thursday night, I don't think those reforms are going to damage our capacity to spend more on essential public provision of which defence is obviously one.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard how much is this process about bringing along public opinion for its support in increase of expenditure on defence?
PRIME MINISTER:
Tim, it's a mixture, there's a mixture of objectives for this. I mean we actually do believe in public consultation on something like this. We do think the public has things to tell the Government. And we do think it's a very good idea to allow people to express their views on something that effects all of us. And I mean they are the fundamental reasons why we're doing it.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard is the fundamental doctrine of defence of Australia as a first priority of the Defence Forces, is that now totally up for grabs? That's no more likely than any other view to prevail?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think to say that the defence of Australia when you're talking about defence is up for grabs, I mean I don't think we'd ever be up for grabs put baldly such as that. Greg, obviously the defence of Australia put in those simply terms is the first priority of any government and of any defence force. But of course you can defend Australia in a number of ways and you can defend Australia against a number of contingencies. And what this process is about and what the white paper will be about is explaining how we believe within the resources we think it appropriate in the national interest to make available and with the men and women and their competence and expertise at our disposal how we think they should be deployed and what should be the stance of defence policy in the years ahead.
We're very conscious that one of the things that effects this is, in relation to equipment there are some very significant decisions which involve a very big capital cost that are involved in the not so distant future in relation to defence hardware. And we also know that we're operating in a very competitive market as far as getting men and women to join the ADF. The lifestyle is always difficult for some people. The itinerant character of defence service. The strains put on husbands and wives because of travelling around and family responsibilities. I think the Defence Forces do a terrific job now of making that easier but all of those things complicate the recruitment process and all of those things make it all the more necessary that we provide as much flexibility. The contribution that the Reserves will make, and you are conscious of the Government's commitment to alter the defence legislation so that the deployment of Reserves, the basis of their deployment will be altered in a quite historic way and we have the support of the Opposition to do that. All of those things will play into the process.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard you mentioned bipartisanship on some areas in your speech. Do you fundamentally see defence as a political issue where there'll be any future division at election time or do you think that era won't return?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh I think there is always politics in everything. What we seek to do is to the extent that it's possible to have a bipartisan approach we'll do it. I don't think you'll ever get a completely bipartisan approach. I would not ask that. In relation to defence policy generally I would ask it of an opposition in relation to support for deployed forces once the decision has been taken. But if you can get a higher level of bipartisanship than we've had in areas say like taxation than that is enormously to the country's benefit.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I think between a half and a million. Is that right?
MOORE:
About half a million.
JOURNALIST:
There seems to a certain amount of ambiguity in the green paper about the attitudes that might be adopted. [inaudible] United States. What's your view on our alliance, our reliance on that alliance and self reliance?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think I've always had the view that you need both. That the alliance with the United States is still the cornerstone of our defence position. But part of the alliance benefit assumes, on the part of the partners to that alliance that each will make its own contribution. And I don't think there's any ambiguity in that. I mean the ANZUS Treaty is still a cornerstone, a very fundamental document and we treat it seriously and I don't think our interpretation of that has changed over the years. But we've always accepted a degree of self reliance and we've always seen our capacity to, in the past anyway, our capacity to deploy effectively with the United States as being an element of defence policy and the extent of that and the way in which it might occur in the future is one of those things that we will look at in the white paper, in the green paper and white paper process.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard our defence (inaudible) our regional vote. What's your vision for Australia's regional role in terms of our defence outlook and capabilities?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think you rightly put it David in saying it's part of the expression of our regional role. I mean I see us very much in terms of being a good, effective, loyal distinctive friend of nations in the region, of having a position in the region which is a little more than consistent with our size because we do bring particular assets to the region. Our association with the United States, our European connections, all of those things add value to Australia's association with the region. And what we've sought to do in the last four and a bit years is not in any way to wind back our regional commitment, in fact if you actually look at the score sheet in terms of economic and defence involvement it's probably been greater over the last four and a quarter years than it was over the previous ten. But we have sought to balance that a little bit with an appropriate emphasis on our linkages with Europe and North America.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]
MOORE:
Well the contract carried out by ASC was a pretty unsatisfactory contract. At the end it was not possible to conclude those contracts and the way in which the shares were offered by the previous owners, Celsius and HDW would not have given us the outcome that we wanted. Therefore it seemed the most appropriate thing for the Government to acquire those shares. That been made possible by the pre-emptive clause. The Government decided to do that and by doing that we were able to go to 100% and under that to offer those to an Australian consortium of some form, yet to be called for. And we hope that under that all areas of technology can be accessed because it's most important for the Australian submarine contract to be completed. We have complete access to American technology. That was denied to us under the previous arrangements.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible]
MOORE:
No we are not intending to own the ASC for any period of time. It's purely an operation to bring it under control and to bring to it conclusion of a very sad story of very poor management.
JOURNALIST:
When would you see the sale taking place?
MOORE:
Within the shortest possible practical time. That may take three to six months.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Moore, you've undertaken a very major shake up in your portfolio. Do you expect to stay in that job at least until the next election to complete the work you've started?
MOORE:
That is beyond my control. You better see my neighbour.
PRIME MINISTER:
I've already expressed great confidence in his leadership of the Defence Department.
JOURNALIST:
[Inaudible]. The Prime Minister mentioned that the national security [inaudible]. Do you see yourself more as part of a team rather than a sort of solo defence policy maker?
MOORE:
No. Look there's nothing solo about the whole of Government. It's a whole of Government operation. The Prime Minister is the Leader of the Government and we are parts of it.
JOURNALIST:
How would you gauge your power in terms of independent decision making?
MOORE:
I don't make judgements like that. We act as the whole of Government and the decisions of Cabinet and whole of Government decisions.
[ends]