PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
29/01/2000
Release Type:
Speech
Transcript ID:
11695
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP Q&A AT COMMUNITY MEETING, PORT LINCOLN

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

QUESTION: [lack of GPs in country towns]

PRIME MINISTER:

I'd like you to do that and the man is Mr Brett Cox. He's back

there holding that brief case. But I just say to you that I think the

problem of getting more general practitioners into rural and regional

Australia is right at the very top of the list. We have made some progress

with a number of initiatives that Dr Wooldridge has introduced. And there

has been some improvement but we still have a long way to go. And I would

acknowledge that doing something about this is about the single most important

area of challenge as far as social policy is concerned. I think people

who live in rural Australia have the same right as people who live in

the cities to have access to proper health care for their families, for

themselves. I think it is one of those basic entitlements that Australians

where ever they are should have. I can understand people feeling a bit

left out if they can't get a doctor to treat them or to treat their

ill child or their parents. I understand that. We are making progress,

making some progress and in a number ways. We've got a greater emphasis

on rural medicine in a number of the universities. We're trying to

put incentives into the Medicare provider number system to bring about

some changes. We're trying a number of different strategies including

the provision of additional funds. And we have a few more ideas we're

working on at the present time. But I can't argue with you. I think

your proposition is correct. I don't think we will have sort of done

the job effectively until there's a lot more progress made on this

front.

QUESTION: [unemployment and shorter working hours]

PRIME MINISTER:

Well thank you very much sir. Could I just say a couple of things? Firstly

we already are doing what you're suggesting. We have seen in this

country a very significant increase in the amount of part-time work and

casual work. I've often had this proposition put to me and if you

study the structure of the labour market in Australia the way it's

changed over the last ten years you can actually see there are a whole

variety of reasons the development of the very trend you mentioned. I

was interested that you quoted Europe. I don't want to be unduly

argumentative because it's not in my nature, but I'd have to

say to you with every respect that Europe is not doing as well as Australia

or the United States or indeed Japan, although Japan has not done as well

lately, as far as unemployment is concerned. One of the reasons that Europe

is not doing as well is that their industrial relations system is still

too tightly regulated and is still too heavily dominated by a centralised

approach to industrial relations. The unemployment problem in Australia

is still with us and it's with us in a big way in many parts of the

country. In other parts of the country it is very low indeed. And what

I was trying to say in my opening remarks was to acknowledge the fact

that in many parts of Sydney the unemployment rate is now only 2% or 3%.

What we want to try and do is to find the ways of bringing about that

same state of affairs in all parts of the country. Now it didn't

get to 2% or 3% in those parts of the country from anything other than

strong economic growth and also I think having a more flexible approach

to working arrangements. I mean I agree with you that we have to have

more flexibility but could I say that we have that now. There's a

lot more part-time work, there's a lot more flexibility in the system

now than there used to be. I don't think you will eliminate the rest

of unemployment by legislating for permanently lower working hours. We've

really got to get to a society where people agree amongst themselves as

to what their working hours ought to be rather than trying to impose a

rigid uniform pattern. I mean if you're trying to run a small business

in a rural area the last thing you want is a whole lot of dogmatic rules

that tell you how many hours you can or can't work. What you really

want is an arrangement of course that guarantees proper minimum standards

so people won't be exploited, but you also want the opportunity to

really make your own arrangements that best fits the employee and also

suits the employer. Now I understand your broad philosophical point and

I don't disagree with it. But I point out that a lot of that is already

happening. At the end of the day you can't get away from the fact

that if you want to reduce unemployment you need strong economic growth.

We've added 575,000 jobs in Australia in the last four years. We

have reduced unemployment nationally and that has happened because we've

had a strong pattern of economic growth. It's been uneven, I acknowledge.

And that is the challenge we have now to try and spread some of the national

economic benefits a little more evenly throughout the community.

QUESTION: [inaudible]

PRIME MINISTER:

Some people like working longer, some people like working less. And some

people would like to work indefinitely, but I agree with that. I think

one of the most foolish things this country did a few years ago was move

towards having fixed statutory retirement ages. I think we should move

away, and we are moving away from that. And I don't think it makes

a great deal of sense to say you've got to retire by a particular

age.

QUESTION: [health services and information technology]

PRIME MINISTER:

Well sir, in no way wishing to walk away from responding to the question,

a number of those things at an administrative level of course are more

in the hands of the State government than the Federal. Can I say in relation

to the IT point I agree completely with that. And one of the benefits,

if I may say so, of the progressive sale of Telstra, and I know some people

in the bush criticised that, is that out of the proceeds of it we have

the resources to upgrade a lot of the communications facilities including

the greater provision of IT facilities. One of the things that will make

people in the regions feel properly included in the economic progress

of the country is not only access to general practitioners which came

up in an earlier question, but also access to the benefits of information

technology. And it's impossible in my view to overstate the economic

benefit to this country of the proper utilization of the information technology

revolution. It does have the capacity to add enormously to our productivity.

It can demolish distance as a disabling factor in a way that virtually

nothing else can. And just as it's important to get the cost of fuel

and therefore the transportation of goods down because there are some

things that you can't transport over the Internet and you have to

carry them by truck or by rail, so it is that if we can bring IT facilities

to people in remote areas then we'll be making a very big contribution.

QUESTION: [GST and automotive industry]

PRIME MINISTER:

Well certainly the motor industry will be one of the major beneficiaries

because of the very significant difference between the 22% wholesale sales

tax and a 10% GST. The answer to that question is that we're monitoring

the figures virtually on a daily basis. But the problem sir is that the

overall figures are still very strong. They really are. We have figures...the

last set of monthly figures on new motor vehicle registrations is still

very strong. Now I understand that the industry is concerned about a buyer's

drought and I understand that it is logical that if you face a situation

where on the 1st of July you can buy something for several

thousand dollars less than what you might have to pay for it now that

you're going to hold back. Now the response has been for some of

the traders to anticipate the reduction by heavy discounting. I think

you're probably very conscious of that. And I know it's uneven.

I've had that question from a number of dealers including several

in my own electorate in Sydney who've put basically the same propositions

to me. I can't at this stage say anything other than we'll keep

watching it. We don't want any crisis to arise but we can't,

I hope you'll understand, act prematurely when the overall figures

still show very strong sales. I mean I don't think there can be any

argument that the motor vehicle industry registrations in aggregate are

still very strong and they're much stronger than they were two or

three years ago. Now we'll keep watching it. Nick Minchin who's

not only from this State but he's also the Minister responsible,

and the Treasurer are monitoring it on a weekly basis. And we said at

the beginning that if we needed to take any kind of emergency action we

would and that remains our position. But the thing that is constraining

us at the present time is that the overall figures for motor vehicle registration

still remain very strong. Now we have to keep watching. We had I thought

quite good news for South Australia in relation to Mitsubishi the other

day – the announcement the other day there will be some rationalisation,

they're still going to maintain a manufacturing capacity here in

South Australia and that's particularly encouraging. But we will

keep monitoring but I have to say that the overall figures are still quite

strong.

QUESTION: [higher education costs]

PRIME MINISTER:

Well could I take the second question first sir. There are...the scares

that arose at the time of that leaked document, can I just tell you that

we are not going to implement any such proposal. We have made some changes

in relation to the higher education sector that have created a situation

where students are making, because of the changes in the HECS arrangement,

are making a greater contribution towards the cost of their education

in relation to HECS. I mean bear in mind that HECS is a system where you

have the option of deferring your contribution until after you are in

the workforce and earning an income, or paying up front. You've got

that choice. Now I have to say to you I think that's fair. I don't

think we as a country can afford to go back to a system where the taxpayer

picks up the entire cost of somebody's education at university. I

don't think that's fair on people who don't go to university,

I don't think it's fair on the generality of taxpayers. I think

what you have to do is to try and have something which is balanced where

people make a contribution. And students, it depends once again where

you live. The opportunities for part-time work for many young students

now are considerable in many part of the country, and they have a capacity

through that part-time work to earn sufficient money to pay their HECS

up front. If they don't, or they don't choose to do so then

they don't have any liability for it until after they've graduated

and they're in the workforce and their income has reached a certain

level. Now I don't think anybody can question the essential equity

of that. And I can't hold out that we can ever go back to and I'm

against going back to the notion that education is completely free. It

didn't work and it didn't produce a better system. Now in relation

to the cost of people being educated who live in the country – of

course it's more expensive. It's more expensive in relation

to school education as well and one of the reasons why my government has

quite unashamedly supported the independent school sector, one of the

reasons, as well as supporting the government sector in education is that

it's the independent sector that by and large provides opportunity

for people who've come from the country to go to boarding school.

I think it's very important that that be kept. There have been significant

improvements. It sounds from your question as though you're not entitled

to it, I'm sorry about that, but there have been very considerable

increases in the living away from home allowances under the youth allowance

in relation to students. In fact one of the features of that new system

was a very significant increase in the value of the living away from home

component of it. Now it's no good if you're not eligible for

it because of the level of your income. I accept that. But it does provide.....

How old is your daughter?

QUESTION:

18.

PRIME MINISTER:

She's just going to university this year. Went last year. Where

is she, in Adelaide? Well I don't think any...I mean of course

it's one of the reasons...not so much reason being here. I said

earlier in answer to a question I think people have got a right in relation

to things like health care and education to see a reasonable degree of

equity. I can't be so unrealistic as to say to you that if you ever

completely eliminate some of these things just as some people I talk to

will argue well you know the cost of buying a house in some of the cities

is a lot more than the cost of buying a house in some of the regional

towns and that's true, and therefore your mortgage payments are much

higher so there are some swings and round abouts between the bush and

the bush and the cities but education and health are two of those basic

things in life which I understand.

QUESTION: [Medicare anomaly]

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, thank you for raising that. I'll investigate it. I wasn't

aware of that but it does sound on the face of it a bit unreasonable.

I'll investigate that and I'll come back to that and go through

Barry with a response.

QUESTION: [Bank closures]

PRIME MINISTER:

Will this mean it has no banks? What's the population? Well I can't

answer that question straight off. I would have to investigate it. The

Rural Transaction Centres, the current round, involve about, we have about

500 around the country. I opened the first of them a few months ago in,

near Parkes in NSW in a little town that had about 600 people. It was

a former Westpac premises that were required on that particular occasion

to a co-operative arrangement with the Local Government and they are a

great concept and the reaction to it has been very good. Can I once again

follow that up and come back to you. We have certain criteria through

the Department and the Minister for working out who gets them and I can't,

not off the top of my head, not having all the detail with me say yes

or no to that without checking out what is available in the resources

that have been allocated to them. Can I just say one more general thing

on bank closures that one of the, it is of no comfort to your community

at all, but one of the things that has happened as a result of criticism

of bank closures not only by people in the country but also by the government,

by myself is that one or two of the banks had actually announced moratoria

on further closures in rural areas. Now Westpac is obviously not one of

them but certainly the ANZ did that and I know a couple of the banks have

some ideas about trying to reverse some of the trends but we are I think

seeing a far greater awareness throughout the country generally of the

extraordinary sensitivity of communities and you put your finger on it

because once the bank closes, cash flows go elsewhere and it has an impact

on the whole sort of economic base of the town and the rural transaction

centres are designed to, as a way of the Government intervening and trying

to bring back services. I think you bring about a big change in the psychology

of a small community if you're actually seen to be putting some services

back. In the last 10 years, it has been a case of the services disappearing

and I think that's tremendously important but your particular question

I'll have investigated and will come back to you.

QUESTION: [Farmers financial burdens, fertiliser bounty]

PRIME MINISTER:

I can't argue with any of the facts you put forward about and they

really highlight the acknowledgement I made in my speech about the what's

happened to commodity prices and the impact that has had. In relation

to the problem of I guess keeping younger people on the land, one of the

things we have tried to do is, by changes to the assets test rules to

ease the intergenerational transfer of title to properties which has facilitated

the transfer of properties and therefore has made some contribution to

addressing that problem. Only some, I don't pretend it's made

a huge contribution. You asked me specifically have we considered a bounty.

The quite concise answer is no we haven't considered reintroducing

it. We have taken the view that the best way of addressing the particular

cost problems of farmers is to try and address them right across the board

in relation to things like fuel and we've done that with the new

tax system. The benefits of cheaper fuel for farmers will be very significant

indeed. I made a commitment to the annual meeting of the National Farmers

Federation in Longreach last year that in any discussions that we would

keep benefits for the bush of the original tax package and they have in

fact been, not only kept but slightly improved because the diesel concession

now applies to rail carriage which is of particular benefit to wheat farmers

in different parts of the country. I acknowledge what you said about interest

rates, I mean interest rates are a lot lower now than they were and that

is of very great benefit but we have generally taken the view, I'm

answering your question very directly that rather than reintroduce particular

bounties for particular products, it is better to try and reduce the cost

of something that everybody in the bush uses such as fuel or something

which everybody at various stages is subject to and that is the cost of

money.

QUESTION: [Automotive industry import protection]

PRIME MINISTER:

I've had that put to me some years ago but this is the first question

I've had on it for several years. You believe it is doing quite serious

damage to your motor dealers? Well I can't say to you, we had a judgement

a couple of years ago for a combination of trade and other reasons that

we wouldn't make any change to the existing arrangements. I can undertake

in the spirit of what I did in relation to a number of other questions

raised to look at the arguments again. When it came before us a couple

of years ago the view was taken that given what we were seeking to achieve

in relation to trading arrangements in other areas and given the general

buoyancy of the industry, which was certainly the case a couple of years

ago and still generally speaking is, I mean I don't think it can

be doubted it is still a very strong industry but there wasn't a

case for further restrictions without promising that we will change it

I can promise to look at it again I'm sure I'll be able to get

back to you through Barry Wakelin when I've done that.

[Ends]

Return to Address at Community Meeting

11695