Subjects: East Timor; UN; fuel prices.
E&OE................................
O'BRIEN:
On the issue of East Timor and its anniversary first Prime Minister, East Timorese Nationalist Leaders have voted to ask the UN to keep a peacekeeping force on the West Timor border for years to come and Jose Ramos Horta has expressed the strong hope that Australia would contribute to such a force, would it disturb you to keep Australian troops in that situation for an indefinite period?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Kerry I wouldn't like them to be there indefinitely and I don't think the Australian public would, but we've always recognised that we have a particular responsibility in relation to East Timor and we'll continue to play a leading role. One of the things we have to do is to encourage Indonesia to exert as much discipline as possible on the militia. When I go to New York next week, one of the people I'll be seeing there is President Wahid, we'll be having a bi-lateral meeting as well as both participating in the Millennium Summit of the UN and I will naturally be discussing the situation in East Timor with him. I understand his good intentions and I certainly understand and appreciate all of the efforts that he has made in recent times to bring the militia under control and we would like that process to go on. It's difficult, I don't want Australian troops there indefinitely. I also want to do the right thing by the people of East Timor. We value what has been achieved in defence of their human rights and their right to a free future. And we won't walk away from our responsibilities but naturally an open-ended commitment of Australian men and women in East Timor is not something that enthuses me or indeed enthuses the Australian public, so we have to bring a number of how shall we put it, pieces of advocacy to bear in trying to get the best result.
O'BRIEN:
And speaking of human rights, Mr Howard the UN is also in the news today, because of the Government's attack, this Government's attack on the UN committee system on human rights and refugees. Your Attorney-General Daryl Williams complained yesterday that the focus of these committees seemed to be on quote minor, marginal issues in countries like Australia. Is that how you see issues like the stolen generations and indigenous health?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think Daryl was making the point that when you have countries that have arbitrary arrest, don't have democracy, where people are mutilated and murdered because of the political party they belong to, when you compare that with even the worst complaints that are made about things in Australia, the latter do tend to pale into insignificance. That was the point Daryl was making and I think it was a valid point. Our concern Kerry is about the committee process, we don't walk away from a commitment to the values of the United Nations and we've been a good member. Kofi Annan the Secretary General said we're a model member of the United Nations. And we've just demonstrated with East Timor a practical commitment to the defense of human rights, but we do think the processes are out of whack. We think they could be reformed, we don't think enough attention is given to the views put by the elected government. When you get committees recording thirteen unfavourable references to Australia by comparison, ten to China, nine for Pakistan and one to Cuba, you get some idea of the basis of the concerns that we have.
What we've moved to is a situation where we are still going to be more answerable to these committees than say the United States and on about the same basis as a country like the United Kingdom. I think it's a measured, reasonable, sensible response given the unacceptable way in which some of the committees have dealt with us over recent months.
O'BRIEN:
One of your former ministers, Andrew Thomson now a backbencher, today described these committees as quote, a theme park for indulging the fantasies of the global NGO Guilt Movement. Is that the kind of rhetoric or sentiment you agree with?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well everybody has a different way of expressing things and Andrew has expressed himself and he can answer for himself. I've expressed myself as I have just a moment ago . . .
O'BRIEN:
He's a member of your Coalition Government.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well of course, he's a colleague, yes. And he's a, he's a respected colleague and he has done some work on the treaty. And the point has to be made that it is irritating to a lot of Australians when the political process in Australia is fully exhausted, throws up a result, which is accepted through the democratic process and then groups go off to another country and to meetings of the UN committee and criticise outcomes and prevail upon those committee in turn to echo their criticisms back to this country. I think a lot of Australians take the view that these issues should be resolved by Australians, through Australian institutions in Australia and that lies very much at the heart of many of the concerns that people have.
O'BRIEN:
Well then when would you accept the right of one of these committees to criticise Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we're not denying their right to criticise if they want to, but we can monitor and control the extent to which we work with the committees. I mean it's a free world, well it's a free world for most, it's certainly a free country in Australia and if people want to criticise this country they have a right to do so, but we're not going to be part, willingly part of a process where we don't believe proper regard is paid to expressions of view by the elected government. But in the end Kerry what really matters is the quality of human rights inside a country and our criticism of other countries is not based on how they react to UN committees, it's based on what takes place inside their borders and where human rights are abused in those countries, that's the thing that attracts the criticism, not whether or not they deal with the United Nations' committee.
O'BRIEN:
But in fact what other countries are exposed to is direct criticisms of the way you've handled some aspects of aboriginal affairs on these committees. The head of the UN treaties' section says quote, Australia is one of the better countries on human rights, but it's also quick off the mark to beat others around the head for breaking the rules, so it should be mature enough that when someone else criticises it's, Australia's record, that Australia just doesn't go off and sulk. That's not a great image for Australia is it in international forums? The . . .
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if you accept that man's view which I don't. I don't accept that that is a fair assessment of what this country does, we don't behave in a quick off the mark fashion in criticising the domestic affairs of other countries. Indeed many of the critics of us over this UN move are the same people who criticised us for being too pragmatic in our dealings with China in relation to human rights. So you can't really win can you. We're not people who hector and lecture and tell people how to run their internal affairs but we are a country that is quite happy to compare what happens inside our country and the value we attach to democratic rights and human rights with those of any other countries. We're not without blemish and we're still coming to terms and grips with a lot of difficult social issues. But the quality of democracy and the transparency and integrity of our judicial system, the freedom of our press, the freedom people have from fear of political affiliation, I mean these are gold plated in this country compared with most countries in the world and they are on a par with or better than the other great democracies of the globe.
O'BRIEN:
But when you talked about us not interfering with other countries, you recently criticised Malaysia for the way its judicial system treated Anwar Ibrahim. Now isn't that a double standard?
PRIME MINISTER:
No that's not a double standard because I had a reason to do so. But I wasn't quick off the mark and I wasn't alone. The Americans criticised the Malaysians, others have done so. I mean I was hardly alone and indeed I think it's fair to say that we strike the right balance.
O'BRIEN:
But when these committees criticise Australia you don't like it.
PRIME MINISTER:
But when they criticise Australia, I'm not saying they don't have the right to criticise but what we're saying is we're not going to facilitate a process whereby they criticise us as a result of the inadequate process of properly assessing the material that is put to them by the government and by non-government organisations.
O'BRIEN:
Malcolm Fraser, your own former Prime Minister in a speech last week described your attacks on the United Nations as, "Jingoistic nationalism over and above the concept and ideal of human rights."
PRIME MINISTER:
Well a lot of what Malcolm said in that speech he's said before. There were some new things like the bill of rights.
O'BRIEN:
First time I've heard that one.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah well I've heard some things like that. But look I don't accept that assessment but he's entitled to his view and it's a free country and it's an open society and he can express it. I think everybody knows that in a number of these areas Malcolm and I have a different approach to them. So be it, that's the nature of life and politics.
O'BRIEN:
And this decision and its timing isn't designed as some are suggesting to, as a pre-emptive strike on the next UN committee report that's expected in a few days to be critical of Australia over its treatment of Aborigines on health?
PRIME MINISTER:
No it's the result of a four or five month examination that we embarked upon earlier this year. It's not released at any particular time for any particular reason. It's just that the report was finished and we've decided to release it.
O'BRIEN:
You've got another critic in UN Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson who says in her view Australia has been over defensive in its reaction to these committees.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I heard that but again it's a question of what judgment individuals in this country make. And in the end you have to look at the quality of human rights in this country. And you have to ask yourself, is it real life for a UN committee to be inferring that human rights are not of a high order in this country. A lot of Australians would say no it's not.
O'BRIEN:
You seem to be down playing the role of NGOs in this as if they don't really have a strong voice in the process. Does that mean that you don't have much respect for NGOs generally?
PRIME MINISTER:
No. Well I think what the criticism we have Kerry is that the UN committees seem to have down played the role of a democratically elected government. I mean in the end most of these issues, indeed all of them in the eyes of most Australians should be resolved in Australia. Now the question of whether the current state of native title law in Australia is fair to all Australian people, that's a matter that I think should be resolved in Australia by the representatives of the Australian people democratically elected and that is what has happened. I mean is it really the business of a UN committee when we clearly have a democratic system in this country and everybody's given an opportunity to put their views, it's not really the business of a UN committee to come along and say well we think that is wrong even though your parliament has agreed to it and we think you ought to change it. Now that might be appropriate if you are dealing with a country that didn't have a robust democracy, didn't have a free press and didn't have an incorruptible judicial system but it's not appropriate for a country like Australia.
O'BRIEN:
With what time we have left Mr Howard, on petrol, you've said that you won't countenance a freeze on the next rise on excise during February. Are you determined to hold to that view no matter how much the price of petrol rises in the coming months?
PRIME MINISTER:
Kerry I don't know what's going to happen with the price of petrol but I do know that it's uncomfortably, indeed painfully high now because the world price of oil has gone up. Eighteen months ago the world price of oil was $US12 a barrel, it's now almost thirty three. Now that's the reason why people are paying more at the bowser. We have factored in excise collection based on certain assumptions.
To get an idea of the order of magnitude, if you wanted to make some difference to the price of petrol by cutting the excise you might say let's take five cents a litre off it and that's something in the eyes of some a modest amount, that would cost $1.7 billion a year. Now if you run your surplus down by $1.7 billion you run the risk of putting upward pressure on interest rates. If you get the money from somewhere else you've got to take it out of roads or education or health or something like that. Now I don't think that's the right thing to do.
O'BRIEN:
But that depends on whether or not you're actually getting this windfall that people have been talking about.
PRIME MINISTER:
Look there's no windfall.
O'BRIEN:
Well your own back benchers seem unconvinced on that.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no well I'm sorry, we had a very lengthy debate about this in the party room. Indexation works against both sides of the budget, operates on both sides of the budget ledger. If your inflation factor is a bit higher than you calculate at budget time you've got to pay more out in pensions. And you pay more out on the outlay side than you collect in additional revenue by a factor of two point four to one. So this idea that there's a huge windfall out of the excise because of a higher than anticipated price is quite wrong.
O'BRIEN:
So when a backbencher like Kay Hull from the National Party says that the windfall should be used to put more money into roads, she's just wrong on the windfall?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, she wasn't actually saying that the windfall should be. She was saying that you should hypothecate or tie or ear mark the petrol excise to roads. She wasn't necessarily arguing that there was a windfall. In fact she accepted our arguments in relation to that. But the ear marking argument is difficult too because if you ear mark a particular source of revenue for a particular outlay project you're taking money away from another outlay project and you've got to get that from somewhere else. You push the balloon in on one side it comes out the other.
O'BRIEN:
It seems another one of your backbenchers hasn't got the message yet. Trish Draper, in a marginal seat in Adelaide was on radio this morning apparently inviting people to sign a petition asking for the freeze that you've described as irresponsible.
PRIME MINISTER:
I've actually seen the petition and I've seen the letter she wrote to people who've contacted her about the price of petrol. And in her letter she actually repeats all of the arguments I've just given you. So in terms of the actual excise argument she's in total agreement with the Government.
O'BRIEN:
So what was it? Posturing?
PRIME MINISTER:
No she was putting a point of view. What she was saying was that if people are concerned about something I'll represent their views to the Government. Now a lot of local members quite properly take the view that that is their responsibility. I don't think she was posturing but if you actually read what she said to those people it's very much in line with the sort of arguments I've just been using.
Kerry I don't like these high prices, I really don't and I know that they're very unpopular but I can't control the world price of oil. Bill Clinton hasn't been able to control the world price of oil. We'll do what we can internationally. Mark Vaile raised it with President Wahid, I'll do the same thing, I know the President of the United States has raised it with the Nigerians and the Saudi Arabians and we'll continue international pressure. But it's the international movement that's inflicted the pain on the Australian public not actions of the Government.
O'BRIEN:
John Howard, we're out of time, thanks for talking with us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Pleasure.
[Ends]