E&OE...
E&OE...........
HALL:
Well with us now in our Sydney studio is the Prime Minister, John Howard. Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning.
HALL:
Let's go first to the crisis building by the day in the country's immigration detention centres. Partly in response to earlier problems at Woomera, your Government opened the Baxter Centre with its state-of-the-art security. That hasn't calmed the unrest, what's your next step?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it certainly won't be to change our policy. I don't accept there's a crisis. There is a lot of unrest from people who are, I guess, protesting against judgements made that they're not entitled to stay in this country. That is something that we're not going to allow to alter our policy. I don't think there are many people in Australia, whatever their politics are, who believe that people who having gone through a process of review are deemed not to have what they asked for, that they are therefore justified for burning the place down.
HALL:
What are you going to do to contain it then?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we will respond appropriately, but we are certainly not going to change policy and to those refugee advocate groups who think this is a reason for changing policy, can I say that they're mistaken, it is not and we don't have any intention of changing the policy.
HALL:
Well, clearly there's a level of fear and unrest in the broader Australian society at the moment. What do you say to those who've criticised your terrorism advertising campaign for being not specific enough to actually providing real protection?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's a campaign that goes over a period of time. The initial aim was to reassure and to identify with the community that everybody has a role. The number of calls received by the hotline is now in excess of 1,000. I think the tone was right. It was realistic, but it was not alarmist and it set out to say to people - we don't want to change our way of life, but we do have to be more alert. It was a campaign that was put together on advice and having regard to the best assessment we could make of what kind of campaign the Australian people would respond to. And the mail so far on it to me is that people think it strikes about the right tone. It is certainly not something that incites hostility to any one section of the community and those people who are running around saying that it was going to target Islamic Australians, for example, are quite wrong. They're part of our community; they need protection, help and advice like the rest of the community. And we're not certainly going to part of any campaign that starts pushing individual sections of the Australian community around.
HALL:
But in terms of increasing security, it doesn't seem incongruous to be spending $15 million on this advertising campaign, rather than on more concrete security programs, for example - the new baggage checking equipment for the nation's major airports which is now not going to be installed until 2004.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we are spending the $15 million and lots more. There's no suggestion that the $15 million that we're spending on the information campaign has been taken from something else. We've already announced upgrades in intelligence, upgrades in the defence forces, more resources into joint security cooperation with the states. We are accelerating the baggage assessment and collection...
HALL:
Until when?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we're accelerating and quite significantly, but you can't do something like that overnight. It involves massive alterations in the infrastructure of airports. So, it's not something you can do overnight. You can put together a television campaign in a relatively short period of time, but when you've got to structurally reorganise airports so that these checking things can be done, bear in mind that... it's already been introduced in the higher risk flights - that is the international ones.
HALL:
You say that you're acting on advice. Was that political advice or security advice?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, when you say political advice, it's certainly not partisan political advice if that's what you mean.
HALL:
Let's talk about...
PRIME MINISTER:
In all of these things you make your own assessment as a minister or as a prime minister and the sort of campaign that we have devised is a campaign that I personally feel will strike the right chord with the Australian people - that's my job. It's not my job to frighten the Australian community; it's my job to be open with them; to reassure them; to try and enlist their assistance and to tell the truth. Now, if that is exercising a political judgement, then I plead guilty.
HALL:
This time of year is generally meant to a be a time of peace. But Prime Minister, how close do you think we are now to war with Iraq?
PRIME MINISTER:
That really depends on Saddam Hussein. The UN process is working. I imagine the report of Hans Blix's inspectors to the Security Council on the 27th of January will be a very critical report. But it is really in Iraq's hands. Do people really imagine the process having gone as far as it has gone that the Security Council, the United States, the Russians, the Chinese, the British, ourselves for that matter can now just say - well, all right, we'll forget all of that, we'll walk away and somehow or other miraculously Saddam Hussein will then give up his weapons of mass destruction? Do people who criticise what the Government is doing, what the Americans are doing, are they really saying that they would feel comfortable about Saddam Hussein having nuclear weapons perhaps in several years time?
HALL:
What...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Now, I don't think they would really. But the people who criticise and the people who say - gee, isn't there an alternative. I wish there were. I don't want to have military conflict and it can be avoided, but when you criticise what is currently being done there is an onus on you to say what alternative should be adopted and if the alternative is to walk away and say we'll forget about it, when you think it through that really is a disastrous alternative.
HALL:
Well, you say it's up to Iraq. What does Saddam Hussein have to do to satisfy you that you don't need to go to war?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, he's got to make a complete declaration of his weapons of mass destruction, he's got to comply in full with the resolution of the Security Council. If Iraq complies in full with resolution 1441, there will be no need for any kind of military conflict and that is a resolution incidentally that was passed 15-nill by the Security Council and that included the five permanent members and a close Arab neighbour of Iraq's, namely Syria.
HALL:
Now, you've said that the Australian Parliament will have the opportunity to debate sending forces to Iraq, but not until after you've made your decision. If it's not meant to influence your decision, what do you expect the debate to achieve?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the normal practice in this country and the practice followed by the Hawke Labor Government in 1991 is that if you send forces abroad, and that's if, that's a decision for the Executive Government - that's our constitutional legal position. So, what I'd be doing, if we decided to commit Australian military forces anywhere, I'd be following a long standing bipartisan tradition and practice of the decision being taken by the Government. Well, Parliament should have an opportunity of debating it, but the constitutional position is the decision is taken by the Executive Government - that's what we're elected to do and then the matter is debated by Parliament. But it is a decision of the Executive Government, but I would certainly follow the example of my Labor predecessor, Mr Hawke, who endorsed the constitutional arrangement in 1991.
HALL:
The purpose then of the debate?
PRIME MINISTER:
I beg your pardon?
HALL:
The purpose then of the debate?
PRIME MINISTER:
The purpose to allow Members of Parliament to express a view.
HALL:
Now, of course, particularly for people in this region it's not just Iraq, but it's North Korea that's of particular concern. Now, you said that compared to Iraq, North Korea doesn't have form, but it does have an unpredictable leader and it seems to be at least as likely as Iraq to use nuclear weapons. Does it concern you, that as we heard yesterday on this programme, the US Secretary of State doesn't regard the situation in North Korea as a crisis?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I think it'd be wrong to suggest that either I or the American Secretary of State are happy about what is happening in North Korea. But there is a diplomatic process to be gone through, just as there is a diplomatic process to go through with Iraq...
HALL:
But...
PRIME MINISTER:
... I hear the Labor Party criticising us over North Korea, we are doing the very thing in relation to North Korea that they have always said we should do and that is try diplomacy. I mean, we are trying diplomacy and surely the sensible first step in relation to North Korea is to try diplomacy. I mean, what are people suggesting, once again, as an alternative? Do they want us to just at the drop of a hat take military action? We're certainly not going to do that - that is absurd. What we must clearly do is to try diplomacy and I noticed overnight that Russia has condemned North Korea. Now, Russia has quite an influence on North Korea, as does China. Now, that is a good step. It shows that diplomacy is beginning to work. I mean, let's... you know, get a sense of proportion. I regard the North Korean issue as very serious indeed. There are some people who believe that one of the reasons why North Korea is now doing what she is doing and is behaving in the provocative fashion is that she is seeing some hesitancy around the world about the world community dealing with Iraq. And in that sense, she may well think - well, this is an opportunity because there's a bit of a hesitancy in relation to a number of nations concerning Iraq. These things are not unrelated, but let's remember that we're well down the track with a diplomatic ploy with Iraq, we've only begun with North Korea and the sensible thing, surely, is to see if a diplomatic approach works.
HALL:
But your own Foreign Minister has called it a crisis and yet the United States is not calling it a crisis as specific...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, look, we don't say everything the Americans say any more than they say everything we say. I mean, our language is our language and their language is their language and so be it.
HALL:
Look, staying on that as international, but a subject dear to your heart - cricket.
PRIME MINISTER:
Mmm.
HALL:
Now, you've said that you don't think the International Cricket Council should be planning matches in Zimbabwe, but the ICC says it's up to governments to make the political decisions. Given that and given your comments on the brutality of the Mugabe Government, will you order a boycott?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, when you say order a boycott, I'm certainly not going to order a unilateral boycott by Australia - that would be quite unfair on the Australian cricket team and Australian cricket generally. My position on this is that either all the teams play in Zimbabwe as scheduled or none of them do. I have never supported the idea that one country should be singled out, be it Australia, England, any other country and say - well, look... and have our Government tell our team not to play, that would not be fair on our team and that's not going to happen. I would hope that the International Cricket Council, acting collectively, would reach another view. We will be talking about the matter with other governments, which is the appropriate thing to do. But when you say order a boycott, I have no power to order a boycott, deliver such an order to the International Cricket Council. Obviously, the Australian Government could unilaterally influence the Australian Cricket Board and stop the Australian team playing in Zimbabwe, but as I've said that would be quite unfair. It should only be done collectively, it should be one in, all in and one out, all out.
HALL:
You said you're speaking to other governments, if you do feel so strongly about the situation there, are you using your leverage in the Commonwealth to move for Zimbabwe's...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm just saying we are talking to other governments. Obviously, I have a role as Chairman in Office of the Commonwealth and Chairman of the Troika, we are due as a Troika to meet again early next year to discuss the situation in Zimbabwe. It has politically, and from human rights perspective, Zimbabwe has continued to deteriorate over the last few months and nothing can [inaudible] that and that is obviously part of the equation. These things are difficult, we all wish that you could separate politics and sport completely, but it never quite works out that way because people like Mugabe use things like this to bolster their own domestic position.
HALL:
Of course, the ICC says that if you're not prepared to make a political judgement on it why should it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the political judgement that... I mean, I've made a political judgement on it, but what I'm saying that in relation to the ICC, the only view that can be put to the ICC is a collective view of government. I mean, the ICC can't be expected to act on the view of one Government, namely Australia. There has to be a collective view put to it. And as I repeat, I'm not going to single out Australia to carry a disproportionate share of the burden - I don't think that's fair on our cricketers.
HALL:
Now, you've announced today a new domestic policy, some new funding for your "Tough on Drugs" strategy to be used for diversionary programs. Now most people would think "Tough on Drugs" means using the courts. So, is this new funding an admission that the court system is failing to achieve the results that you hoped?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, the announcement I'm making today, Eleanor, is a continuation of part of the 'Tough on Drugs" program that's now been in operation for several years. There are three elements - there's law enforcement, there's education and there's rehabilitation. And what I'm announcing today is a continuation of the diversionary program, which is part of the rehabilitation process. And what happens with this is that we say to people who are starting to be caught up in the criminal justice system because of drug use, you have an opportunity to go straight - to use the old language - if you are prepared to go into a diversionary program, if you're prepared to go into a rehabilitation program and make an effort to kick drugs, then we won't throw you into the court system. Now, it's worked quite well and it's working in cooperation with all of the states and it works so well that we've decided to renew it for the next four years. And we're pretty encouraged with the results, but we're also encouraged with the fact that there are now fewer heroin deaths and heroin usage has fallen. I'm not saying all of that's due to our campaign, and I'm cautious about claiming too much success, but when you see a significant decline in the number of deaths from heroin that's a good sign.
HALL:
Prime Minister, we'll leave it there for a moment. But would you mind staying because we'd like you to hear... like to hear your thoughts on our next item.
[Les Murray's comments]
HALL:
Well the Prime Minister is still with us. Mr Howard, that was your friend and eminent poet Les Murray with his reflections on the year just passed. What do you make of them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm more optimistic than Les and I obviously wouldn't plead guilty to political correctness. So if he's talking about politicians becoming politically correct, he clearly can't have me in mind.
HALL:
What about political doublespeak?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think one of the messages that comes out of the tragedy of Bali is that the best things in the Australian character always come to the fore when we're under stress. It was an awful tragedy but the way in which people came together because we are a relatively classless nation, they came together so readily and spontaneously and openly, was a reminder of one of our great strengths as a community. So out of that awful tragedy we were again reminded of one of the ageless strengths of Australia, and in that sense, that was reassuring to me rather than being bewildering and confusing. I therefore have a rather more optimistic view than I think Les was conveying in that message.
HALL:
What about his implied criticism there, that Australia's multicultural society has, since the 1970s, operated in a way that sort of develops individual cultures rather than being more integrated. I mean is this, and indeed our whole attitude to Muslim immigration, something that we need to have a national debate about?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think what we need to do is to understand that we've always had a strong, distinctive Australian culture and that over the years it's added to and changed in certain ways by successive waves of immigration but the enduring core is still there and that enduring core is represented by some of the things of which I just spoke. As far as Muslims are concerned, Islamic Australians are as much part of this country as anybody else. I don't want them to feel isolated or alone in this very difficult time and we all should put out our hand to them and embrace them as they are as part of our community.
HALL:
Now you have of course been quite vocal in your criticism of political correctness. Do you think in your seventh year as Prime Minister that you've been able to temper this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that's for other people to make a judgment of. I'm a participant in that debate. I have strong views about political correctness and they're largely negative I think. We should not be ashamed of what this country's achieved. We should be open in acknowledging its historical blemishes and mistakes, of which the treatment of Aboriginal people is obviously the most prominent, but the balance sheet of Australian history and achievement is hugely positive and something that we should continue to celebrate and be very optimistic about and to that extent I'm a rampant opponent of political correctness.
HALL:
Now, Prime Minister I can't let you go without a question about your own future.
PRIME MINISTER:
Mmm.
HALL:
You're off today on your annual break. No doubt it'll be something you'll be putting your mind to. You're riding high in the polls. Will you stay on if Australia is at war?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't want to add anything to what I've previously said on that subject but I'll certainly be reading a lot of books over the next three weeks.
HALL:
Prime Minister, thanks very much for joining us this morning and have a good break.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
Top