Subjects: Meeting with Mr Blair; Middle East, Iraq; Queen Mother; 4 year terms
E&OE...........
PRIME MINISTER:
If there are any, I'll be very happy to answer any of your questions. But the only additional thing I'd like to say is that I had the opportunity after the funeral of a half hour meeting with the British Prime Minister, the Canadian and the New Zealand Prime Minister. We had an ‘eight eyes'; and the British Prime Minister was able to give us a briefing on his discussions with President Bush in Texas over the weekend. We talked about the Middle East situation and also the juxtaposition of Iraq and the rest of the world. It was a very good opportunity for the four of us to exchange our views which are fairly similar in relation to both of those issues and just a reminder that gatherings of historic and ceremonial significance are also ideal opportunities for meetings of that kind. It was a very valuable further opportunity and I also had an, in a more social environment, an opportunity of talking at some length to both John Prescott and Jack Straw. I also met the British Defence Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, who I had not previously met. So from a foreign relations diplomatic point of view, it was a very good opportunity to talk to senior people in the British Government yet again about a number of these issues.
JOURNALIST:
Did Mr Blair talk about what processes might be necessary to gather the same kind of international coalition against terrorism for action against Iraq? Did you talk about exactly what must be gone through to make sure you've got that sort of thing?
PRIME MINISTER:
We all agreed that it's hypothetical at this stage to be talking about action against Iraq. Iraq properly stands accused of not complying with United Nations'; requirements regarding weapons inspections. At this moment and in the immediate future it is hypothetical to talk any further. Clearly, we would like to see Iraq comply and clearly there may come a time when Iraq is required to comply. Beyond that, I don't know that I want to talk about the processes.
JOURNALIST:
Would there be a similar kind of coalition?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, I don';t think - things change. Clearly if something were to occur, the broadest coalition possible if necessary, but it's premature to even be talking about something occurring.
JOURNALIST:
What do you make of Saddam Hussein's restriction on oil supply and his linkage with the Palestinian cause, given the situation in the Middle East. How volatile has that situation become?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think it's an unhelpful – it';s not the act of somebody who is seeking to bring about a reconciliatory outcome.
JOURNALIST:
By Saddam Hussein. You wouldn't expect that though, would you?
PRIME MINISTER:
Why wouldn't I expect it? Why is it that apparently bad behaviour is accepted from some people but it is immediately condemned when it occurs in others?
JOURNALIST:
I'm not suggesting that Saddam Hussein's actions are acceptable, just how serious?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't want to give it a prominence that it might ultimately acquire.
JOURNALIST:
George Bush has said basically – the axis of evil, Iraq – how much apprehension would you have in going into something with Iraq?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think at this stage it is hypothetical. There's been no proposal and I know of no proposal for imminent action and it's too serious and difficult an issue for me to deal other than in reality. It's not an issue on which I should hypothesise and I don't intend to.
JOURNALIST:
So what did Mr Blair say was George Bush's determination to deal with Iraq?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think his view and my view is that the Americans will deal with Iraq in a very sensible way.
JOURNALIST:
On the question of oil was there any discussion about the possibility of ....action by Iraq and are we going to see you again in July for the Queen';s celebrations. Will you visit Brussels at that time?
PRIME MINISTER: As far as the world is concerned, we didn't talk about the oil thing. I'm not sure that what Iraq has done is going to last. We didn't discuss the detail of it. It's too early to see it as a major threat. I'm not planning to come here in July as currently advised for the Golden Jubilee celebration. There was a dinner offered to the Queen which she accepted at the Coolum meeting and it's not in my travel plans at the moment to come here in July. As far as Brussels is concerned, I'm looking at the possibility of a visit to Northern and Western Europe some time this year. Whether I can fit it in, given the other commitments I have. I plan to go to China in the second half of May to, amongst other things, mark the thirtieth anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between our two countries and also to lobby very hard for Australian LNG supplies. Whether I get to Europe again, I don't really know. But we'll let you know if I'm coming.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, did you talk about Zimbabwe?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, we had quite a lengthy talk about Zimbabwe and, in addition to that, separately this morning I had a meeting with Don McKinnon and Jean Chretien and Helen Clark to talk about Zimbabwe. We all agreed that we'd like to see more movement. We are willing to allow the internal reconciliation process that was argued upon President Mugabe by President Mbeki and President Obasanjo a few weeks ago when they went to Harare. We would like that to be given time to work and to succeed.
JOURNALIST:
How much time?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, something like this, you don't say look it's six and a half weeks and it's not fixed by then, the - .
JOURNALIST:
It is moving painfully slow at this point in time. It';s a bit frustrating after -
PRIME MINISTER:
It is, but it's too early to say it's not going to work. We are all keen to see the maximum diplomatic and other pressure kept on the Zimbabwean Government from different parts of the Commonwealth and different parts of the world.
JOURNALIST:
What was the mood inside Westminster Abbey?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think there's a mood of respect, of thanksgiving. There was a sense of history, of the end of a particular era. I don't say that in a negative way but anybody who occupies that position and lives to the age of 101 when they die, it certainly is the end of an era. It touches a lot of points along the way in the history not only of the Royal family but also in the history of Britain and also in the history of the relationship between Britain and Australia.
JOURNALIST:
I believe there's a Liberal Party meeting in Australia this week.
PRIME MINISTER:
A Liberal Party meeting? Yes, I'm going back for it. I don't allow them to meet without me. Always unwise for that to happen.
JOURNALIST:
There's a suggestion that people within the party are interested in pushing the line of, support the idea of a four year term?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, that's been around for a while. I personally think four years is better than three years. That's been my view for a long time. How important it is, is another matter, and whether the public wants longer terms then I just sort of pose the question, in this age of greater accountability, does the Australian public wants its government to account to it every three years or every four years? I would say to people on both sides who are advocating four year terms, look at it from the point of view of public accountability. There's no doubt in government, if you knew you had four years, there are some additional things you would do which you know would be unpopular in the short term but will produce a long term dividend. There's no doubt about that. But I don't think you can accuse me of leading a government that's been unwilling to take decisions and have unpopularity in the shorter term. So, as a matter of principle, I would like to see a longer parliament but I take my cue on this from the Australian public. If the Australian public wants its parliament to be more regularly accountable, then in a democracy that's what ought to happen. You can't change it without a referendum. You can't change it by an act of parliament. It's not the sort of thing that I would personally favour having a separate referendum on. I really wouldn't. If you are going to have a referendum on it, it's something you would run in conjunction with the next election. But I'm interested to see that the Labor Party is positive about it. And I think it's the sort of thing that I would like to see debated without people taking party political positions. I keep an open mind on it, and if in fact I feel that there's a growing consensus for it in the community, I'll talk to the opposition leader and see if we can't reach an agreement to put it on the agenda for the next election. That's the way I would approach it but if I see it being used as some kind of party political wedge, forget about it.
JOURNALIST:
You said this is the end of an era for the Queen Mother.
PRIME MINISTER:
For the Queen Mother, yes.
JOURNALIST:
Is it in a sense the turning point for the monarchy itself?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I think that is a simplistic non sequitur. I don't think it automatically follows. You can have the end of an era without it automatically meaning doom and gloom for the monarchy. The question of the continuation of the monarchy in my country, our country, Australia, that's a matter for the Australian people. I don't think the Queen Mother's death and the evident and obvious expressions of affection towards her both in Britain and Australia, I don't think that bears either way on the debate. It's perfectly possible for somebody to be a staunch republican but to respect the job that the lady did. It';s equally possible for somebody to see it in more positive terms for the monarchy. I think you've got to keep the two separate. I see it as the end of an era because she was alive and connected to events that stretched back to World War 1 and that's a very long time ago. There aren't many people left now who fall into that category. Arguably one of her finest hours was the way she stood beside the late King and wandered through the rubble of bombed and blitzed London in the dark day when there were only Britain and Australia and New Zealand and Canada and a few other countries standing against the Nazis. So it is the end of an era in that sense and that's one of the reasons why there's been such an expression of affection and regard.
JOURNALIST:
You talk about show of affection. Some might suggest, rather that it is a revivial for the monarchy?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to comment on the monarchy in Britain. That's a matter for Britain. I think the position of the monarchy in Britain probably remains quite strong and central but the impact of this on the monarchy in Britain, I don't really want to comment. But clearly the observation I made yesterday going into Westminster Hall, there were people of all ages, of all backgrounds and that said something because they didn't have to do it and it did say something. You ask me about the monarchy in Australia. Well, we had a vote a couple of years ago and the people said no. That's not to say there won't be a ballot again some time in the future. I don't think we're going to have a debate about it. I don't think we're going to have a vote on it again for quite a while but that's a matter for the Australian people. You know my views on the subject. They haven't changed, but you should also understand that I'm first and last and always a democratic, small d, and it's what the Australian people want that matters. It's not what I want. I put my view but in the end, the future of the monarchy in Australia is in the hands of the Australian people and always at their disposal.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think the mood in Australia could change either way?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think the mood in Australia is going to be dramatically affected either way by what's happened.
JOURNALIST:
Really, it has been broadcast live and people have been watching it -
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but then so are other people as well. I'm not playing it down but I think it's a mistake to assume attitudes to an institution from proper regard and respect for individuals. The Queen as an individual has always been held in high esteem in Australia even amongst people who don't believe in the monarchy. And that will always be the case because she's an incredibly conscientious committed person and her mother was the same, and her father was the same. She inherited those characteristics from two people who were the essence of commitment to service and duty. And that meant a lot and it was of great value to this country and also to my country, particularly during World War II.
JOURNALIST:
Anything on the agenda this afternoon?
PRIME MINISTER:
I will be having a drink with the ADF personnel who've come over here. So that's what's on the agenda this afternoon.
JOURNALIST:
What did you think of the members of the Royal Australian Army Medical Corps who marched?
PRIME MINISTER:
They were great, as always, and I shall have the opportunity of personally thanking each one of them.
JOURNALIST:
I didn't see you in Westminster Abbey ... can you explain (inaudible) ....
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I've not the faintest idea. I didn't run the funeral.