PM: How are the kids?
KING: The kids are great, Prime Minister, how are you? This is what you call fill in time when we try to get organised. You were running a little bit late. Was that traffic on Coronation Drive?
PM: There was a few problems on Coro this morning, but we actually had to do the block, so my apologies.
KING: No, that's OK. Let's start with the health system. This is the biggest health overhaul since the introduction of Medicare, but you would have seen the headlines this morning. This health plan will see the Commonwealth money sent directly to regional areas and it might be heading for referendum already, with at least one state and the Opposition strongly opposed to it.
This morning you might have a view on it, too. If you have: 1300 222 612 is my number throughout the morning.
This, of course, comes as the Prime Minister tries to get back on the front foot after a weekend of apologies.
Welcome to Brisbane, welcome home, and welcome to 612 ABC Brisbane.
PM: Always good to be back home. Back home last night in Norman Park and the garden needs some work.
KING: It does. It's had a lot of rain, though, hasn't it, like the rest of the place.
PM: It has had a lot of rain. I was just talking to the mayor of Charleville, by the way, before I came on air, and they are managing as best they can out there, so I'm sure everyone's thinking of them and Roma and St George this morning.
KING: Let's start with health this morning. New South Wales is saying 100 hospitals will be financially unviable under this new system. Can you rule out country hospitals closing?
PM: There is absolutely nothing in the national hospital and health network plan that I announced yesterday that would result in the closure of any hospital anywhere. That's the first point.
The second is this - you mentioned New South Wales health bureaucrats briefing this story out. Can I just say we're going to have opposition from health bureaucrats, state health bureaucrats, state politicians across the country. I don't think anyone in the country believes that a business as usual approach to the current state of our health and hospital system is good enough .That's why we're bringing about change.
KING: But you need the support of the states and the Opposition to get this through so that it can become law. Otherwise, as you say, we're going to a referendum. Is that an empty threat or are you serious?
PM: I stand by every single word that I said on this matter prior to the election. I stand by every single word I said on this matter yesterday at the National Press Club when I announced this policy, and that's how we're going to do this.
But you know something? My appeal out there to right-minded, right-thinking premiers, state health ministers, state politicians and state health bureaucrats and others, is let's get on with the business of fixing this system for the future. We need better health, better hospitals, we need a system which is nationally funded and we need a system which is locally run. That's what we've put forward.
It's very easy to go out there and carp and complain and criticise. I believe the system's at a tipping point and we need to reform it for the future, fund it properly for the future. That's what we've put forward.
KING: Everyone would agree with that, but they want to know how. You put up a plan yesterday, but on first reaction Victoria is vehemently opposed to it, the Opposition say they vote against it. That means you will be forced into a situation of a referendum, a referendum which you will not win, given history.
PM: You know, how unusual, though, for a bunch of state politicians and state health ministers to get out there and to oppose a plan like this. How unusual for Mr Abbott, who seems to oppose everything, and criticise everything and support nothing?
The bottom line is this: I believe the overwhelming mood of the nation is to get on with the business of reform. We've put out a plan. It is designed to deal with the needs of local patients. If you're a patient you want to know, for example, that you're local hospital's going to meet tough national standards. Furthermore, that that will include acceptable limits on waiting times at accident and emergency and things like elective surgery.
To get this done we will take this argument to the people, as we are right now in this debate now-
KING: -Via a referendum?
PM: If the states and territories come on board, that's terrific. I repeated quite clearly yesterday what happens if they don't cop the reform, and that is that we would seek a mandate from the people. That's what we've said.
KING: Do you really think you could win a referendum without bipartisan support on this?
PM: You know something, Madonna? Let's take this step by step. I'm out there with a plan at the moment. It's important that your listeners get their understanding of what we propose by way of changes and what it means for them as patients of local doctors, patients of local hospitals, and then let's just see how this unfolds in terms of whether states and territories get behind it or oppose it.
Around Australia right now you've got some Premiers who seem to be supporting, some opposing, some waiting and seeing-
KING: -But that, your success in this is so much dependent on that. If we go to a referendum, will you ask for full control, not the 60 percent that you're currently proposing?
PM: If you, what I said yesterday at the National Press Club is that we would go to the people to seek a mandate for full powers that we would need to bring about these reforms to the system.
KING: Is that full control?
PM: That says full funding control, and that is what I've said prior to the election, subsequent to the election, and that is what we would do.
Our approach is to try and get right-thinking state governments and territory governments behind this because I think the public of Australia are fed up, sick and tired with the blame game, all the criticism, all the complaints, everyone looking for someone else to blame. Instead, they want people to get together and bring about a sustainable health and hospital system for the future.
We've decided to take a step forward on this. It is well costed, it is well considered, it is well planned. We have spent a lot of time doing it. We have consulted more than 100 hospitals around the country on it. We believe it's the right plan for the future, and I would suggest that those who are out there just whinging and moaning about it, they should basically get with the program.
KING: But if they don't get with the program, which is plan a, and you don't win a referendum, which is plan b, have you got a plan c?
PM: Well, you know something, Anna- ah, can I tell you, something, Madonna-
KING: -Every time you come on this show you call me the Premier of Queensland. I don't know if it's a promotion or a demotion.
PM: Well, I'll let you sort that out with the Premier of Queensland. Can I say that we're now engaged in the business of making sure that the people of Australia understand very plainly what we're on about.
Secondly, we have made it very plain what we'd do if the states and territories don't come on board. You know something? That is the right and rational approach because we want better health, better hospitals for all those people listening to your program this morning.
People I've spoken to this morning who say 'I've been waiting seven months to have my veins attended to', people I've heard ring in to other programs saying they went to accident and emergency yesterday and were shunted from one hospital to the next, they don't want a political brawl about who's responsible for what. What they want are solutions for the future.
So, if state health bureaucrats in New South Wales are out there opposing this, well, can I just say that's very predictable. If state health bureaucrats and other states are out there opposing it, that's very predictable. I'm on about solutions, not just blaming somebody.
KING: You talk about solutions. Are you able to give my listeners an indication of how much waiting lists will be cut by? Let's say, in five years, would you expect them to be half they are now?
PM: Can I say this: right now, no hospital in the nation is prepared to give a guarantee on how long you will wait for elective surgery or in an emergency department. Part of our funding deal with new local hospital networks will be to require local hospital networks to give those guarantees. Take elective surgery-
KING: -What will the guarantee be? Give an indication of how long you would have to wait to have your veins fixed?
PM: First thing you've got to do first is get the funding agreements right, then you get the guarantees made. Local circumstances will differ from hospital to hospital, and you've got to be credible in the guarantees you have.
But right now no-one gives any such undertaking. That's what has to change for the future, because on elective surgery, for example, as I said yesterday at the National Press Club, if a local hospital, a local public hospital, can't meet its guarantee for someone who needs elective surgery within the next three months, then what is our guarantee? That service will be purchased by the local hospital network from an adjoining private hospital if necessary, so you've got a built-in capacity to deliver.
KING: Can you rule out an increase in taxes to pay for these reforms?
PM: What we have put forward is a fully-costed plan for the future, so that in terms of the budget, in terms of the budget - this is your question - in terms of the budget, it is met entirely within our current budget. That's what we've put down.
Second point I'd say is if you're looking at the long-term future, guess what? Hospital costs are going to go up, and therefore let's just be frank with the Australian people that it's going to cost more into the long-term future.
KING: So you're saying that new taxes will be needed to fund health into the future.
PM: No, what you've just drawn is your own conclusion.
KING: Well, no, that's what your Health Minister seemed to be saying yesterday and again this morning.
PM: No, but, Madonna, let's just have a, your question to me was 'the plan you've put forward, is it met within the budget or does it cost more by way of taxes?' Answer to that question: it is met within the budget.
Secondly, I'm just being completely blunt with you about the long-term impact of health costs on Australia. Let's just be very blunt about it - it's going through the roof. Aging of the population, we're going to have double the number of people in this country over the age of 65, relative to the number of people in the workforce. The number of people over the age of 65 needing more and more hospital treatments, it will cost more and more.
One of the key elements of this reform is this - the Australian Government saying, for the first time, we will become, long-term, the dominant funders of the system. In the past- I'm going out to Royal Brisbane Hospital today. Royal Brisbane Hospital, in the past, the Australian Government did not give a zac for any capital building at that hospital. In the future, we will now become the dominant funders of the expansion of that hospital and others across Queensland because of the proposals that we've put forward.
KING: You're on 612 ABC Brisbane, I'm Madonna King. It's 8.43 and you're listening to the Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd.
Speaking of tax, will Ken Henry's big review be out before the May budget?
PM: I haven't worked that through with Wayne, the Treasurer, yet, because guess what? I've been busy on this one, and we'll sort it through.
KING: But you're saying on the weekend you've disappointed voters a little bit in terms of timetable. You've had this big tax review for a fair amount of time. Obviously, you've read it. I mean, is it going to be tough on the taxpayer?
PM: Can I say, Madonna, I believe what the Australian people wanted me to do is get on with the business of delivering health and hospitals reform - number one priority. You ask people who are listening to your program this morning what they want fixed and fixed first and fixed most, it's the state of our hospitals right across the country.
Of course we're going to deal with long-term reform of the taxation system. Each thing in its season, we've got to do one thing at a time, and we're going to do this work and do it thoroughly, but in terms of specific timetables for doing it, no, I don't have anything particular in mind, and the Treasurer's working on it.
KING: But you've got it there. What are you waiting for? You've got it there. Why not release it?
PM: Well, Madonna, if you go through the content of the health and hospitals reform plan yesterday I think you would conclude that the Government has had a fair amount of its energies focussed on this for a long time. We've been criticised, for example, for being seven or so months late in delivering this reform plan. Well, fair cop.
I can say, though - the reform plan on health and hospitals' had been waiting for more than seven months. It had been waiting for more than seven years. I seem to remember seven years ago was when Mr Abbott became the Health Minister.
But, on the tax system, yep, got more work to do, but on the timetable for it, Wayne Swan and myself and others are still working our way through the details.
KING: Are you committed to the proposals in Ken Henry's review?
PM: You know something, Madonna, what we've always said is that this is an independent review of the tax system and what I have said on multiple occasions is I'm sure there's stuff in there that we can live with and there's stuff in there we can't live with, and you know something, that's why you ask independent experts to have a look at it.
KING: Just on letting people down, there's some-
PM: -Oh, by the way, just on that, the National Health and Hospital Reform Commission, we asked them to go to work two years ago, just after the Government was elected, to look at the overall needs of the system. No-one had done that system-wide for 20 years, and then you get their independent recommendations and we've run with a fair number of them, but there are others that we've put to one side. That's the best way in which you make government decisions work.
KING: Just on letting people down, there's some who doubt your sincerity, so can we just clear this up - they say, and this is a comment I've been hearing, that if you were being genuine, why would call Peter Garrett a first-class minister one day and then sack him the next. How can it be so different?
PM: On the question of responsibilities for the implementation of the insulation plan, there were real problems with the compliance in the system. The second thing is this - if you look at the structure of the Environment Department itself it was seeking to do two sets of things. One, run programs to protect our environment, performing functions like decisions on the future of the Traveston Dam, decisions on the pulp mill in Tasmania, all those decisions which have been traditionally with the Environment Department, but over many years there were added these other functions which had to do with grants-based programs of the type that we had with the insulation program.
Therefore, we decided to separate those out. Therefore, those functions have been removed from Peter's responsibility, and that's why we've done it in the way in which we have-
KING: -Do you think he was a first-class minister?-
PM: -Those responsibilities have now gone with Greg Combet.
If you ask the people up in South-East Queensland whether they think the decision on Traveston Dam was a good decision, I think they'd say it was, because what we had with Peter Garrett was a bloke who puts all the evidence on the table, cops all the pressure coming in from both sides of the argument, and despite some great degree of political pain with the Queensland Government, took the decision that he took, so on that question, on the pulp mill in Tasmania, these other huge projects across the country, I don't think anyone would fault Peter Garrett's decision-making processes one bit, and in making those decisions I've got to say he's performed absolutely well.
KING: This morning politicians are demanding thousands more to do their job, plus they want a retraining allowance, severance pay and five months' salary when they're actually turfed out so they can be prepared for another job. Is there any rationale for that in your mind?
PM: Well, the first thing I'd say is that when we came into office we froze MP salaries. That was the first thing-
KING: -And then unfroze them.
PM: That was for the first year. When was the last time you saw that happen, Anna, ah, Madonna, I should say.
KING: I'm going to start making decisions across the state, shortly.
PM: I thought you were! There you go.
The second thing is on the question of the year following, where, of course, there were adjustments to salaries.
Thirdly, we then called for a review of overall entitlements. That's underway. People can submit to it and decisions will be taken after a period of time, but the bottom line is this: when it comes to the future determination of the salaries of MPs, that should be still left in the hands of an independent tribunal called the remuneration tribunal and politicians shouldn't have anything to do with it.
KING: So, will politicians, and I think Labor and Coalition politicians have got together to support this, do you support having five months' pay when you lose your job to retrain to do something else?
PM: Not really, but, you know, they'll all get together and put together a submission, and guess what? We'll look at the various submissions from the public and we'll work our way through it.
It's important that all these things are considered on their merits, but, as I said, on the question of salary entitlements, that should lie with the independent remuneration tribunal and politicians shouldn't have anything to do with it.
KING: Yesterday, on this program, the big issue was violence and teenage violence and what we do as parents about it. The Prime Minister's view on that next, but just to get you to work quickly:
[BREAK FOR TRAFFIC REPORT]
KING: It's 8.50 here on 612 ABC Brisbane. You're listening to the Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd.
PM: And Madonna King.
KING: And Madonna King, as opposed to Anna.
PM: Her sister Anna King.
KING: That's right. Apart from insulation, Prime Minister, the other big issue here has been youth violence. This morning we hear that schools are renting out their grounds for war games. Kids as young as six are playing these war games of a weekend. The Government says it's up to P&C associations and they just do it by company name. What kind of onus is on a school when, as a community we're trying to actually reduce the level of violence?
PM: This story is new to me, so fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Let me just try and find out what's happening here.
Look, the key thing is to make sure that P&Cs and P&Fs, for that matter, are properly supported by what governments are doing. I think no-one would argue that the Federal Government has been out there supporting local schools in recent times.
As to why people would find it necessary to run these as fundraisers, I'd have a few questions in my own mind, but I'd really like to know the local details.
KING: Well, on the same issue, yesterday, not only here, everywhere, everyone was talking about this 8-year-old boy and he's in Townsville, he's in an intensive care unit. His family say he's been the victim of bullying for a long time. They've gone to the school over and over again. They claim he was running away from kids who were bullying him when he was hit by a car and he's now in intensive care.
Irrespective of the facts of that case, because they are debated, parents by and large feel as though they are powerless to stop bullying. You may go to a school, but, as a parent, when do you step in and say, well, I'm not leaving this in the hands of the teacher. I need to confront the bully's parents.
We heard Angry Anderson talk to the parliamentary committee the other day and say parents need to take back control and start parenting their children. You've seen the violence that's happened in Queensland and New South Wales schools in the last month. What do you, as a parent and as the chief policy maker of the nation, think we should do?
PM: As a parent, I have exactly the same feeling as the mums and dads that you describe this morning. I am completely revolted and appalled by any kid who fears going to school for being thumped, for being threatened, for being intimidated in any way.
A school should be a place where a child feels safe and they should enjoy learning, and where you've got any other kid acting effectively as a local thug, that has to stop, and schools have to step in and they've got to have the power given to principles to step in and make a difference. We should have a national policy of zero tolerance towards any form of bullying towards a kid.
The problem these days is it's not just what you and I experienced as kids at school, which is the physicality of being bullied in the playground, and you saw that happen and it was always something really uncomfortable, I think, for those of us who were trying to be right-minded as kids, but now it follows them home through cyber-bullying, and so it's 24-hours-a-day bullying, and that's what, I think, is the new cancer out there facing the young people of Australia.
Second question is what are we doing about it? I've spoken at length with the Alannah and Madeline Foundation, which will be known to some of your listeners, not all of them. This is a campaign that we are working on with them right across Australia with a view to getting it into every school where we simply have a policy of say no to any form of bullying. And that we have powers given to teachers and principle to step in and make this a safe environment for our kids.
As for the role of parents, look, anyone, any parent out there who faintly gives a nod and a wink to one of their kids saying it's OK to use physical violence or threats against another kid, I'd just say to those parents - don't. Just don't.
KING: But as a parent, if your child was being bullied, you go to the school and each day your child doesn't want to go to class. At what point do you, as a father, say 'enough is enough. I'm going to contact the bully's parents', or 'I'm going to sort this out'?
PM: I think that's exactly the right thing to do, and I would not object to any parent doing that one bit. These things have to be sorted out, ideally in the classroom with a teacher, secondly or ideally between the kids, and that's what Alannah and Madeline's all about, to give kids the authority and the power to say 'no, that's just wrong.'
The second thing is, with the classroom teacher, the third with the principle, if it doesn't work there, then parents have to, you know, exercise their responsibilities as the carer of their kids, and therefore, that means if things are going wrong, things are going bad and your kid is terrified about going to school, that is unacceptable and you've got to do something about it. And therefore, if it comes to it and you've got to actually pick up the phone and talk to the parent of another kid, I would say there's nothing wrong with that at all.
KING: Kevin Rudd, I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you.
PM: Good to be back in Queensland Madonna.