KOCH: Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.
PM: Good morning, Kochie.
KOCH: If you knew last October, and some of the letters are dated back in August, as well, that there was, quote, aan unacceptably high occupational health and safety risk', why didn't you act then?
PM: Well, what happened, Kochie, was that each time Minister Garrett wrote to me and informed other ministers that there was a problem with the implementation of this scheme either on safety or compliance actions were taken to improve the safety. This happened on at least three, four or five occasions in the second half of last year.
The scheme came in on 1 July. It went to Cabinet beforehand. It went through an exhaustive analysis. It was implemented from that time, and then, on a number of occasions, through that correspondence, the Minister, responding to industry, responding to concerns out there in the community, said 'here is a problem. We need to do x, y and z about it'. And what Cabinet and I did through correspondence was say 'OK, fine, do that', and that's what happened.
But the bottom line is, the measures, at the end of the day, were not sufficient, and let's just be frank about that.
KOCH: OK, was there a suggestion in any of those recommendations, though, to say we should stop it, should take a breather, let's reconsider this?
PM: I'm under no- I have no awareness or knowledge of any document sent to me which said that the scheme should be stopped until, at the end of the day, the advice came to stop it. What we received all the way though was one series of recommendations from the Minister, and the letters that have just been referred to, saying x, y, z needs to be done because a, b and c is going wrong or needs to be improved, and that's what was ticked off each way through. But the bottom line is this - mistakes were made. These measures were not sufficient, and of course there has been a review of these matters conducted by Mr Hawke. But this has not been a program which has been well implemented. Let's just accept that as a fact.
KOCH: OK, alright, let's go on to questions now from viewers. We have an email from Sam. Sam was too nervous to come and put it, so we'll put it to you. This is very topical at the moment. Given the current logic being expressed as to why mining companies should have their taxes increased on super profits, why don't you apply the same logic on the super profits of banks? Now, does Sam have a point? Why pick on the miners? I mean, you know, the banks are making massive profits as well.
PM: I think, David, everyone out there understands that the non-renewable resources of Australia are owned by the Australian people. What happens with the mining companies is that they rent the use of that resource. That's what's different about mining.
These resources are owned by the Australian people, and therefore, throughout our history, have been taxed separately on top of the normal company rate. For example, in the past what you've had is state governments applying what's called royalties to get a tax stream coming from those resources, but our view is if you look over the last 10 years, for every three dollars in profit earned by the mining companies, one dollar was being paid to the taxpayer through royalties. Roll it on 10 years, it's for every seven dollars in profit, one is being paid to the taxpayer through royalties.
So, what we're saying is we just need a fairer share for the Australian people in order to fund better super; in order to fund tax cuts for small business; and to fund the future needs of infrastructure.
KOCH: But you're being accused at the moment of undermining the confidence of the Australian dollar, sort of sparking a share market rout in mining company share prices which is flowing through to our super funds, so we're getting poor performance because mining companies are saying 'this is going to hurt us. We're not going to go ahead with a lot of mines. We're going to pull out of Australia and go somewhere else.'
PM: David, you're a financial journalist. You know that both those first propositions are just wrong. On the question of the dollar, any market analyst will tell you that what's happening with the Australian dollar in the last week you've seen on currency markets across the world because of reactions to what's happening with global financial market instability, and, also, even in our part of the world with events on the Korean peninsula.
And on share markets, let's be very blunt about this - what's happened with share markets is, again, a response to instability in global financial markets and our resource stocks in Australia have performed better than the banking stocks or the financial stocks, and our overall stock exchange has performed better than most other stock exchanges around the world.
So let's just be clear about this. Obviously, mining companies will complain if they're asked to pay more tax, but we believe they need to be paying a fairer share to help with better super for all working people, upping that rate from 9 per cent to 12 per cent, bringing in company tax cuts for all companies, 30 down to 28, special tax cuts for small business or tax breaks for small business, and, of course, better infrastructure investment.
KOCH: Alright, let's go back to our viewers. Shane Holdam is in Melbourne. Shane, you've got the Prime Minister's ear. Fire away.
VIEWER: Yeah, Mr Rudd, good morning.
PM: G'day Shane.
VIEWER: I get drug tested at work. Why can't we drug test people that are unemployed, receiving a benefit all the time? A lot of other industries now get drug tested as well, so why can't - if they want to receive the benefit, the dole or unemployment - why can't we drug test them?
PM: Well, when we're looking at unemployment benefits and trying to get people into work, there's a whole series of practical things we've got to do and I'll come to your specific question just in one sec. If you're under 21, we have a policy called Earn or Learn, which means that in order to have access to what's called Youth Allowance they've got to be either in full-time education, they've either got to be in full-time training, or on top of that, they've got to be in full-time work. If you're in part time training, you've got to be out there looking for work, earning or learning, so those folk don't actually fall through the cracks.
If you're over 21, then of course we have what's called a series of interviews, initially fortnightly and growing over time, which we've only just brought in, to make sure that people are out there in a fair dinkum way looking for work or for identifying their training needs to get them into work, then to plug them into the right training provider.
You asked specifically about whether, in fact, people should be drug tested. Look, on the question of those sorts of things, it would strike me as something which would probably involve all sorts of problems in terms of civil liberties, but let me just come back to the program whether in fact there are any other health checks which apply to people on the receipt of New Start or Youth Allowance. On that one, though, I don't think we have any plans in mind.
KOCH: OK, thank you for that, Shane. Opposition bringing back the Pacific Solution as a policy to stop boat people coming in - will you look at changing your policy more towards the Pacific Solution, because it seemed to work better than yours?
PM: Well, let's just nail it in one. The so-called Pacific Solution was in fact a stopover in Nauru for 6 or 12 months, costing the taxpayer $300 million or $400 million, and 70% of those people were then resettled in Australia or elsewhere. In fact, a very large number ended up back in Australia. So, let's just call a spade a spade here - it might look good in the headlines, very expensive and a huge number ended up coming back to Australia.
The problem with the asylum seekers challenge is that it rises and falls with what's happening with global security circumstances, whether it's in Sri Lanka, whether it's in Afghanistan, or whether it's in Iraq, and in the past, the previous government dealt with this when they had hundreds of boats, 15,000 people come, then it tailed off for a while, then it began, of course, in recent years to rise again because of events in Sri Lanka and elsewhere.
We will maintain a balanced policy on this, a hardline policy tough on people smugglers, and anyone who's not a genuine refugee gets sent back home.
KOCH: Alright. Run out of time, but can we give you some homework for next week-
PM: -By all means.
KOCH: -Give the details of the family of John Parsons. John, from Bendigo, died in Hawaii while trekking in 2008. The family says the investigation into his death there has dragged on for so long they still can't bring the body home. Can you make some inquiries on their behalf and see if they can speed things up?
PM: These deaths of loved ones abroad are always really hard, so let's get to the details and come back to you.
KOCH: Terrific. Thank you. Good to see you.
PM: Likewise.