HADLEY:
Prime Minister, good morning to you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Ray.
HADLEY:
It's lovely to see you, I would think under better circumstances normally, but we see the headlines today - President George W. Bush has his finger on the trigger of war. Are we any closer to war today than we were perhaps yesterday or a month ago or five weeks ago?
PRIME MINISTER:
We probably are unfortunately. The one thing that will stop force being used will be if Iraq becomes fair dinkum about cooperating. I mean we've had a lot of talk about inspectors and reports and slight movement, but in the end if Iraq were to say, okay we'll fully cooperate and demonstrate that, the inspectors could have all the time in the world. So in the end, force will only be used if Iraq does not voluntarily disarm. You can't leave a country with chemical and biological weapons with the track record of Iraq. There is a risk other countries will do the same thing and there is an even greater risk that those weapons will one day get into the hands of international terrorists, and God knows how they will be used if that happens.
HADLEY:
If the world goes soft on Iraq, does it send the wrong message to North Korea?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh absolutely. I've been saying this for weeks, that if the Security Council cannot discipline Iraq, what earthly hope does it have of disciplining North Korea?
HADLEY:
Does it worry you, you're the Prime Minister, you've got the most important job in the country, but you're a dad and you're a husband... does it worry you as an Australian that perhaps young men and women are going into an area that perhaps they may not return from?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes it does. I think about that a lot. If anybody imagines that I've gone into the last few months with some kind of gung-ho view of the world, they couldn't be more wrong. Nothing has played on my mind more than this, the humanitarian balance. Lives will be lost if there is military conflict, but lives will be lost, perhaps in even greater numbers, if Iraq is not disarmed. And it's a terrible regime. People are routinely murdered and tortured. He's used poison gas on his own people and on other countries, invaded other countries. He subsidises Palestinian families who send suicide bombers into Israel. Now, when you hear the humanitarian criticism of any military conflict, I ask those people to bear in mind the humanitarian cost of not doing something about Iraq.
HADLEY:
There was criticism of you after the peace marches, the peace protests, for stating what I thought was a fairly obvious thing - that that would offer comfort to Saddam Hussein and people who supported him in that part of the world. They'll say well hang on a sec, George W. Bush, John Howard, Tony Blair and all those people from the European countries who are part of what we're opposing, they're all wrong because look at all these tens of thousands... hundreds of thousands of people in Barcelona, in Sydney, in New York and London, who are saying 'no, leave him alone'. There wasn't one banner suggesting that Saddam Hussein was anywhere but in the right place, doing the right thing.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, my criticism was not of their right to protest.
HADLEY:
No.
PRIME MINISTER:
I totally respect their right to protest. I wasn't questioning their motives. I was explaining the consequences, and the right to the protest doesn't carry with it an immunity from criticism. And all I was doing was pointing out that if you have these demonstrations, then they are noticed in Iraq, and I've had the strongest possible view that the one faint hope of Iraq becoming fair dinkum will be if the whole world unites and says to Iraq 'the game is up'. But while ever ambiguous, confused messages are being sent to Iraq, why wouldn't they play the rest of the world along? Why wouldn't they just give a little bit to the weapons inspectors? I mean there is talk today that they're going to agree in principle to destroy the al-Samoud missiles. Well whether they do or they don't, that doesn't represent total cooperation with the United Nations Security Council, and see they only do this when there is pressure. I mean both Hans Blix and Kofi Annan have admitted publicly and privately, were it not for the American military presence in the Gulf, the inspectors would not be in Iraq. Yet the countries like France who criticise America, their starting point for further action is that the inspectors are in Iraq. They're only there because of the very military presence of the United States that they have criticised.
HADLEY:
Are you frustrated, disappointed, at the French attitude towards all this? The Germans, the Russians?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I disagree with it. There is never any point in getting too frustrated or agitated because in the end you've got to work through with people and this is not an occasion, in my view, for flippant comments and insults. We're dealing with a deadly serious, quite lethal issue and I hope in the end that we can get a resolution through the Security Council. We don't need it for legal purposes. There is enough legal authority for enforcement of disarmament on Iraq right now.
HADLEY:
You have been very strong about Robert Mugabe representing the Commonwealth. When you've been there, you've wanted things done, and you can't get agreement from black African nations. When you see Chirac on stage with Robert Mugabe, welcoming him with open arms, I mean it made me angry that someone...
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it made most people angry. I mean Mugabe, he's in a different league from Saddam Hussein. He hasn't got biological and chemical weapons. But that country is not a democracy. He stole the last election. It was rorted. He's starving people who didn't vote for him, and he's expropriating people's farms without proper compensation. I mean the country, it's a tragedy and I think what the French did was very foolish. I'm not going to put it any more strongly than that because...
HADLEY:
I think we can read between the lines.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah and I mean, you know, President Chirac may come to Australia later this year and in the end, I mean France and Australia go back a long way and there is a lot that France has given to the world. But when you're dealing with somebody like Mugabe, the symbolism and face and status are so tremendously important. They're far more important to dictators, who are by definition incredibly vain people, than they are to democratically elected leaders. I mean we're all regularly put in our place by the voters and talkback callers. If you get too carried away with yourself in this country, you're pretty smartly reminded where you're living...
HADLEY:
No one is immune from that.
PRIME MINISTER:
That's right.
HADLEY:
We have a test here on radio every month. I think you reminded me earlier, you have a test every fortnight.
PRIME MINISTER:
That's right.
HADLEY:
You're going alright in your test.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh well, you know, I mean I'm in the middle of an issue now where you have to do what you believe is right irrespective of how...
HADLEY:
But it must have been gratifying, the latest Newspoll, despite you're in the middle of that issue and despite the fact that so many people seem to be opposed to you on that particular weekend, that when the Newspoll comes out, you still have tremendous support from the electorate as the preferred Prime Minister and as someone that people trust to lead us into the future.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that was gratifying. I think on Iraq, Ray, the situation with public opinion is that a lot of people haven't finally settled in their views. There is quite a group of people who are strongly opposed to what the Government has done. I think there are a lot of people who are strongly in favour. But the majority are probably in the middle and they're holding their breath and they, like all of us, would like to see the thing resolved without force, and they hope it all works out right, and they're listening to the arguments and they're making up their minds. Now, that is the great democratic process, and people will listen to an argument and they will listen to the long-term argument. The short-term argument is all in favour of giving in, everybody going home and hoping for the best and crossing your fingers, closing your eyes and hoping that he'll behave. You know, he won't. I mean, if the world walks away from Iraq, Saddam Hussein won't reward the world by getting rid of these weapons, he'll say whacko I've won and he'll expand his weapons programs. Now, but in the short term that is the more attractive option, but in the longer term, it's the least attractive option of all.
HADLEY:
Well, Colin Powell again said today he's resurrected this idea that war could be avoided if Saddam Hussein steps down, walks away. There's little likelihood of that in light of what he's said to people recently...
PRIME MINISTER:
It would appear that there is little likelihood, but the Secretary of State is right that that could still occur but it is only likely to occur, possibly, faintly, if the whole world says the same thing. I mean, you try and put yourself in Iraq's situation, Saddam Hussein's situation, and you look around the world and everyday there are bulletins reporting differences in approach, that will give you comfort. But if you woke up one morning and you found that every single country through the Security Council was saying - if you don't get fair-dinkum about disarmament, genuinely cooperate, throw the whole show open, tell us where you've got these materials, we'll come after you - you'd be more likely to do it then, wouldn't you?
HADLEY:
Do you get updated daily by George Bush, not personally, but via the normal channels so that you know exactly...?
PRIME MINISTER:
We have a very close security intelligence relationship with the United States. One of the most valuable things we have with both the British and the Americans was, is the intelligence sharing arrangement. And I have to say, I was alarmed to see on the Channel Nine news last night a suggestion that Mark Latham had raised, at a Shadow Cabinet meeting, the possibility that the Labor Party would agitate for Australia to withhold intelligence gathered through Pine Gap from the Americans if there was military action against Iraq. Now, that is crazy stuff, completely against the interest of Australia because that intelligence thing goes both ways. I mean, if we were to withhold information from the Americans, they would almost certainly withhold information from us and that might contain warnings of terrorist attacks. I mean, that intelligence sharing relationship is one of the most precious things we have because, and not only with the Americans but also with the British, the British have very good intelligence sources, particularly in the Middle East, historically they have very good arrangements and very good understandings and penetration with the Middle East. And the way that our three - the CIA and the British Secret Intelligence Service and our agencies - cooperate and share information is second to none and it is a very valuable part of our relationship. And I had always understood, and I'm sure it is still the case, that the great bulk of people in the Labor Party would believe that we ought to continue that close relationship.
HADLEY:
We've mentioned and touched briefly on North Korea, because of its location in the world it's obviously of a greater threat to us domestically than what's going on in Iraq.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well...
HADLEY:
And you mentioned Pine Gap, I mean they'd be concerned - the North Koreans - about Pine Gap. I know they don't have the facility to reach Pine Gap, they have the facility to reach the northern part of Australia, maybe in the foreseeable future. But obviously, that's of concern to them because we're so closely allied to the Americans in relation to that.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the North Koreans are behaving in a very provocative way. In my view, one of the reasons they're behaving provocatively is they've looked around the world and seen division over Iraq and they've upped the anti. Now, if Iraq is not dealt with, the world won't deal effectively with North Korea. In the meantime, we're really trying, if you like, a two fisted approach. We're trying the diplomatic route and we were the first country to send a diplomatic mission there after they admitted breaching their obligations under international agreements. But we're also willing to look at whether, in the long run, this missile defence system that the Americans are working on might be of use to Australia.
HADLEY:
This is the star wars?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, the so-called 'son of star wars'. Now, we haven't committed to it. It's a long way into the future, it is very expensive. But when you might have the sort of threat you described, I'd be crazy not to look at the options.
HADLEY:
So, one of the things that you've mentioned a number of times, and I take the pragmatic view, we're 19 or 20 million people in a very large continent, if we get in strife it's a bit like having a big brother.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the ultimate security guarantee for Australia is a combination of its own resilience and self reliance and strength and also our military alliance with the United States.
HADLEY:
Of course it is.
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean, that is the bottom line for this country's security and long term interest. Now, that is not said offensively to our friends in Asia. When I went abroad recently, I not only went to see President Bush and Tony Blair but I also went to see the President of Indonesia. Now, that was a demonstration of the importance I attach to that relationship and it was a very valuable meeting. And there is an understanding in Asia of our alliance with the United States. I mean, our alliance with the United States', close though it is, has not stopped us building a very close, economic relationship with China. But the best thing that we achieved trade-wise in 25 years, we achieved last year with that huge natural gas deal with China. I mean you can walk and chew gum at the same time, but most Australians know that in the end it's a combination of our own resilience and independence and that alliance with the United States and you should never write it out of decisions we take on foreign policy and national security issues.
HADLEY:
Closer to home is a State election coming up on March 22. Will you be - I think Bob Carr said on this program yesterday or the day before that one of his significant factors is the popularity of the Prime Minister in his home State - will you be volunteering your services to John Brogden and the Coalition in New South Wales?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I will certainly do what I can to help John Brogden. I think he's fighting a gutsy campaign. In the end it'll be decided on State issues, as Federal elections are decided on Federal issues. But I will help, John is obviously the underdog and when I hear the Premier saying nice things about me at the beginning of an election campaign, I think to myself - some kind of subterranean strategy on that, it's not quite what it appears.
HADLEY:
Yes, well, perhaps you're exactly right about that. I think it probably suits John Brogden to be the underdog and I think he's hoping that continues because, obviously, the last few days in the election campaign will be dreadfully important.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the history of State election campaigns, particularly is that you can have big movements during the period of the campaign and the one that most recently comes to mind, of course, is Bracks' surprise defeat of Kennett. When that campaign started nobody thought Bracks had a chance of winning, but he ran a very good campaign, Kennett ran a very bad and arrogant campaign and Bracks ended up toppling him. Now, in this case I believe that people have, over the next three weeks, they'll have an opportunity of looking at both of the leaders and John will come up very well. He's fresh, he's different, he's having a go, he's consistently and steadily released a whole lot of new policies, particularly in areas that matter to voters, like education. Now, the standards in schools, the quality of public education, tables of school performance - all of those things, they're very bread and butter issues that are very important to people in New South Wales and I think he will perform very well in the campaign but he's clearly starting from behind, he knows that, we all know that, and Bob Carr is clearly a favourite by a long way.
HADLEY:
Well, maybe 2003 might the year of the underdog.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I certainly hope so.
HADLEY:
In State policies...
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
HADLEY:
In State politics but not federally.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we'll just deal with one election at a time.
HADLEY:
Is there an election in the offing...they were talking about...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, no. Look, we only have three years at a Federal level and unless there's a very good reason I always like to go as near as you can to the three years and I certainly don't have any ideas of an early election. We've only been there for 14 or 15 months and the next election...the three years will be up in November of next year and that's when you would normally expect the election to be held, then or around about that time.
HADLEY:
You're looking fit and well, will you lead this Party into the next election?
PRIME MINISTER:
I haven't made up my mind about that. I'm not thinking about it at the moment.
HADLEY:
[Inaudible]
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I want to see the country through this Iraqi issue. I am feeling fit and well and all of that but I will think about my longer term future a bit later on but right at the moment I'm thinking very hard about the immediate challenges and the Australian people should know that I will certainly see them well and truly through that.
HADLEY:
Okay, just one or two final issues - Telstra. The sale of Telstra was one of the issues in that last election that you just referred to. The share price is down around the $4.00 mark now. Obviously it's not an opportune time to be talking about selling Telstra at this juncture but the performance of Telstra and the share price. And the mums and dads that went into Telstra at the $7.00 mark or thereabouts, what message for them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm glad the company's paid an extra dividend, that's of benefit to all the shareholders, including the Government but, very particularly, the individual shareholders. The stockmarket for Telcos around the world is down. Telstra is not alone. There was clearly an unsustainable exuberance a few years ago around the world about the value of Telco stocks and in common with that, you know, bursting bubble, Telstra has suffered. Now, I can understand people being unhappy about that. I still believe that in the long-term it's a good investment because it's a very soundly based, very soundly run company. I also believe in the long-run you have an unsustainable position with it being half owned by the public and half owned by the Government and the Government's not going to buy the half that's sold back and I think in the long-run it should be fully privatised. At the moment, if we had the parliamentary authority we wouldn't sell because the price is not very good. That doesn't mean to say we won't at some stage in the future seek parliamentary authority to sell when the price does get better but it's not an issue that's very high on my agenda at the present time for those reasons.
HADLEY:
I've got a way of bumping up the share price.
PRIME MINISTER:
How's that?
HADLEY:
We had a number of calls about you in Washington and I defended you as you went on one of your morning walks in your Vodafone Wallabies tracksuit.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, I was wearing the Australian Rugby Union tracksuit.
HADLEY:
I defended you, Prime Minister. I said that that was not you sponsoring Vodafone, you were wearing proudly a Wallabies tracksuit which happened to be sponsored by Vodafone. Now, I think David Gallop, Holly Kramer and the people from Telstra should supply you with a Telstra NRL premiership tracksuit so the next time that you're seen walking in cold places you're wearing a Telstra NRL tracksuit with the Australian Rugby League colours.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'd always be proud to wear the Australian Rugby League colours.
HADLEY:
With Telstra on the back instead of Vodafone. It's a win-win situation for everyone.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yeah, except for Vodafone.
HADLEY:
Well, bugger Vodafone, we're worried about Telstra at the moment. [Inaudible] they've had their free kick with you, Vodafone. Now, the other thing that you've had a bit to say about today again is the huge golden handshakes. Now, this fellow that's now working for Mr Packer, Chris Cuffe, he's come in for some criticism but as I understand it...
PRIME MINISTER:
He was successful.
HADLEY:
Thank you, that's a valid point, he actually got a quid for his place. The thing that people...
PRIME MINISTER:
It's still a very big payment but he was successful and...
HADLEY:
Well, say he makes the joint $200 million and gets 33, we can understand that but when someone loses $14 billion and gets $1.5 million, well, I mean, anyone running either a public company or private company, if your truck driver, all of a sudden makes you $800 a week, you can't pay him $4000 a week because you'll go broke.
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I think you make a totally valid point. People take the view that, generally, fair-minded people, that top company executives are entitled to be well paid and they are, they're very well paid but if the company does badly you're not entitled to something, in my view, on top of all of that. Now, I think there will be...there's already the beginnings of quite a cultural change in the corporate world about it and I think that change will continue. You've got to write these contracts differently. In a lot of cases what happens is there are legal obligations to pay people because it's part of their original contract. I mean, you're aware of people negotiating and they get these deals. I mean, companies have got to be more hard-nosed. Pay the company executives good money, pay them performance bonuses, for want of a better expression, but clearly if the company fails it does stick in people's craw if the people who were at the helm when it failed or went down...and I feel a bit sorry for one or two of the people, they didn't have...well, can I say that Stan Wallis is a person who I know quite well and Stan's contributed a lot to the corporate world and he's become the butt of some of the criticism. But the principle behind that criticism is, nonetheless, very valid and that is that it's not a good look to the average battler who's told to restrain his wage claims if somebody gets paid millions even though the company they've run has performed badly. And you can't ask the ordinary person to exercise restraint on a modest wage if they don't see restraint being exercised by people who are highly paid. It is as simple as that. It's a question of a fair go for the entire community.
HADLEY:
And, finally, I start broadcasting rugby league again on the 15th of March. Kogarah's Jubilee Oval will be in use, I believe, about April or May, are you looking forward to the Dragons getting back to their home place?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think that will mean a lot to their followers. There's a sentimental attachment in Kogarah Oval, a great sentimental attachment and I think that will mean an enormous amount to their supporter base.
HADLEY:
I've got another way you can help them as well. I got a letter from them today asking me to pay $1000 for a paver on their walk. They're making a walk on the street and it will be a walk of fame with acknowledgment of the great St George players before they became St George Illawarra and they're asking people involved in the game to buy the pavers and have your name put on it there for evermore.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm sure I'll get a letter.
HADLEY:
Unless someone at Kogarah knocks off our paver but I might get next to you. J Howard and R Hadley, pavers together.
PRIME MINISTER:
Okay.
HADLEY:
Prime Minister, I appreciate your time.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
HADLEY:
And it's nice to see you again and in our new studios.
PRIME MINISTER:
They're very attractive.
HADLEY:
Better than getting to Sussex Street.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, you know, life's improving but good luck and you've done well and congratulations.
HADLEY:
Thanks, Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
[ends]