CASSIDY:
Prime Minister, welcome to the program.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good to be back.
CASSIDY:
Is it time for political parties to start giving a little more consideration to public servants when they are resolving their differences?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think some of the criticism in that area on both sides has been exaggerated. We haven't compromised the position of the public service, there have been no secrets revealed. Everybody knows there is an ASIS and defence signals directorate, everybody knows there is a Pine Gap and everybody knows that new Opposition Leaders get briefings. I think that part of it has been exaggerated. The real issue this last week is whether it's right to impose an artificial deadline for the withdrawal of Australian forces from Iraq.
CASSIDY:
Do you think somebody like Ron Bonighton would have been comfortable with the week?
PRIME MINISTER:
Public servants always prefer to be out of the limelight, sometimes it is unavoidable. I respect the public service, I respect him and I think the intelligence agencies of this country do a great job and I have been a very strong defender of them. But unavoidably, sometimes if you have a certain amount of crossfire then, on a factual basis, the contributions of the bureaucracy are unavoidable because claims were made and what was I to do? Just ignore them when I knew them to be incorrect. That is absurd.
CASSIDY:
How did you know they were incorrect?
PRIME MINISTER:
How did I know they were incorrect? Well, I certainly knew, because of what we'd been told.
CASSIDY:
But told by whom? You weren't at the discussions.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, but we get briefings on what takes place.
CASSIDY:
Do you get briefings on the Mark Latham briefings?
PRIME MINISTER:
We are told generally what happens, yes. In the same way that Paul Keating would have got briefings on what I was told. I was once given a briefing about sensitive matters not by a public servant but by the former Defence Minister Kim Beazley when I was Leader of the Opposition. This idea that there is something strange that we would know what the other side was told. I mean why shouldn't we know. If there is something that the other side is told that we haven't been told we are entitled to know why we haven't been told it. So I think this part of it, Barrie, with respect, has been over-exaggerated. The real issue is which policy is right and which policy is wrong - that is a far more important issue than the question of the involvement of individuals in the public service.
CASSIDY:
On that - and your policy now does seem to be - it involves an indefinite timetable - and when you see the shocking events that went on at Fallujah this week it must make you worry about the safety of Australian troops and Australian civilians in Iraq.
PRIME MINISTER:
I've always worried about their safety. I have repeatedly said that something could happen to some of our personnel there, but I don't believe, right at the moment or indeed in the near future, it is a very good idea for any of the participating countries to be contemplating arbitrary withdrawal because it will send the wrong signal, especially if the wake of what happened in Spain. I mean you have to keep going back to that. That's the main issue. Is it right for 1 of the 35 countries effectively to cut and run until the job has been finished?
CASSIDY:
But when you see the viciousness of what occurred in Fallujah, the job may not be finished for years. These are ingrained hatreds.
PRIME MINISTER:
It was certainly macabre and appalling and many would argue that is a further reason why you don't cut and run. Just contemplate what might be the signal sent if, in the wake of what has occurred in Spain and what has occurred recently in Iraq, a number of countries said "Well, the game is up as far as we're concerned, we're going." That would be seen by terrorists and enemies of our allies as an enormous victory, an enormous win. That's why the Latham policy about bringing them home by Christmas, come what may, is wrong. You see, what we saw at the end of last week was an even harder Labor position than at the beginning of the week. At the beginning of the week there was a bit of wriggle room, there was a possibility you might leave some there and bring others home, but by the end of the week there was absolutely no doubt at all that they were all coming home by Christmas, no matter what the UN said, no matter what the Iraqis said, no matter what the Americans said, no matter what the overall strategic need might be. Now I think that is just totally the wrong...
CASSIDY:
And you are not looking for wriggle room yourself? What Fallujah might indicate is that it could be years, it could be years before the situation is a safe one.
PRIME MINISTER:
You can't assume that, Barrie. I'm not look being for wriggle room. Nobody wants forces overseas longer than necessary but, equally, we have a responsibility beyond the formal handover not to leave until on an objective assessment our job has been done.
CASSIDY:
Have you thought about going to Iraq yourself?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, Barrie, I think about going to a lot of places, and, in relation to Iraq, if I did contemplate going there I wouldn't be, for understandable reasons, signalling it in advance.
CASSIDY:
Might that be a better use of your time than going to Washington in May?
PRIME MINISTER:
I can only repeat what I've just said. I wouldn't be signalling something like that in advance.
CASSIDY:
On Gallipoli, Foreign Affairs are now advising people to cancel all non-essential travel to Turkey and that of course includes Gallipoli for Anzac Day, yet the Defence Minister Robert Hill is going, that sends a bit of a mixed signal, doesn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
You are on the horns of a dilemma. There is no credible evidence, there is no direct evidence of an attack on Gallipoli or the area around it but there is a heightened concern, generally speaking, about attacks in Turkey because of what happened a few months ago and we have had to try and communicate that. The next step would be to say we're cancelling the observance altogether. That would be an enormous victory for terrorists and it would, I believe, be repudiated by most of the Australian public. So what we have done is say, "Well, our minister is going" because while ever there are ceremonies there the Government should be represented. As to rest of the public - we warn generally of the dangers, we tell them of that, and they make their own minds up.
CASSIDY:
OK, the autumn session of the Parliament is behind you. Do you feel that you are getting a handle on Mark Latham now?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's a matter for the public to decide. You know I'm notoriously reluctant to join in commentary. It is going to be hard for us to win this next election but there is a long time to go before the election is held and you and I both know the vicissitudes of national politics, how things can change. We have got two fundamental things going for us - the first is that we are a united, strong and stable government and the other is that on the big things that matter - national security and the economy - we are regarded by the public as being a superior performer. Now they are things that are going in our favour. Obviously, I will leave it to the Labor Party to point out the things that are going against us, but I think it is going to be very tough. We're behind at the moment, there's no doubt about that but we have been behind before and won comfortably.
CASSIDY:
Of course, while you were engaged in the Parliament this week, Mark Latham put out a couple of policies, one on baby care, presumably you are going to replace the baby bonus.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I'm not saying what we are going to do. We will obviously have something to say about a number of things in the budget. But that policy of Mr Latham's has a $350 million funding hole and it is in part funded by the introduction of a federal payroll tax, albeit of a very small amount for the first since 1971.
CASSIDY:
Is there a funding hole because you underestimated or overestimated the pick-up rate on the baby bonus?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's not the latest figures that we have from the Treasury.
CASSIDY:
What do they suggest?
PRIME MINISTER:
They suggest that there is a $350 million funding hole, that's what they suggest.
CASSIDY:
And not because the baby bonus has been a flop.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, not because the baby...they suggest is a hole. You can either fund it or you can't.
CASSIDY:
On work and family policy, there is also a suggestion that this week there will be $100 million for early childhood development.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'll be making an announcement about the future of the work - the future of the stronger families and communities program and we are going to revamp that and give it more direction and give it a different emphasis. And Larry Anthony and I will be unveiling the details of that on Wednesday.
CASSIDY:
When did you first decide that ATSIC had to go?
PRIME MINISTER:
I've been thinking about the failure of ATSIC for quite a long time, I can't say - I can't fix a particular date or moment, I don't do things that way. But certainly some weeks ago I made some very strong remarks on Melbourne radio about what I regard as the failure of ATSIC. But the reason we haven't formally announced any policy is that we have a report from Jackie Huggins and Bob Collins and John Hannaford and we are still looking at that. And when we have completed that examination, in our time according to our timetable, we'll make some announcements.
CASSIDY:
Why should small business be exempted from redundancy payouts? Workers in small business are going to lose their livelihoods in the same way as other workers.
PRIME MINISTER:
I think the reason is that the constraints on small business, the costs and so forth, are different than they are on large corporations and if you place too many burdens on them you'll result in them employing fewer people. And in the long run the cost paid by the people who lose their jobs or don't get jobs in the first place are much greater than those who don't get redundancy. And we're talking here about not taking away something that somebody has got but we are talking here about preventing the impost on small business of another expense at a time when it is providing a great amount of job generation and I think it is a question of not killing the goose that laid the golden egg, as far as employment growth is concerned. When you get big employment growth in an economy it normally comes off the back of small business not from big corporations, they are always looking at ways of downsizing and rationalising. It's the multiplier effect of the growth of small business that matters and that's why we want unfair dismissal laws changed and that is why we are going to legislate to overturn the redundancy requirement because that is going to cost jobs in the small business sector.
CASSIDY:
Prime Minister, you've said repeatedly that you are going to continue in the job for as long as your party wants you to, but how will you know when that is no longer the case?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it's certainly not the case at present and I haven't really turned my mind to it. It's the most normal, natural way of dealing with the future - one's future - when you've led a political party for a number of years. I'll know and I know my party well and they know me well - we're a very united bunch and we're focused on winning the next election. But as far as my future is concerned, I've repeatedly said - you know what my response is and it won't be changing.
CASSIDY:
Yes, I do. And when you said that "I'll know" you will mean that you'll make the judgment, it won't come to a party showdown.
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't want to get into that. I've made a statement and I don't have anything to add to that.
CASSIDY:
Finally on the Budget - and it's five weeks away now and already it has been characterised as your tax cuts versus Labor's spending on services, is that a fair analysis?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to start marking it out in any particular way. Our position remains that we have certain things we have got to spend money on, we will not be going into deficit, definitely not, and if there is room after those two considerations then we will provide tax relief. But in what form and how much I don't know and I'm not therefore in a position to speculate.
CASSIDY:
There was one concept floated over the weekend of tax cuts phased over several years. That would be new. What has that got going for it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I have read the story.
CASSIDY:
Has it got anything going for it?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have read the story.
CASSIDY:
The concept itself.
PRIME MINISTER:
Barrie, I'm not going to start ruling things in or out, we are only a few weeks off the Budget, so I don't think I will get into that.
CASSIDY:
Thanks for your time this morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
You're very welcome.
[ends]