JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, Jenny McKenry supports Mr Scrafton's versions of events in relation to the Scrafton story. What's your comment on that?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, she supports the fact that he discussed the video with me, which I don't dispute, she supports the fact that he said it was inconclusive. I don't think you can take it any further than that. I don't have any quarrel with anything she said, and it's known that she'd spoken to him before. What she said is no sort of blinding new revelation, all she does is to state that we talked about a video, that the video did not provide evidence that children had been thrown overboard, that it was inconclusive, I've never disputed that. That's not the issue. The issue is whether he told me that it was a unified view in Defence that children had not been thrown overboard, that's the point that I dispute. I don't dispute that we talked about the video, I mean that's the reason I rang him. Can I just make the other additional point, all this talk about a cover up, the reason I released the video was to avoid a charge of cover up. I actually knew the video was inconclusive despite that. Can I just repeat this point because I think it is important, knowing that the video was inconclusive, knowing that it did not provide evidence, that's the video, that children had been thrown overboard I nonetheless released it. How therefore can I be accused of a cover up?
JOURNALIST:
So why then does Mr Scrafton say that what McKenry says supports his...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I don't answer for him, I answer for myself. I'm just dealing with his allegations, I'm not talking about his motives, I'm not going to analyse it, you blokes will do all the analysis. This is three years ago, I thought we were meant to have an election about the future, not about the past. I mean I think the public are fed up with going over the entrails of an issue that did not determine the result of the last election. We won the last election because we ran the economy better, we were better on terrorism, and we had strong border protection policies, that's why we won the election, the Labor Party is still saying "we was robbed" and I think the Australian public are getting a bit sick of that, they want talk about the future.
JOURNALIST:
What about how might rural and regional Australia fare under a Costello Government?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Peter Costello more than any other person has been involved in delivering the low interest rates and the good economic conditions as Treasurer and he and I and John together have really been the leaders of a Government that's delivered low interest rates. And I give you one message on interest rates, if you want low interest rates into the future don't vote for Labor, they always deliver high interest rates. You remember when they were last in office, what the interest rates were? If they got into office again it would happen again because they would run budgets into deficit and deficit budgets push up interest rates.
JOURNALIST:
... that he told you that there were grave doubts that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Is that true?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I had a look last night at the transcript and Blix was very guarded in what he said, he was extremely guarded in what he said. He did make a number of points but that conclusion, and he admitted in the interview he gave to Mr Brown who wrote that article, he admitted that he had not kept notes of the meeting, well I did keep notes of the meeting and whilst he certainly didn't agree with everything I was putting, I'm not asserting that, it's fair only to say that he was cautious and guarded in what he said about Iraq's possession of WMD. That's the correction interpretation of our discussion.
JOURNALIST:
Did he say there was no solid evidence?
PRIME MINISTER:
He was careful and guarded.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, Mark Latham's in hospital at the moment with pancreatitis, do you have a message for him?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm very sorry and I wish him a speedy recovery. I wish him, I am sorry to hear that he is unwell and I send him my good wishes for a speedy and full recovery.
JOURNALIST:
Will the election date change now as a result of...
PRIME MINISTER:
There has been no date fixed for the election, how can it change?
JOURNALIST:
Will you be calling an election a bit later now?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I'm not getting into that. The third anniversary of the Government's re-election is the 10th of November 2001, we were re-elected on the 10th of November 2001, and the third anniversary is three years after that. So we're still a long way off. But look this constant asking of questions about the date of the election, it's a complete waste of time, I haven't decided when the election will be but I do know this, that when the election is held it will be about the future of this country and will not be about the past. I mean I have been lectured for months now about looking to the future, all the Labor Party wants to do at the moment is to look to the past. They will set up another Senate inquiry, they will use their numbers, they will combine with the Democrats and the Greens and I tell you what, they will find my guilty. I mean what else would you expect with a Labor, Democrat, Green majority in the Senate? I mean chief justice Faulkner will judiciously find me guilty.
JOURNALIST:
Don't you think it's a serious issue though Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
I do think it's a serious issue...
JOURNALIST:
... serious and senior public servant has basically accused you of being a liar.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he's wrong.
JOURNALIST:
His version of events is corroborated by another senior public servant.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well his version of events was not corroborated because she wasn't present at our discussion. Or that she has done is to confirm that he told her what I don't dispute.
JOURNALIST:
Does it concern you that it seems to be the continued case of former bureaucrats against the Government now?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there are a lot of former bureaucrats in this country, I don't think 44 represent them all. There are always people who disagree with the Government in office, I've been in power eight and a half years, I take strong stands on issues and a lot of people disagree with me but a lot of people support me and in the end my future is in the hands of the Australian public, not in the hands of commentators, not in the hands of journalists, not in the hands of public servants, but in the hands of 19 million Australians. And they will decide, nobody else, whether I'm telling the truth, they will decide what sort of government they want for the future. But this election will be about the future, it won't be about the past, and if the Labor Party wants to live in the past well that's their problems.
JOURNALIST:
Have you picked up on this trip to the bush that you'll be taking back to Canberra?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think the resilience of rural people, I think there's a sense of cautious optimism, people are still doing it tough as a result of the drought, there's still the problem of bad commodity prices, although beef prices are good, other commodity prices have been better although they're coming off a little bit and are still not as good as a couple of years ago. But they want low interest rates, they don't want the unions back in charge of industrial relations, and they don't want the MUA back in charge of the waterfront. They're four messages I've picked up.
JOURNALIST:
Can I ask you about a Bulletin article which suggests that your office contacted the Bryant inquiry and told them to take Mr Scrafton's comments no further?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well ...
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible).
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no I'm sorry I haven't seen the article but I'm happy to answer the question.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible).
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that's a matter of record, there's nothing new about that, it was known, it was known.
JOURNALIST:
How damaging is this affair going to...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that's a matter for you to decide, I mean I'm only the Prime Minister.
JOURNALIST:
With the lie detector test...
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, lie detector test.
JOURNALIST:
How important is the rural vote to the Government and the...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I mean rural Australia is important to Australia, I mean that's our reference point, not the vote, our reference point is how important rural Australia is to this country and we want a strong rural community and we want a fair go for farmers and we want to keep rural communities together. I mean that's the aim of our policy, the question of how that pans out politically is entirely a matter for people.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think that regional Australia gets a fair go?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it's getting a fairer go now as a result of a number of policies that we have brought in. There's always more that can be done and there's always more that will be done. But I do think that we have tried systematically though a lot of programmes, the local solutions programme, our regional assistance programmes, our AAA programme, the farm management deposits scheme that was so helpful in cushioning the impact of the drought, the particular packages we've had for sugar, the various other measures that we've brought in. I think all of those things, they've got rural transaction centres, they've all steadily addressed areas of difficulty and then on top of that we've had a number of breakthroughs on the trade front and there are benefits in the Free Trade Agreement for rural Australia and over time they will become more apparent and there are benefits in the Thailand Free Trade Agreement for farmers, for dairy farmers for example. So if you add all of those things together it's fair to say that rural Australia is getting a fairer go now than it was a few years ago. But the big thing is still the state of the economy, if a government that can't control interest rates is elected rural Australia will go back into a slump.
JOURNALIST:
... disagree with you because we've never had so many amalgamations and loss of services, especially in this area, very recently, how much does that concern you?
ANDERSON:
Well I'll just pose a question if I may in response, name one service the Commonwealth Government has taken away? Name one.
JOURNALIST:
Well most of them have been state government services, but obviously you can influence that because most of their funding comes from you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well let me make it very clear, about 45 per cent of state government funding all around the country does come from the Commonwealth Government. But we don't control it once it gets into the hands of the state government and we don't accept responsibility for the failure of the state governments to spend money wisely. I mean I sometimes wonder what state governments do because they get enormous amounts of money from us, whenever anything goes wrong they blame us and ask for more money. Now we accept responsibility for our failures and John has put you on the spot correctly in saying name one Commonwealth service that has been withdrawn. Now we have tried to build up Commonwealth services, I agree with you that a lot of state government services have been withdrawn, you take Roads to Recovery; Roads to Recovery was in part needed because state governments pulled money out of supporting local roads. So we accept responsibility for our failures, but in a federation if you're unhappy with the New South Wales Government well they should get it in the neck, if you're unhappy with us we get it in the neck.
[ends]