SPEERS:
Mr Howard, thanks for your time.
PRIME MINISTER:
Hello David.
SPEERS:
If I can go straight to these anti-terror laws that you're looking at, they do include as you say, taking away citizenship from somebody if they fail to properly embrace the values of this society. Now what do you mean by that? It could potentially mean quite a few people.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well David that's your definition by conflating a couple of statements that I've made. What I have said is that one of things we will look at is whether in certain circumstances it would be justified in depriving somebody of citizenship. I haven't tied it directly in specific terms to that particular form of words that you use. What I have said is that if somebody comes to this...
SPEERS:
Well Prime Minister you did say yesterday that if someone didn't properly embrace the values of this society, that they're the sort people that you could be looking at?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no, no, what I said was that if somebody comes to this country, they really enter into a mutual obligation. On the one hand they have the rights and privileges, and they are immense, of being an Australian citizen or resident, in return those people are required to embrace and imbibe and become part of Australian society and Australian values. Now separately from that, what I said was one of the things we could do was to look at citizenship deprivation where there was proven behaviour in relation to somebody's behaviour.
SPEERS:
But does that behaviour include for example somebody supporting the right of Iraqi insurgents to fight foreign forces. Would that be the sort of thing that you're talking about?
PRIME MINISTER:
David, I'm not going to, at this stage, try and write the changes. We are looking at this issue. Plainly we are not going to have a situation where somebody would lose their citizenship exercising their right of free speech in the sense that we understand it, and you know that. And I don't think it helps sensible debate on a subject like this to try and suggest that we're going to take away fundamental and ordinarily accepted rights. But it is an issue we are looking at. I'm not going to say anymore than that. And until we've completed that examination you'll just have to wait.
SPEERS:
Clearly you're testing the waters on this issue...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I'm not testing, no I'm sorry, I'm not testing the waters. I'm getting advice, I'm consulting my colleagues and when we've taken decisions and reached a view, then we'll articulate them.
SPEERS:
Well among the measures being looked at in Britain following the London bombings is the pledge of allegiance for new citizens and also tougher English language tests for potential new migrants. Would that be the sort of thing on the table here?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have a pledge of allegiance at the present time. I think it's quite a good pledge of allegiance. And I think in a sense we shouldn't play with words on an issue like this. It's an attitude of mind that matters and it's the behaviour of people that matters. If you are cynical and you have a view that is inimical to the values of a society you join, you can quite freely give a pledge of allegiance. It's how you behave and the attitude of mind you bring to your citizenship that really matters. As far as English is concerned, there's a general desirability that people learn English when they come to this country, but there are plenty of people who haven't learnt English very well, that are fully part of and making a great contribution to this community. So I wouldn't want to get hung up on that as an issue. That's a general ongoing issue about citizenship. We're dealing here with a small number of people and what we have to try and do is to penetrate the communities in which they live, and to try and find out who they are, what motivates them and very particularly, enlist the aid of those people within those communities to not only help us to understand what they're up to, but also to help persuade them down a different path of behaviour. That's really what I'm talking about and I think we have to confine our efforts, and our attention, and not spray off in a whole lot of general directions related to immigration and citizenship because that can be quite counter productive.
SPEERS:
Well Prime Minister the former defence chief, Peter Cosgrove, has said that one of the things motivating terrorists in Iraq is the presence of foreign forces, including Australian forces. Would you agree with that view?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I've read what General Cosgrove has said and I agree with him very much that the important thing is to train up the Iraqi forces and until those Iraqi forces are trained up, then it's not possible for the foreign forces, including the Australians to withdraw.
SPEERS:
And (inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
Hang on, can you just let me finish, my view is that the terrorist in Iraq are not only targeting foreign forces, they are in fact targeting the democratic process. And the objective of the terrorists is to stop the emergence of a free Iraq. And one way of ensuring that there is a free Iraq is to train the Iraqi Army to the extent necessary for them to be able to secure the position without foreign help. And a premature withdrawal of foreign forces, which is the policy of the Australian Labor Party, would in fact destroy the capacity of the Iraqis to be trained and would thus condemn the future of Iraq to terrorism. That's my view.
SPEERS:
Peter Cosgrove has also suggested that at end of 2006 is the sort of date he would like to see the Australians withdrawn. What are your thoughts on the setting of an arbitrary deadline like that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well he didn't set an arbitrary deadline, once again if you do the man justice and read what he says, he said it would be good if they were out by the end of next year.
SPEERS:
Do you agree with that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't commit myself to a date. I don't and I won't commit myself to a date. I will commit myself though to continuing the policy that General Cosgrove endorsed in the interview and that is that the aim should be to train the Iraqi military forces to the extent necessary for them to be able to secure the country. And I say again Labor's policy would rob the Iraqis of a capacity to defend themselves and would condemn that country to the grip of terrorists.
SPEERS:
Prime Minister if I could move now to the resumption of parliament this week. The industrial relations reforms you've signalled are one of your top priorities heading into this session. The Industrial Relations Commission today handed down a landmark ruling for families. They'll now be able to take... the mother and father will be able to take eight weeks unpaid leave, either parent could ask for up to two years unpaid leave and also part-time work until their child starts school. Would any of these changes be at risk under the reforms that you are proposing?
PRIME MINISTER:
What the Industrial Relations Commission did today was to confer upon employees under awards the right to ask for those things. They didn't confer those things unconditionally. So what you've said is not quite a correct depiction of what the IRC decided. What the IRC said was you can ask for those things and an employer is only obliged to give them if he is able to do so, and it doesn't result in inefficiencies or unreasonable cost. What the IRC was really doing was to say that the end of the day things like that are a matter of negotiation between employers and employees, that is a reinforcement of our policy approach. And what I would say is that under our policy it is far more likely that employees will get those sorts of benefits, than it would be under the policy that the unions and the Labor Party are espousing because the essence of our policy is that you negotiate arrangements at the workplace which suit both employers and employees. And any good employer will bend over backwards to accommodate the family needs and the family circumstances of employees. So there is nothing in today's decision that alters the view I've put, in fact it reinforces the view I've put, that at the end of the day the best way arrange the balance between work and family is for each individual situation to be accommodated at the workplace, and not try the ACTU's one size-fits all approach which is doomed to fail.
SPEERS:
The decision has been welcomed today by the unions and by employer groups. Does it show that the Industrial Relations Commission as it currently operates is operating pretty well?
PRIME MINISTER:
No I think what it shows is that it's one of those decisions that is a bit two bob each way and really just reinforces the view I've put, and that is that these things have to be worked out at the workplace.
SPEERS:
We're still waiting to see the detail of your legislation...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, well the main detail and outlines are already there, you're waiting to see the legislation.
SPEERS:
When will that come?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well that will be introduced early in October. But I can assure your viewers that the legislation, when it's introduced, will sweep away a lot of the fear campaign that's been dishonestly waged by the unions, it will reinforce our argument that under this policy real wages will continue to rise, employment will continue to fall and that all of the predictions of the destruction of working conditions will be exposed for what they are, and that is complete deception.
SPEERS:
Prime Minister on Telstra the Treasurer has today signalled some support for this idea of a $2 billion fund to be set up if it's fully sold, and then invested, the proceeds used to bankroll projects in rural Australia. It's an idea that Mark Vaile, the Deputy Prime Minister is also supporting. Do you also agree that this is a good idea?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, we have a process for discussing these things inside the Government and that process is going on, and until it is complete I'll not have further things to say.
SPEERS:
But some of your colleagues don't seem to be feeling any pressure not to speak publicly about this. As I say Peter Costello and Mark Vaile have signalled their support.
PRIME MINISTER:
That's fine by me. I'm just telling you in answer to your question what my position is. I'm not imposing any sanctions on them or indeed anybody else. I'm just saying, speaking for myself as Prime Minister, I'll continue to handle the process for discussing this matter inside the Government and when we have reached a decision, then that decision will be announced.
SPEERS:
One of your new backbenchers, the Nationals' Barnaby Joyce, has said that a $2 billion fund won't be enough, $5 billion it has to be. Is a $5 billion fund out of the question?
PRIME MINISTER:
What is your next question David, I'm not going to get into that.
SPEERS:
Well I suppose we'll wait and see. Any timeframe on when we are going to see a decision from the Government on this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh it will be dealt with soon, but I'm not going to tie myself to days or weeks.
SPEERS:
Well just a couple of quick issues then finally Prime Minister. We hear today reports that about $600 million in drought relief apparently hasn't been spent because the rules are too tough. Are you going to look at relaxing them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well much of that report is historical in the sense that there was a relaxation of the rules in March or April of this year, I forget the exact month, or earlier this year. But otherwise let me simply say is that there's nothing wrong or bad if less money is spent than was thought necessary. I think it's fair to say that this Government has been a very good friend of the Australian farmer, we have in the past, we are now and we'll continue in the future. But if people don't meet the eligibility criteria for drought relief or any other kind of relief, then it's only fair and reasonable that the money not be spent, that would be irresponsible and nobody, particularly farmers who know that irresponsible expenditure pushes up interest rates would ever want us to behave in an irresponsibly fiscal fashion.
SPEERS:
Okay. As we head into this parliamentary session, your approval rating remains over 50 per cent, which is as many have pointed out is quite unusual for a Prime Minister after almost 10 years in the job. What do you put it down to?
PRIME MINISTER:
David, I will leave observations about my popularity or approval rating or any failings or strengths I might have to other people. I try and do my job, I try very hard to talk to the Australian people directly and frankly, I don't have tickets on myself and I recognise that my success is a product of a great team. I've got terrific ministers around me, I mean you couldn't get a better Treasurer than Peter Costello, you couldn't get a better Foreign Minister than Alexander Downer, I've got a great Senate team, I've got very capable education and health ministers, I'm very well served by the people around me, and any credit that might fortuitously come my way is credit that is owed to them as much as it is to me.
SPEERS:
But for you personally, your commitment and energy for the job isn't fading at all?
PRIME MINISTER:
No I am very committed, I'm very focussed but if you're getting into any of those tricky questions that you journalists like to get into, to talk about my future, ask me about the cricket, ask me about the Ashes, or the Tri-Nations rugby, which has taken an interesting turn.
SPEERS:
Far more palatable topics I'm sure. Prime Minister we thank you very much for your time today.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you.
[ends]