MITCHELL:
First today, in our Canberra studio the Prime Minister, Mr Howard good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Neil, how are you?
MITCHELL:
I'm well, thank you.
PRIME MINISTER:
I can't hear you very well I'm afraid. The volume's not very strong.
MITCHELL:
Okay, well we're working on that. Is it acceptable now?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'll try but it's fainter than normal. Go ahead.
MITCHELL:
How does this work? Telstra runs down the services, takes huge profits out of the community and then as taxpayers we have to pay to fix it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it's never as black and white as that. Telstra came to see us yesterday and put a proposition to us which we will consider. I'm having Government advisers look at the proposition today and we will probably have a look at it next week and then we'll take a decision. Until we've done that, until we have the benefit of the advice of our officials on the Telstra proposal, I'm not going to speculate about it.
MITCHELL:
But they are asking for money?
PRIME MINISTER:
They are wanting us to agree to a proposal which involves an investment by Telstra as well as some investment by the Government. I'm not going to say in what proportions, and I'm not going to take it any further than that. It's a proposal that I believe is worth looking at. I'm not saying we're going to support it, I'm not saying we're going to reject it, but we had a good discussion. It lasted about an hour and a half and we went through a lot of things and it was an opportunity for me and for my senior colleagues to question both the Managing Director and the Chairman of Telstra, to hear their views about improving services, not only in the bush but all around Australia and also to hear their views about the operation of the current competition laws which influence the rivalry between Telstra and their competitors. Now we listened to what they had to say and calmly we're going to get some advice on it and then the Cabinet will consider it. And this is all part of the process of us dealing with the issue of the sale of the Government's remaining share in Telstra and it will be dealt with in a normal fashion by the Government. Proper processes will be followed and we'll make a decision and we'll take that decision to the Joint Party Room.
MITCHELL:
I'm sure you can see the point I made. What's the answer to that? Just philosophically, they've been making profits, they've run the system down, they come to us and say 'well help us fix it.' Why should we? Why should we as taxpayers fund it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well one of the things that we have to take into account is the balance between investment by Telstra in its future and what is a reasonable investment, if any, by the taxpayer in ensuring that services which cannot be delivered by force of competition and the market are nonetheless needed and are nonetheless services that we want delivered.
MITCHELL:
But haven't they run that down?
PRIME MINISTER:
Could I tell you, I am having terrible trouble. I am sorry but I can't hear you very well.
MITCHELL:
No I understand that. I apologise for that. We'll take a break. I'm told we can fix it then. We'll be back in a moment, frustrated, but with the Prime Minister.
[break]
MITCHELL:
20 to Nine. I think we're fixed. I apologise Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Much better, courtesy of Channel Nine.
MITCHELL:
Channel Nine?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. It's too complicated to explain.
MITCHELL:
It was probably a Telstra line causing the problem.
PRIME MINISTER:
Could well be. I'll complain to Sol.
MITCHELL:
The point I was making is why should we pay to fix something they've run down?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well put like that, we shouldn't but they will argue that it's more complicated than that. They will argue that part of the reason why some things have run down is that they have been providing services which are uneconomic and can't be properly subsidised even in a structure of cross subsidisation. And what we have to do, no matter what has occurred in the past, what we have to do is to take a sensible decision about a number of things and that is what we'll be trying to do next week and I hope that we can give the plan Telstra's put forward sensible and fair consideration. I'm not flagging that we're going to accept it, but yesterday's meeting was a good one in the sense that we were able to calmly sit down and spend a bit of time, listen to what Telstra had to say. They put together a proposal that was well argued. I'm not saying I agree with it all, but it was well argued and they had a point of view and we listened and we're now going to get advice from our own people and then take a decision.
MITCHELL:
So is there any question the sale will go ahead sooner rather than later?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well my position in relation to the desirability of the sale, because I don't believe in the long run a company of this size, the biggest in Australia, can forever be half owned by the Government and half owned by individual shareholders. My view on that remains, but we're going to deal with the thing in a sensible fashion. We're not desperate to get an answer tomorrow. We're just going to deal with the thing in an orderly, sensible fashion.
MITCHELL:
So I'm unfair to call Sol the Mexican bandit?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to get engaged in any descriptions. I mean, a lot of people have the liberty of using all sorts of descriptions. I found him an intelligent, pleasant man in what he put yesterday and I treat people how they come at me. He put a proposition, he's got a job to do. It's a big company, he's trying to familiarise himself with the Australian economic, political and social culture. It's different. We've got a lot of things in common with Americans, perhaps not as many though as some Australians and Americans think. There are some significant cultural differences between Americans and Australians and I suppose if you start from the proposition that we're identical you are always over-surprised at the differences.
MITCHELL:
Speaking of such issues, what happened with the bomb that they accidentally dropped on us? Have you got a report on that?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I've got a report that it's happened and when I get, when they've completed the investigation, I'll no doubt....
MITCHELL:
But there's no injuries or anything...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I've not heard of any injury and Neil, things like this will always happen. We hope not very frequently and we hope not any more dangerously, but the idea that you can conduct any kind of military exercise without some kind of potential for mishap is unrealistic.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister has the Government established who that masked man, the terrorist with the Australian accent, who he is?
PRIME MINISTER:
No. Investigations are going on, particularly by the Federal Police but we have not established who he might be.
MITCHELL:
Did you see the reports he was a Private Mathew Stewart?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have read the newspaper reports. I am not going to confirm or deny them, I'm not in a position to do so. The investigation is going on. He does sound like an Australian, although some people who listened to him very carefully thought it could have been a British regional accent, but the Australian, the more I listen to it, it does sound more Australian than English.
MITCHELL:
Yeah it's chilling stuff isn't it?
PRIME MINISTER:
It is chilling stuff and of course it would always be in the interests of Al Qaeda to use someone who was unconditionally a westerner, to use somebody who had a broad Australian or British regional accent would be more valuable to Al Qaeda than to use somebody of Middle Eastern or sub-continental extraction because it would make the point that this is a worldwide movement although it would give the impression rather that it was a worldwide movement even though it isn't a worldwide movement and support for Al Qaeda in this country or in Britain, is absolutely miniscule. But what Al Qaeda does is to always to exploit the propaganda value in the context of western public opinion in anything they do, that is why whenever there is an attack they always say it is related to something that re-ignites an internal political debate in western countries, that is our involvement in Iraq, whether that is the case or not, the are completely opportunistic in the public relations approaches they adopt and in the explanations they use and in the claims that they make.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister are you concerned about what is being taught, I believe there are 29 Muslims schools in Australia, are you concerned by what is being taught in them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Generally no, in some cases I've had advice that there could be cause for concern. Generally speaking though, because in fairness they observe the curriculum.
MITCHELL:
Do we fund them?
PRIME MINISTER:
We fund schools that meet the criteria for Commonwealth funding in the same way that we fund Christian and Jewish, we are completely non-discriminatory.
MITCHELL:
So are we funding some of those of which you are concerned?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if there were any basis for that concern, then we would re-visit the funding.
MITCHELL:
So are we doing that, you're concerned about...
PRIME MINISTER:
What I am really saying is that I am in the process of satisfying myself as to whether there are any things that are being taught that shouldn't be.
MITCHELL:
Should there be a requirement on such schools to teach Australian values such as democracy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there should be a requirement on all schools, I don't think it would be right to say that Muslim schools, well we are going to require you to teach Australian democracy but say to Catholic or Protestant schools, we're not going to require you to do it.
MITCHELL:
No sure.
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean I am strong believer in what you and I might have called civics, I think we have retreated too much, we have become too apologetic about our identify, I think we went through a period in the 70s and 80s where we looked around for reasons to criticise ourselves rather than celebrate the tremendous achievements of this country. I think we did go through a bad, negative, navel-gazing period and I think you've heard me on this subject before.
MITCHELL:
So should we require schools to teach that?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have, going back to the time that David Kemp was Minister for Education we had introduced civics, re-introduced civics and in the end the curriculum is determined by the state government because they control primary and secondary education and I am not trying to disturb that but the Federal Government's role is one of national leadership and of prodding and pushing but as you know it is often difficult with the teacher unions at a state level. Look at the problem we've had trying to get literacy standards accepted. I mean at long last people are accepting literacy standards but six or seven years ago when David Kemp first started a campaign for this we were told it was none of our business and we were told the standards are perfect, well perfect, but they were high enough and many of the unions objected to it, they object to the comparison tables, they even poured scorn on the requirement about the flying of the Australian flag. Now some of them did, not all of them. Now that to me was a metaphor for the scepticism that we have sometimes been greeted with. Now I am not arguing that people be given a bland one sided view of Australian history, I think we should be taught the truth about Australian history, the truth about this country is an overwhelmingly positive one and I think we should be taught that more energetically and I think we should taught the values and the great strength of the philosophy of western civilisation.
MITCHELL:
We'll get some calls for the Prime Minister, 9696 1270. I was talking to your man Andrew Robb yesterday about the industrial laws and I am still a little confused, will anybody be worse off under these new laws?
PRIME MINISTER:
I believe the generality of people will be better off. If you're asking me to give an explicit guarantee in relation to 10 million people, I can't do that, that's impossible.
MITCHELL:
Well how big is the minority that could be...?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't believe there will be any, I mean look...
MITCHELL:
You don't believe anybody is going to be worse off?
PRIME MINISTER:
I mean I believe people generally will be better off but for obvious practical reasons and I am not going to say in relation to each individual person I can guarantee that every last one of the 10 million Australian workers is going to be better off.
MITCHELL:
But you've made such guarantees in the past.
PRIME MINISTER:
Not quite in those explicit terms.
MITCHELL:
[inaudible] worse off.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I have actually visited, had a look at what I said even as far back as 1996 and I talked in generality about the Australian workforce, I talked about there not being a cut in take-home pay. Well I don't believe that these reforms will result in a cut in the take-home pay of Australian workers.
MITCHELL:
So who's going to be vulnerable?
PRIME MINISTER:
Who is going to be vulnerable? Well I believe these reforms which will strengthen the Australian economy, will mean that there will be fewer people that will be vulnerable. I'll tell you who will be even better off than they are now...
MITCHELL:
But who is going to be vulnerable and worse off, everybody seems to be able to tell me who is going to be better off but nobody is capable of saying who is going to be worse off.
PRIME MINISTER:
No look I don't believe people are going to be worse off.
MITCHELL:
Nobody?
PRIME MINISTER:
And Neil, let me repeat what I am saying. I do not believe that people are going to be worse off but I am not going to give an explicit guarantee in relation to 10 million Australian workers, I do not know the precise circumstances that might effect them in relation to issues that are in no way the concern of these industrial relations reforms that might be in some way attached to them. I am simply not going to do that because that is unrealistic and beyond my capacity or beyond the credible capacity of anybody in my position.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, when my children were young they used to refer to a thing called the rude finger, do you know which one it is?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
MITCHELL:
Peter McGauran, no it was Julian McGauran, I apologise, Julian McGauran in the Senate yesterday waved a finger in a rude gesture and escaped serious punishment because he used the wrong finger, isn't that a bit ridiculous. The suggestion was meant to mean something obscene, why wasn't he punished properly and should he be?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I thought his behaviour was wrong, it was unacceptable and he deserves the criticism that he's received and no Member of Parliament should behave like that.
MITCHELL:
Bill Heffernan did the same thing didn't he?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I am not going to go into the detail, you are asking me what my reaction to the incident was.
MITCHELL:
Well that is one incident, Senator Heffernan did the same thing.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I was not in the Senate, I do not control the procedures of the Senate, all I can say is that all Members of Parliament, no matter what their party is, should behave in a proper, polite fashion. I endeavour to do so and I don't approve of that kind of behaviour from anybody.
MITCHELL:
Hello Hugh, go ahead please Hugh.
CALLER:
Well good morning Prime Minister and Neil. Prime Minister, my question to you is, a couple of weeks ago you were talking about individual contracts and the per cent that people needed to vote to change. But even if the majority didn't vote for it, that shouldn't stop the minority going on their individual contracts. We just had one a couple of years ago where 48 per cent did want to go on their individual, an EBA, and we were forced to because of the majority. What's the difference?
PRIME MINISTER:
I am sorry, I don't understand, you've lost me with the description of what happened. So 48 per cent of people wanted to do what?
CALLER:
48 per cent of people who I work with, did want to go, wanted to stay with the award but were forced to go on an EBA.
MITCHELL:
Because the majority voted for it.
PRIME MINISTER:
An EBA, that is not an Australian Workplace Agreement.
CALLER:
Yes but it's the same difference.
PRIME MINISTER:
No I am sorry, an EBA is not an AWA. An EBA was...
CALLER:
Yes but what this view is, the minority should have the choice to go on to an individual contract, whereas we had 48 per cent who did want to go on to...
MITCHELL:
What about...
PRIME MINISTER:
Sorry I would need to know more background before, I am a little puzzled as to the description you've given.
MITCHELL:
Can I just ask a simple question?
PRIME MINISTER:
Sure.
MITCHELL:
Will the eight-hour day be guaranteed as a minimum?
PRIME MINISTER:
Eight hour, well 38 hours a week, yes.
MITCHELL:
Okay. Have you been told the execution of the Bali bombers is close?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have read of that.
MITCHELL:
Would you expect Australia to be told?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well my understanding is that it has not been confirmed by the Indonesian Government, and the answer to your direct last question is yes.
MITCHELL:
Would you still support the execution of those three?
PRIME MINISTER:
Although we do not have capital punishment in Australia and I do not support it, nonetheless we are not raising any objection to the death penalty being metered out to these people.
MITCHELL:
Why?
PRIME MINISTER:
Because they committed a crime in another country that has the death penalty.
MITCHELL:
Prime Minister, the oil prices are absurdly high and every time they get to that level, we talk about it, will you review the tax on a tax on petrol?
PRIME MINISTER:
We don't have any plans to change that. I guess in a sense every time I see the oil price go up I wince like everybody else because I know the pain that it is inflicting on families but we do not have any plans to reduce the excise. The excise is fixed on the volume of the spirit, it is not fixed on the price and therefore the Federal Government is not reaping additional revenue as a result of the increase in the price, there is some increase in the GST take.
MITCHELL:
At $350 million?
PRIME MINISTER:
That is going to the states but it is fair to argue that as people must pay more for petrol unless they drastically reduce their consumption of petrol, they will spend less on other items and those other items that have GST attached to them will therefore involve less GST revenue collection so there could be what the economists call a substitution effect and the increase in GST revenue might be a lot less than people imagine.
MITCHELL:
You must be worried overall about the effect on the economy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes I am, I think the remarkable thing is that it hasn't had a bigger effect. One of the reasons is that we don't rely quite as heavily as we used to on petrol and the other explanation of course is that the economy is incredibly strong and peoples' take-home pay has continued to go up, they've just got a big tax cut, although opposed by the Labor Party. And on top of that we have a 30-year low in unemployment. I mean yesterday we had another 5 per cent we've had 1.7 million new jobs, the purchasing power of Australians has never been greater. I mean going back to industrial relations, people ask me for guarantees, the best guarantee I can give people on industrial relations is my record.
MITCHELL:
Well actually we've got another question on it if you don't mind, Andrew go ahead please Andrew.
PRIME MINISTER:
Sure.
MITCHELL:
Andrew go ahead please Andrew.
ANDREW:
Yes good morning. When I was asking regarding the working hours, I'm talking about at the moment I work in the equine industry and unless by mutual agreement, you can not be made to work more than 8 hours, even though some companies are already breaking that rule.
PRIME MINISTER:
So, sorry, so what's your question?
CALLER:
Under the new legislation are we going to be guaranteed 8 hours or will the company be able to enforce on us...
PRIME MINISTER:
Are you covered by an award?
CALLER:
More than 8 hours per day?
PRIME MINISTER:
Are you covered by an award?
CALLER:
Well at the moment we are yes.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if you continue to be covered by an award nothing will change.
MITCHELL:
And if you're not covered by an award?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if you're not covered by an award, if you negotiate a Workplace Agreement, and bear in mind you can't be threatened with the sack if you don't sign a Workplace Agreement, on an award, the boss can't say if you don't sign a Workplace Agreement I'm going to sack you. It will be the question of the hours you work, when you work the minimum hours of 38 that will be a matter of negotiation.
MITCHELL:
So they could argue that you work two 17-hour days?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it might suit people. I mean, let's have a bit of commonsense about these things. Not everybody is unhappy about the idea of working different hours.
MITCHELL:
That's true, but the workers feel powerless against the bigger organisations.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Neil, I understand some do, that is why we are building in a balance of protections with the greater flexibility. We've got to try and have an industrial relations system that is based on both fairness and commonsense. You can regulate the system to billyo, but that won't save jobs. We had an incredibly highly regulated industrial relations system in the late 1980s and early 1990s when we had the recession. It didn't stop a million Australians being thrown out of work, it didn't stop their real wages falling. At the end of the day, and industrial relations system is only as good as the contribution it makes to our economic strength. It's a strong economy that delivers high wages and low unemployment, not the industrial relations system. All the regulations in the world will not save somebody's job, or push up their wage if the economy falls over. And what we have to do is find an industrial relations system that lifts productivity so that the economy continues to grow and that's why we're undertaking these reforms.
MITCHELL:
Just very quickly, Andy Thomas the Australian astronaut is stepping down. Is there some sort of award or honour for him from Australia do you think?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm sure a lot of people will want that to happen and normally when a lot of people want something like that happen it does happen.
MITCHELL:
And what about Shane Warne? Did you watch his 600?
PRIME MINISTER:
I did. A fantastic performance.
MITCHELL:
Did you send him a message?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'll send him one now and I've had to get ready for this interview. That's hard work Neil.
MITCHELL:
Thank you for your time. In our Canberra studio the Prime Minister Mr Howard.
[ends]