PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Howard, John

Period of Service: 11/03/1996 - 03/12/2007
Release Date:
24/03/2006
Release Type:
Interview
Transcript ID:
22187
Released by:
  • Howard, John Winston
Interview with Neil Mitchell Radio 3AW, Melbourne

MITCHELL:

Prime Minister good morning.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good morning.

MITCHELL:

Did you kiss every member of the Australian basketball team last night?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes I did and it was very, how shall we put it, a very excitable moment. They were, they played well, they had a huge win, the crowd was exuberant, they were exuberant and so was I, and so I went over and I did. I plead guilty.

MITCHELL:

It's been a great Games so far. What do you think it does for the country, it does for the city?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think it does a lot. The sense of wellbeing and friendliness around Melbourne, and I have been here apart from going up to Queensland on Wednesday to visit the cyclone area, I have been here the whole week and I will stay here until Monday morning and Mr Blair and I will then go up to Canberra. The mood around Melbourne has been fantastic. I have walked around the city a lot. Everybody's friendly, they're always friendly, but they're more than friendly and there's a sense of pride; civic pride. Melbourne does these things better, in my view, than any other city because there is a sense of community cohesion and a common attitude and reaction in Melbourne like no other city. Sydney's very different in these events, I mean the Olympic Games were absolutely fantastic but Sydney is a more disaggregated city than Melbourne.

MITCHELL:

Did you, I mean you have been a politician for a long time and you don't take these things too seriously, but a lot of people were very impressed by the response you got from the public at the opening ceremony. Did you notice that? I mean you got the cheer?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yeah well a few people did remark on that. My hearing plays tricks with me sometimes on those occasions and I really was told by a number of people that it was a good reaction. That's nice but I don't ever get too carried away by those things. But I certainly have found a friendly reaction. People do react in a positive way to these sorts of events and I think it does enormous things for the country, to see people cheering for Australia, but also cheering for other countries as well. There was a fantastic reaction when Papua New Guinea won a gold medal in one of the swimming events a few nights ago and the applause for that bloke was as strong as it had been for any Australian. I think we have been a very sporting crowd on this occasion. There's been no booing, no acrimony. Sure we've gone delirious when an Australian has won but we have been generous about other people. There is something about the Commonwealth Games. They call it the friendly games and when you experience it for a long time, and this is the most sustained exposure I've had to a Commonwealth Games ever, it certainly is the case that it's friendly.

MITCHELL:

Great moment with Jana Pittman last night. I was talking to her earlier and she's sort of rebuilding herself in public eyes. Do you think she's had a bit of a rough deal?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh well, I think she's a person who gets very engaged. I listened to her this morning when I was out walking and she articulates, she verbalises her feelings, and when that happens you always get varied reactions. If you're a person who is very reticent then people just react to you according to your sporting performance. If you're somebody who trades every blow, so to speak, and articulates every feeling, then people will have different views about her.

MITCHELL:

A number of athletes have disappeared and seem to want to stay in Australia. Is there a chance they could be allowed to?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well that would entirely depend upon the circumstances of each individual case. We don't give blanket asylum to people who leave sporting teams visiting this country. If they have some bona fide reason, but it would have to be a bona fide reason, and I don't want any other athletes who might be thinking along the lines to imagine that all you have to do is stay behind and we will keep you. No, it doesn't work that way.

MITCHELL:

Prime Minister the AWB bribery scandal. Do you think people care about it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I care about it. I want to get to the bottom of it. That's why I established the Cole inquiry. This seems to have been forgotten.

MITCHELL:

But what about the electorate? What about the voters?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I mean in the end that's a matter for individuals to decide. I'm not going to make a judgement about the level of interest in the community. But we established the inquiry because we were concerned about the allegations coming out of the Volcker inquiry and we have gone further than any government in the world in trying to get to the bottom of this. And it's been, for the Government, it's been a challenging exercise and inevitably there's criticism and because snippets of information are reported out of context, false impressions are created.

MITCHELL:

Well what was the context in this? Both Alexander Downer and you, you on October 31st last year told the Parliament that the Government had cooperated fully with the Volcker inquiry. It's now obvious that Alexander Downer tried to prevent diplomats speaking to Volcker and also restricted access to documents. How is that cooperating fully?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well the basis on which he did that was quite valid.

MITCHELL:

It's hardly full cooperation.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well hang on. Once again you've got to see the context of this. The cooperation didn't extend to just arbitrarily handing over classified documents which were the intelligence of foreign countries. It's very interesting that this has come out because I have got in front of me a newspaper report, Sydney Morning Herald 13th of January 2005, in which a spokesman for the Oil-For-Food Inquiry, that's the Volcker inquiry, praised Australia for providing information that had been helpful and valuable. He went on to say that the Australians have been expeditious in providing information. He also said that we had been more helpful than most other countries. Now this is a spokesman, incidentally, for the food for oil inquiry. Incidentally that report was written by Caroline Overington who was then the Herald correspondent in New York and is now the principal reporter on this issue for The Australian newspaper. Now the point I'm simply making is that Downer's concern late in 2004 was that the inquiry would have access to classified foreign intelligence. I think that was a legitimate concern.

MITCHELL:

What about interviewing people involved?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well my understanding is that the differences that existed at the time were worked out and if you look at the totality of the Government's response, there was total cooperation. And certainly when concerns were raised with me, as appeared in the press this morning, I in fact wrote on the minute there had to be total cooperation and transparency.

MITCHELL:

Initially there was not total cooperation and transparency was there?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well the reason for that, the reason for the reaction, I don't automatically accept every assessment that was made by the UN committee. I mean we have to be careful in these situations that you don't accept every single claim that is made about the Government and assume the worst on every occasion about the Government, you have to look at the context.

MITCHELL:

I understand that. But I'm just looking at what's been said and both you and Mr Downer have said full and complete cooperation. Initially there wasn't.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well yes but you have to see that in the context of Downer's legitimate concerns about making available foreign intelligence and that was a reasonable concern. Bear in mind, and these remarks are not directed at Mr Volcker in anyway, I've great regard for him, but bear in mind that the United Nations itself, in a lot of its agencies, was up to this thing to its ears.

MITCHELL:

Is it an indication that how your office works? June 2003, the other documents we've seen have come through, not drawn to your attention, this is the eve of when we're going to invade a country.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well actually, no, June was actually three months afterwards. It was March.

MITCHELL:

Oh okay, I'm sorry.

PRIME MINISTER:

But I mean, look, I understand the point.

MITCHELL:

We're at war, we've invaded a country and we're getting information here through about bribes being paid and it's not drawn to your attention.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, well it wasn't because there are hundreds of cables every week and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which was the action department, did not believe the claim that had been made. I mean we have to cut to the chase on this. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, on the basis of a number of things, and I could understand and support the assessment they made at the time. I'm not dumping on them. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade made an assessment at the time and it included discussing the matter with AWB that the allegations were not well founded. Now you can say with the benefit of hindsight that that judgement was wrong, but it was not a corrupt judgement, it was not a superficial judgement.

MITCHELL:

Well was it a wrong judgement?

PRIME MINISTER:

Look we all, with the benefit of hindsight, might say it was.

MITCHELL:

I just find it extraordinary the document wasn't brought to your attention. Are you concerned by that?

PRIME MINISTER:

No I'm not concerned about it because at the time the view very strongly amongst our departmental advisers was that most of the complaints being made about AWB derived from commercial competitors and they had reason to have that view. The view inside the Government was that AWB was a great champion of the Australian wheat industry and our major preoccupation was not to allow the Americans or the Canadians to grab our share of the Iraqi wheat market. Now if I am to be criticised for that, well let people criticise me and if, with the benefit of hindsight, a wrong judgement was made by the Government, well we all live in a world where if you had the benefit of hindsight you'd alter a lot of things. You have to look at the conduct in the context and I do defend what the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade assessment was at the time. Now you can say well it was wrong, but that's with the benefit of hindsight.

MITCHELL:

Did Alexander Downer operate properly at all times?

PRIME MINISTER:

I'm satisfied he did.

MITCHELL:

What about Mark Vaile?

PRIME MINISTER:

I'm satisfied he did too. I defend their behaviour.

MITCHELL:

None of your Ministers are culpable here?

PRIME MINISTER:

There has been no finding by the commission that anybody's been culpable at this stage, but I do not believe on what I have seen that either of those men, and they're the two people principally in the firing line, if I can put it like that, either of them has been culpable. The commission will make a finding in relation to AWB and the commission will make findings of fact, I believe, in relation to the conduct of this issue to by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and obviously if the commission wants to talk to any of us, including me, then we are available.

MITCHELL:

I'll take a break, come back with calls and more questions for the Prime Minister.

[break]

Twenty minutes past nine, the Prime Minster is with me, Mary-Anne go ahead please.

CALLER:

Mr Howard good morning.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good morning.

CALLER:

Look in keeping with the theme of the Commonwealth Games. When world disasters occur Australia is always first out of the block; due for gold I reckon. Anyone helping us with Cyclone Larry, I am curious and hope your answer is yes?

MITCHELL:

Who do you mean, you mean other countries?

PRIME MINISTER:

You mean other countries?

CALLER:

Yes other countries?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, they are not but George Bush offered help and I said thank you very much but we can look after ourselves. I would have thought that most Australians would support that response. But let me say on his behalf that he did ring up straight after it happened, he did express his concern, he did offer help. Now he gets a lot of criticism from a lot of people in this country but, be it remembered that he was the one world leader that actually got in touch with me to express concern and to offer help. The reason I didn't accept that offer was that I felt that most Australians would believe, and they're right, that we can look after this ourselves, we have got great resources. And I think the other world disasters you're referring to, much in all as we worry about what happened in Far North Queensland; there were 275,000 Indonesians killed in the tsunami and there were 70,000 Pakistanis killed in the earthquake. So we have to keep a sense of proportion.

MITCHELL:

Do you support the appointment of Peter Cosgrove to oversee it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh yes.

MITCHELL:

Can any more be done?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I checked on this before coming onto the programme and my office has been in touch with the Mayor of Innisfail late yesterday afternoon, with the local member Bob Katter and they both report that some of the problems of a couple of days ago have now substantially eased. There are three one-stop-shop centres for people getting relief assistance. The big outstanding difficulty is reconnecting the power because if you don't have power, you don't have refrigeration, you can't properly cook and the sewerage system which relies quite heavily on electricity doesn't function properly, supermarkets don't work, the ATMs don't work. So getting the power reconnected and the Ergon fellows, the electricity authority fellows, are working overtime and have to cope with a lot of rain in the first couple of days. I don't offer any criticism of the Queensland Government in relation to this. I think Mr Beattie has done all that he can in the circumstances. He did discuss beforehand the appointment of General Cosgrove with me and I fully support it. I get the sense that things are getting a little better, but it is tough. I mean if you have lost your house, you might have lost your job, you can't cook, you've got no power, you do get a bit stroppy and that is very understandable. But my reaction on Wednesday was that although some people were getting close to breaking point the great bulk of the people were handling it quite well.

MITCHELL:

Hello Robert, go ahead please Robert.

CALLER:

Good morning Mr Howard, good morning Neil. Just wondering if you are going to take legal action against Kevin Rudd for calling you a liar publicly?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I am not, I don't have a lot of resources of my own and I couldn't ask the Government to finance such an action.

MITCHELL:

Does it offend you?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well it is not true, let me say that. I deny it. I have got a very thick skin, I think Mr Rudd cheapened himself. The public does not like we politicians calling each other liars. I don't believe that I have actually ever used that word in relation to Mr Beazley. I might have said something he said was a lie or untrue. I try not to use that sort of language. I don't think it helps because in the end it is demeaning to the person who uses it and the Australian public will make a judgement about me and my candour and truthfulness. I have been around a long time and they are better judges of my character (inaudible).

MITCHELL:

Do you think they trust you?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I am always reticent about making self assessments, but the public have re-elected me on four occasions so that must mean something I hope, touch wood.

MITCHELL:

But people talk about children overboard, weapons of mass destruction, and now the AWB and say...

PRIME MINISTER:

In none of those cases did I tell any lies. I mean what lie did I tell about...

MITCHELL:

Selective ignorance is the way it is described.

PRIME MINISTER:

I beg your pardon.

MITCHELL:

Selective ignorance.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well that is wrong. I mean the weapons of mass destruction I believed on the basis of the intelligence that Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, so did Mr Rudd, so did Mr Crean, so did President Chirac. The argument, let me remind you, I know it might sound boring now but seeing you raised it, the argument then was not about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, it was how we should deal with her possession of those weapons, that was the argument.

MITCHELL:

Prime Minister, Bernadette Young has called in, she is a person I spoke to up in Queensland yesterday, she is in the middle of the cyclone area and I said to her yesterday that if you want to speak to the Prime Minister do so. Hello Bernadette.

CALLER:

Hello.

MITCHELL:

How is it going up there?

CALLER:

Ah yeah alright, we are getting on with it, yeah. It is incredible the amount of support we have had from everybody, they are doing their very best to get us back on track. They are setting up generators in the main street and just still trying to clear up.

MITCHELL:

Where exactly are you Bernadette?

CALLER:

We're in Babinda.

PRIME MINISTER:

It is John Howard speaking Bernadette, we called in briefly to Babinda...

CALLER:

That is right.

PRIME MINISTER:

...the other day and I am pleased to hear what you say. We all know it is quite difficult but my sense is that are a lot of people helping and it is gradually getting together, but if you don't have any power; have you got power?

CALLER:

No.

PRIME MINISTER:

No, that is the biggest, in my view, the biggest single obstacle to people feeling a whole lot better and once we get the power reconnected, or the Queensland authorities get it reconnected. And they are working very, very hard to do that...

CALLER:

Oh I can see.

PRIME MINISTER:

...they are working flat out. I met some of the blokes who were doing it on Wednesday and they were clearly quite exhausted from having had worked very hard.

MITCHELL:

Bernadette you are talking to the top, is there anything you need?

CALLER:

Well we do have one question, small business owners were wondering; we know that you were talking about businesses that have a staff of 20 or less. There are quite a few of us in town who have shops that are just sole traders.

MITCHELL:

You've got a hair dressing salon.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well you would qualify, you don't have to have any employees. The point is that the 20 full time staff is an upper limit and it is 20 full time positions, it is not a headcount, it is 20 full time positions. But if you are just a sole trader, or you've got one employee, sure you qualify. I mean, if your business has been completely unaffected then you don't, but assuming your business has in some way been affected you can get a $200,000, up to $200,000 concessional loan and the first $50,000 of it, of $200,000, is a grant.

CALLER:

Right.

PRIME MINISTER:

And the concessional part of it is an interest rate of four per cent and no payment of principle or interest for two years. So you would have nine years to pays to pay off the $150,000. So that is a fairly concessional loan.

CALLER:

It is, it is, absolutely. It was just the people with their own little...

PRIME MINISTER:

Well you are definitely entitled.

MITCHELL:

Bernadette hang on, if you like we'll get a number for you. Perhaps we can pass it onto the Prime Minister's people if you need more information on that. Bernadette is feeling very isolated and rang in for that reason. Prime Minister in Afghanistan there is a possibility that they are going to execute a man who changed from Islam to Christianity because he's become a Christian. Have we protested?

PRIME MINISTER:

We have and I am going to personally raise protest, again, to the President of Afghanistan. I think this is appalling. When I saw the report about this I felt sick, literally. It was an appalling thing that we are fighting, we are putting the lives of Australian soldiers on the line and this sort of thing is allowed. I mean this is outrageous. The idea that a person could be punished because of their religious beliefs and the idea they might be executed is just beyond belief. So I am very unhappy about it. The Foreign Minister has said that we have objected and I will be taking up the matter personally. I will be writing to the President of Afghanistan reinforcing our concerns. There can be no justification of any description for this. I would have the same level of anger if the person were under threat because he became Jewish or Islamic or whatever. It's got nothing to do with the identity of the religion, it's the principle.

MITCHELL:

Well a local clergy is saying if the Government bows to western pressure, the people will tear this man to pieces and he should have his head cut off.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well that is appalling.

MITCHELL:

These are our friends.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well they're not our friends. I don't want friends like that. Whoever said that is no friend of Australia's, but it's still a very divided country and no doubt there will be some people saying oh well there's a balancing act that's got to be performed, but on issues like this we are very unhappy.

MITCHELL:

Would you like to introduce compulsory school for 4 year olds?

PRIME MINISTER:

I ought to hear the debate. I do think those early years are important. I would like to hear the debate. I think preschool is very valuable. I also think time spent with parents when children are very young is the most valuable thing of all. At the risk of sounding, in the eyes of some, old fashioned, I don't think there is any replacement from the time a child is born until the time a child goes to school, there is no real replacement for the virtual constant care and attention of a mother or father or both, or if sadly one of those is not around, another close relative or friend. I think the constancy of the focus of one individual who at a very early stage is seen by the child as the child's mentor or protector and somebody who loves the child unconditionally, I think that is priceless and can't ever be replaced later on.

MITCHELL:

Maybe it's more pre-budget chest-thumping from the Ministers but I noticed a suggestion there will be a pay increase for the Army, the Reservists as well. Is that right?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I don't want to comment specifically on that but we are looking to make the Reserves more attractive and I made it very clear in the election campaign and also last year and again this year that we would put more resources into defence and that's going to be reflected. I mean we have to spend more money on defence. That's been a view I've held for a long time and it's a view that I will continue to articulate until I feel the levels of defence spending in Australia have reached an appropriate level.

MITCHELL:

I know you need to get away. A couple of quick ones if I could. Do you believe that the heat has gone out of the industrial relations changes?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think people will wait and see. The real test of how the public reacts to these changes is how they find them and the laws are coming into operation next Monday and I would say to people just put out of your mind the noise and rhetoric, if you like, from both the unions and the business side of it and just wait and experience them. I believe as time goes by people will find sure there's more flexibility in relation to unfair dismissals, and some people who have been a disruptive influence in a small firm may not find it as easy to remain. On the other hand, there will be a lot more jobs created because small business won't be frightened of taking on new staff.

MITCHELL:

Who will decide they are a disruptive influence and what's a disruptive influence?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well in the end judgements have got to be made, but they are best made at a local level.

MITCHELL:

Is the disruptive influence a busy shop steward or is it somebody else?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, somebody who is in a small office of five people who is constantly and unreasonably complaining about the way the office works. I mean so many people have spoken to me and said I know exactly what you're talking about; we work in a small office and there's one person who makes our life a misery. Now that doesn't happen all that often but when it does, when it has happened in the past it has been very hard for an employer to do anything about it.

MITCHELL:

What did it cost us to blow up the Pong Su?

PRIME MINISTER:

I don't know off hand.

MITCHELL:

Why did we do it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well it's a long-standing maritime tradition, apparently, to destroy evil, or the carriers of evil cargoes.

MITCHELL:

Do you think it sends a message to North Korea?

PRIME MINISTER:

It could. I don't think that's the main purpose of it though.

MITCHELL:

I wonder if I can just ask you quickly too, I know your attitude on drugs. Three AFL players have tested positive twice to, we don't know if it's cocaine, ecstasy or cannabis, but an illegal drug. They can't be named because the courts have taken an injunction on this while they head the case. The AFL has called in the Federal Police to investigate the leak, they're questioning journalists. Do you think that they should be named? I mean this is an anti-drugs campaign as much as a sports campaign.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well we have a protocol that says that they shouldn't be named until they've been given due process, and that can mean a variety of things given the circumstances, I guess. I support that approach. I don't think they should be given any greater immunity than an ordinary citizen in relation to this and if they are well perhaps there's a reason for questioning that. I don't want to single them out, they're high profile, I assume they are, I don't know who they are, who I'm talking about. But as a matter of principle I think that people are entitled to due process, but if the rest of the community has to have the indignity of being named, well that same approach be taken in sport.

MITCHELL:

And apart from cuddling the entire basketball team, your highlight of the games?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think, believe or not, the end of that 20 kilometre walk. I mean I am a bit of walker myself and I sort of have a (inaudible) when one, two, three Australians won. I think (inaudible) McCann's victory was probably the emotional highlight in a way, but I found the walk finish, which I witnessed very close up, very exciting.

MITCHELL:

And the 50 km walk is underway at the moment, the men's. How far do you walk every morning or is it done by time?

PRIME MINISTER:

I walk about, probably about 4kms. I walk about half an hour to 40 minutes each morning.

MITCHELL:

Is it right George Bush had trouble keeping up?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yeah, but I think to be fair to him he'd had a gammy knee. He's pretty fit George. He's very fit.

MITCHELL:

Thank you very much for your time.

PRIME MINISTER:

Okay.

MITCHELL:

The Prime Minister and the Presidential report.

[ends]

22187