PRIME MINISTER:
Ladies and gentlemen Mr Andrews and I have called this news conference to announce with pleasure the appointment of Mr Nicholas Wilson, who's with us, as the new Executive Director of the Office of Workplace Services. He's had a very distinguished industrial career, both publicly and privately; he has previously occupied the position of Industrial Register at the AIRC. As you know as part of the Workchoices reforms the Government is investing an extra $97 million in the Office of Workplace Services over a period of four years. That means we'll have more than 200 workplace services inspectors located around Australia and they'll be in 28 separate locations. It's an indication of the Government's determination to ensure that the standard under the new legislation is fully met and that the rights and interests of employees under that legislation are fully observed. And my understanding is that certainly in industrial practice in the English speaking world, there is nobody that draws together all of these responsibilities in quite the same fashion. And I welcome a person of that experience to the position. I should point out that whereas the office in the past has been part of the Department, it will now become an independent executive agency, which is important to its freedom of movement and independence of action.
Mr Andrews may want to add to what I've said and before I take questions on that or other matters I do want to make a brief comment about the outcome of the elections in Israel.
MINISTER ANDREWS:
Prime Minister, can I just add that the powers under the Workchoices legislation of the Office of Workplace Services, and particularly inspectors, have been expanded. Up until Monday they did not have a range of powers which they now have and those powers importantly include the ability of inspectors to prosecute matters as of their own right. One of the criticisms in the past is that employees may be reluctant to prosecute matters because it affects an ongoing employment relationship or a future employment relationship. Giving these powers to the inspectors means that they can independently prosecute where they believe a case has been made out and they also have a wide range of powers in relation to investigation including inspection of documents. And so this is a further added protection for employees in Australia under Workchoices.
PRIME MINISTER:
Can I just say in relation to the Israeli election that I offer my congratulations to the Acting Prime Minister of Israel, Mr Olmert, on the fact that the Kadima Party won the largest number of seats in the Knesset. There is still a challenging process of negotiation to be undertaken before a government can be formed, but the very strong likelihood is that he will form the new government in Israel and if that takes place he will have very importantly a mandate in his own right to lead Israel over the next few years to bring about a consolidation of what has been achieved in recent years as a result Ariel Sharon's initiatives. He has indicated that he wants to define Israel's boundaries and that is an important objective. Kadima offers real hope. Certainly the vision of Ariel Sharon of having a force in Israeli politics, drawing on both sides of the traditional divide, committed to a sensible peace process, is one that the Australian Government very strongly supports. As a very strong supporter, close ally and good friend of Israel, but also a country that has long supported the emergence of an independent Palestinian state, we hope for lasting peace in the region and I hope to have the opportunity of speaking to Mr Olmert later today to convey my personal good wishes and tentative congratulations, and certainly congratulations in relation to the outcome of the election. Are there any questions?
JOURNALIST:
Could I ask Mr Wilson, why have you accepted this appointment? And do you think that 200 inspectors will be enough for you to monitor every dispute in every workplace around the nation?
MR WILSON:
Well the reason I've accepted the position is I think that the Office of Workplace Services will play a very vital role in ensuring compliance with the industrial relations legislation that's recently been passed and commenced. I have over 20 years experience in industrial relations and including some inspectorial roles in the past. Certainly I value very much the role that inspectors have to play in workplaces.
JOURNALIST:
Will your inspectors be proactive or reactive?
MR WILSON:
Inspectors will be largely proactive, that is that they will be expected to be in workplaces and they'll be expected to be providing education to workers and employers about how the legislation should work. Of course there are occasions where complaints will be made, many occasions where complaints will be made; the inspectors will be expected to fully investigate and make determinations about how those matters should be finalised including taking compliance or litigation action.
JOURNALIST:
The new regulations on employer record keeping are they enforced now or is there some unofficial grace period for employers to comply with those?
MR WILSON:
Well the regulations are enforced now, there's not an unofficial grace period, there's an official grace period written in to the regulations which means that an inspector is not able to take compliance action for a period of about six months after the commencement of the regulations. Obviously we need to be disseminating the information to employers and employees about the records which should be kept.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister do you share the Treasurer's enthusiasm for a smartcard which he says should store more information than the original Australia card? And what do you make of his simultaneous call for the Government to have more power over the media in relation to the protection of privacy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I haven't seen that second bit I must confess, I've been tied up on studying matters like mental health submissions and other issues that are before the Government at the present time. I haven't seen his remarks in relation to that so I won't try and comment. In relation to the smartcard, I've had a number of discussions with Mr Hockey and my own Department about it, I can see advantages but the debate is yet to be exhausted and we'll see what comes out of it.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister you've no doubt heard the unions have been making lots of claims about people being unreasonably dismissed under your new laws. Has your Government got any evidence, had anything brought to your attention about any real sustainable complaint of employers misusing these new laws an illegal or unreasonable way?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I can't speak for the Department and I don't want to say categorically yes or no in response to that question because information is flowing into the Government all the time and I don't want somebody to contrast my answer with some email that was sent five minutes ago. So I'm not going to fall in to that. But let me just make the general observation that there is monumental hypocrisy by the union movement of the Labor party on this issue. This morning a union leader in Victoria attacked the Victorian Government for dismissing 75 people who were employed by the Department of Environment in Victoria. There's no speech of outrage from Sharan Burrow about that. I will wait with baited breath to hear Stephen Smith get up and rail against that and Kim Beazley rail against it. I mean of course they won't do that because that's been done by the Victorian Labor Government.
I'm not attacking the decision incidentally by the Victorian Government. I mean we really have to get a bit mature about this. People are coming and going from employment all the time. The true test of fairness is the aggregate employment opportunities in the community and the best response to all of this nonsense is the strength of the economy. And the ultimate guarantor of job security in this country, the ultimate guarantee of job security in this country is a strong economy. And this idea that every single movement of a person, of an individual out of job, to another job is sort of the example of the, is an example of the villainy of this legislation, is ridiculous.
I mean I quote the example that 75 people and they have been put off, let go, whatever expression you want to use by the Victorian Labor Government. I await Mr Combet's denunciation.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, how serious do you think the diplomatic problems between Australia and Indonesia are at this point over the Papua issue and are you going to take any sort of initiative to try and smooth them over? Are you going to talk again to the President or whatever?
PRIME MINISTER:
Michelle, this incident has put a strain on the relationship. I think expressions such as crisis, massive problem, are exaggeration, but it has put a strain because there is sensitivity in Indonesia about her sovereignty over West Papua, a sovereignty which Australia has never disputed and a sovereignty which Australia fully respects and fully supports. But we went through a process and this process was in accordance with Australian practise and law and could I perhaps put it in this context. When there were very strong criticisms and strongly expressed views about Schapelle Corby being expressed by Australians on talkback radio and elsewhere, I asked the Australian community, no matter what their feelings were, to respect the Indonesian justice system. Their justice system was their responsibility and their challenge and by and large in the end the Australian community did that. I think in this particular case in a way I am asking the people of Indonesia to understand and respect our processes. We have a process for dealing with these things, it might be different to what Indonesia has, it might not be what Indonesia wants and it clearly hasn't produced the outcome that Indonesia wanted anymore than at the time the outcome of Indonesian judicial process produced, was acceptable to the Australian community. We have to understand that each has control over its own internal processes. I believe that the challenge will pass, I don't believe that it is going to cause any fundamental lasting damage to the relationship and as always if there are initiatives in terms of personal contact with the President or anybody else that can be usefully taken by me they will be.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, on China there is a report today by the Strategic Policy Institute warning that China is becoming an increasingly authoritarian power in the region. I am wondering what your response is to that and also to the comments reported by Premier Wen Jiabao that he is anticipating an acceleration of the process on Free Trade Agreement when he arrives next week.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I certainly will welcome progress on the Free Trade Agreement but I will say again, as I have constantly on this issue that a Free Trade Agreement with China is not the be all and end all of our economic relationship with that country. If we don't have a Free Trade Agreement we will still have a magnificent trading relationship with China and it is important that if we are to progress that agreement that there be measurable gains on both sides and if they can't be achieved then we don't have the agreement. I don't think if that happens to be, turn out to be the case I don't think that should be seen as any kind of setback because the trade relationship Australia has with China is viewed with great envy by most world leaders that I talk to. In relation to China's assertiveness and authoritarianism within the region, China is a big country and China is a country that seeks to look after her own interest, on the other hand in a number of ways China has been a good citizen in the region. China has helped a lot in relation to North Korea. China has played a very constructive role in trying to bring about a changed attitude in Pyongyang and I look forward very much to the Premier's visit, we do have a good relationship with China. I am not starry eyed about it. Australia is a different country and once again on processes we had a Chinese diplomat who defected and at that particular time we said to the Chinese we have to deal with this matter in accordance with the processes of our law and we did. That is the way that nations have to deal with each other. We are not going to change our processes to suit other countries, but equally we should be careful about lecturing other countries to change their processes to suit us.
JOURNALIST:
What about the Premier's comments about Australia's possible sale of uranium to India and what is the possibility or the expectation of China and Australia signing a uranium agreement allowing China to explore for uranium in Australia?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well in relation to India I am interested in what the Premier had to say, but that matter will be determined by the Australian Government and we are not going to change our policy because of a comment from another world leader. I am interested in his view but we have a policy at the present time that precludes the sale of uranium to India because India is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and there's no current intention of changing that policy. In relation to uranium sales to China, negotiations are going well and there may be something to be said on that subject when the Premier comes to Canberra. But if it were to happen, it would be strictly in accordance with the safeguards rules that were established a long time ago and I noticed there was some talk about exploration, exploitation, investment in Australia etcetera. Anything on that front would have to be in accordance with our existing foreign investment policy. There will be no special foreign investment rules in relation to a particular country.
JOURNALIST:
Again on Indonesia, are you personally offended by the publication in Indonesia of a cartoon depicting you and Mr Downer as amorous dingoes with designs on Papua and not necessarily related to that, is it true that you have recently postponed or cancelled a visit planned for Indonesia in the next few weeks?
PRIME MINISTER:
In relation to the cartoons, look I have been in this game a long time. If I got offended about cartoons, golly. Give us a break. In so far as going to Indonesia is concerned, for a while I've been, my office and department have been in discussion with the Indonesians about a visit; when I say for a while, I mean a few weeks. And I would like to pay a visit to Indonesia some time in the next little while and when a date's been arranged I'll let you all know.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what do you think about tax reform as distinct from tax cuts and is the tax system too complicated, does it have too many distortions for the economy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well my view has always been that the average Australian wants a tax cut and if he or she wants a tax cut that desire is not mollified by some long academic speech saying that we have reformed the tax system but you're still paying the same amount of tax. Now I haven't come across many people in my wanderings around this wonderful country who hold that view. That's not to say you can't reform the system. I might also say that a lot of Australians want to make certain that we maintain a proper level of investment in services that they want. So there's always a balance between the two. Do you want my honest opinion of what the average Australian is telling me?
JOURNALIST:
It's too complicated now though.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well life is a bit complicated and the Tax Act reflects the complication of life and the complication of business. I well remember having a meeting with some businessmen about 30 years ago and they said we want a simpler tax act. I said well let's have a Tax Act where you just pay tax on what you earn and you have absolutely no deductions, and then they said but you'd have to allow for depreciation wouldn't you? And then somebody else said you'd have to allow some investment incentive and somebody else said you'd have to allow and in the end it was all back where we started. Now I'm simply saying if you have a complicated way of running a business, you're going to end up with a rather complicated Tax Act. And I really think it is pie in the sky to imagine that with complicated business arrangements that you can have a Tax Act that thin, but I'd like to see it much smaller than it is now.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, do you think Mr Downer is prejudging the Cole inquiry by suggesting that when the Cole inquiry comes out a lot of people will have to eat humble pie?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think Mr Downer is quite legitimately defending himself against some very unreasonable assessments that have been made in recent times. I'll go no further.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, back on Indonesia, how is not contradictory to offer asylum to Papuans and still say that you believe in Indonesian sovereignty and at the very least, is it not a criticism of the way Indonesia manages that province that you can't guarantee that those people will be safe when they go back?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think it's contradictory. I think it's a recognition that we have obligations under international law and the decisions that have been made are in accordance with refugee conventions and refugee protocols that have long applied and to which Australia has been a party.
JOURNALIST:
Are you saying they won't be safe if they go back?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well a judgement was made by a decision maker in DIMA, the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs that is, and I was not a party to that process. And the point is that we have long established rules and if we had tried in some way to sort of ad hoc alter the application of those rules in this case, there would have been the greatest explosion and expressions of outrage under the sun. Now we have followed the rule book and I ask my Indonesian friends to understand that having followed the rule book, that is not a message of hostility to Indonesia. We have great friendship towards Indonesia. The Australian people showed the generosity of their hearts and pockets a little over a year ago towards the people of Indonesia. In a few days time we'll commemorate sadly the deaths of nine Australians who died at Nias on a humanitarian mission to help the people of Indonesia. This country has great goodwill towards Indonesia, but we have our own dignity as does Indonesia. We have our own rules, we are a sovereign nation and we don't bend the rules to, we can't and won't, bend the rules to any country. One more question.
JOURNALIST:
Just in relation to the ACT and the civil unions, can you just explain why you are looking at possibly intervening in relation to that legislation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes, very readily. The legislation is plainly an attempt to remove as far as constitutionally possible, the difference between marriages customarily understood in this country and a civil union between same sex couples. What it seeks to do is to put marriages and civil unions of that category on the same basis. It would provide for the registration of the civil unions along with births, deaths and marriages. It would provide for the same period of notice as required under the Marriage Act. It provides for the same, for a ceremony and it presumes the availability of marriage celebrants that are licensed under the Commonwealth Marriage Act to be involved. Now that seems to me and I think it will seem to most Australians, to be marriage by another name. Marriage, as the Attorney-General said this morning, with everything but the title. Now the Commonwealth Parliament has declared the long standing law of this country, the common law of this country is that marriage is a voluntary union for life for a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. And it was done very deliberately and we therefore look with some scepticism at what the ACT is doing. We're not going to make marriage celebrants available for these ceremonies. We will always seek to remove areas of discrimination against homosexuals, gay and lesbian people, we don't seek to maintain discrimination but there is a special place in Australian society for marriage, the institution of marriage as historically understood, and we do not intend to allow that to be in any way undermined. Thank you.
[ends]