PRIME MINISTER:
Well ladies and gentlemen I've called this news conference, particularly, to say how delighted I am that unemployment has fallen again. To note the fact that since WorkChoices legislation was passed by the Parliament, 159,000 new jobs have been created. Yet we were told by Mr Shorten, by Mr Beazley and by others in the labour movement that the new industrial relations legislation would be a green light for mass sackings. And whilst I'm not at this stage able to claim, and I won't claim, that the new jobs are directly attributable to the abolition of the unfair dismissal laws, it's too early to make that claim. It is not, however, too early to refute completely on the basis of these figures, the outrageous claims that were made by the Labor Party at the time and by the unions at the time, that this new legislation would lead to mass sackings. We now have unemployment at 4.8 per cent, it's the lowest since August of 1976 and it's a wonderful thing that the key social economic indicator in Australia should be so strong. I mean there is no more important obligation on a government than to create the climate where Australians who want job, can have a job. And on that indicator, this Government has been outstandingly successful.
I know there may be others in the community who might have wanted the figures to go in another direction for their own political purposes, but I'm very pleased for Australians and for the sake of, particularly the young, that the job market is so strong. About 80 per cent of the new jobs in the last few months have been full time jobs and whilst that figure will bounce around, and let me say the unemployment figure will move around, but the fundamental direction of unemployment in Australia today is providing great hope. And it's a reflection of the strength of the economy, and it's a reason why we should be optimistic, and it's a reason why we should put our faith in further reforms and not retreat with fear into the policies of rollback and regression to earlier regulated labour markets which so abysmally failed when the economic indicators and the economic currents turned in the wrong direction.
This country has every reason to maintain its optimism about the future, we have every reason to embrace with courage further economic reforms, that is why we are pressing ahead with our WorkChoices legislation. But the real message out of these figures is that the mass sackings did not come. Mr Shorten and Mr Beazley said there'd be mass sackings, they have not come. And just as the Office of Workplace Services has exposed the dishonesty of the ACTU campaign, so it is fair to say that the mass sackings that we were told were going to come, haven't come. Now as to whether in the fullness of time it's demonstrated that these figures, and any consolidation of them, are directly the result of the removal of the unfair dismissal laws, as I say, it's too early to make that claim and I do not make it. But the preliminary returns, the early polling if I can put it that way, is encouraging. And the openers have made a solid start.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister the economy's clearly powering along, the Reserve Bank is worried about wage-push inflation. These figures today would probably add to those concerns wouldn't they?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I had a look at that because I thought I might be asked that, and even the monetary policy report that was released last week, the Reserve Bank said that although the labour market remained tight, the outlook for wages remains stable. Low unemployment of itself does not create a reason to lift interest rates. The relevant factor is the contribution of wage increases to inflation, that's the relevant factor, and I might say that in a tight labour market a less regulated industrial relations system is more likely to contain inflationary pressures than a more heavily regulated one, because if you throw your mind back to the early 1980s when we had a very highly regulated labour market, and to the early 1990s, when we had a very deep recession, it was the greater rigidity and the remorseless flowing through to the economy of centralised wage fixation decisions which threw so many people out of work. So the argument frankly is that in a tight labour market a less regulated system is more likely to contain unreasonable increases in wages. Now increases in wages are eminently affordable and an entirely desired thing provided they're based on productivity. And the good news of the last 10 years is that we've had a lot of wage increases. We continue to have them, but they have been more heavily based on productivity in the past. Yes Michelle.
JOURNALIST:
If further reforms are very desirable Mr Howard, surely the logic of that is that they include industrial relations reforms?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I use that expression in the present tense. Now don't try and hang on that remark a suggestion that I have further industrial relations reforms in mind. I'm talking very much in the present tense. I regard these industrial relations reforms as very much the needed package and I don't have any more in contemplation. So let me make that very clear.
JOURNALIST:
So further industrial relations changes are off the agenda before the next election are they?
PRIME MINISTER:
Except fine-tuning.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister why would removing unfair dismissal laws in your mind perhaps stimulate more hiring by employers?
PRIME MINISTER:
Why?
JOURNALIST:
Yes, what would motivate the employers?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well don't ask me, ask every small business in the country. If small business think they can take on some extra staff and know that if some of them, for whatever combination of reasons don't work out, they can be let go without having to pay pay away money of 30 or $40,0000 a year, they will do so. I mean that is the explanation and that has been the basis of our approach and small business' approach to this legislation for many years.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, you've just met with Senator Fielding to discuss, amongst other issues, migration. Are you considering further fine-tuning to the migration laws to try and get it through the Senate next week?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I have no idea, I have no idea how Senator Fielding is going to vote. It was a good discussion. We discussed a number of things, but Senator Fielding is his own man and I am not considering any further changes to the legislation.
JOURNALIST:
Was one of those other issues the question of stem cell research?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't intend to say what the other issues were. It was a range of issues, but because it's obvious that the meeting has taken place at a time when the migration legislation is being discussed, it's silly not to acknowledge that that was one of the issues. But I have no idea how he is going to vote, and if you want further information, go and talk to him. He is his own man and everybody should understand that.
JOURNALIST:
So you did discuss stem cells this morning with Senator Fielding?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I have indicated in answer to Mr Middleton that I am not going to say what other matters were discussed, except to say that there were quite a lot of things discussed.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, Australia's own Chief Scientist actually said yesterday during the launch of Science Week that he thought that Cabinet had adopted a too cautious approach to stem cells, that he believes it's something that scientists should be able to pursue.
PRIME MINISTER:
This is Mr Peacock?
JOURNALIST:
This is Mr Peacock.
PRIME MINISTER:
Dr Peacock, I'm sorry.
JOURNALIST:
Dr Peacock. Will you allow him to address Cabinet on this issue? Do you think he's wrong when he says that Cabinet is being too cautious on this issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I like and respect Dr Peacock. Address Cabinet, I don't know. We don't normally do that, but I'm not frightened to hear his views and I'm sure I'll have an opportunity in different ways to talk to him about it, but I don't want that answer to be taken as a commitment, yes, we will have him address Cabinet. Do I think he's wrong? Well, he's looking at it from a totally scientific point of view and I respect that. Our disposition is, as you know, that I am going to have a discussion in the Party Room and let everybody have a go and express their views on it. It's not an easy issue this, and I don't think people should be too theological or too doctrinaire. I think I understand the sensitivities but I also understand, you know, we're dealing with a fairly important fundamental issue and I would want to take, as I always do, the counsel of my parliamentary colleagues.
JOURNALIST:
Are you rethinking the idea of a conscience vote on the stem cell issue?
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh no, the view of the cabinet on that and I suspect a view of the great majority of my colleagues is as I've enunciated.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, after the confrontation this morning outside the Parliament between Mr Tuckey and Mr Beazley over the migration laws, are you concerned that people are getting a bit punchy about this?
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't think that altercation reflected well on either of them. Bear in mind, of course, Mr Beazley does aspire to be the Prime Minister. But I think, far worse than that has been the performance of the Opposition in Parliament over the last couple of days. I mean here we are dispatching an additional 150 Australian soldiers to Afghanistan in very dangerous circumstances and the best the Labor Party can do the same day is to produce a toy chicken. And if anybody thinks that that was a unilateral, isolated gesture by one Labor Member, it wasn't. Observing the body language of the entire frontbench of the Labor Party, they were involved in it themselves, all of them. They knew, it was all part of, you know, a little ruse. I don't think that reflects well on them, I don't think it reflects well on the Parliament. I mean we're back here to debate serious issues. People are worried about high petrol prices. They want to debate the economic future of the country. They want to know where the two parties stand. They feel heavily, the further defence commitment to Afghanistan. The situation is getting worse there, and so at Question Time, the best the Labor Party can do is play around with a toy chicken. I don't think it's a bit funny.
JOURNALIST:
Should name calling like ignorant twit and evil little shit be allowed to stand in the Hansard?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, if you ask me that question, I don't think it is either, but they are matters for the Speaker. I don't think those sorts, I really thought that the exchanges and the behaviour yesterday, I mean, I think it demeaned those who were the perpetrators of it, and the person against whom it was clearly directed has only risen in stature as far as I am concerned, and I am sure as far as all of his parliamentary colleagues are concerned.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard there does seem to be some frustrations with the Speaker's ruling though on both sides of politics. Are you satisfied that Mr Hawker has the authority to keep parliament...
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh, the Speaker retains the confidence of the Government.
JOURNALIST:
Were you disappointed that three, it seems, of your backbenchers were not swayed by your requests that they abstain from today's vote rather than cross the floor?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I never like members of my parliamentary party, how shall I put it, departing from the overwhelming majority view of the Party Room. It's not just me, this thing's been very extensively debated. But I am not going to engage in a slanging match with them. As I indicated yesterday, I don't engage the practice of yelling at my colleagues, I continue to work with all of my colleagues. Of course I am disappointed, but it's a difficult issue, and any government that's been in for a long period of time, you will have issues such as this. But the Australian public should remember that what we're about here is further strengthening an already strong border protection regime and they should also be reminded, of course, that the Labor Party is against further strengthening of our border protection legislation. And this legislation, if it runs into difficulties, and let's not speculate too far in advance on that, then everyone will know that the Labor party voted as a block to oppose it.
JOURNALIST:
Just back on IR, the appointment of Joe Hockey and this taskforce is that a concession by you that you are losing the PR war out there with voters on industrial relations?
PRIME MINISTER:
It's recognition that this is an important issue. These IR laws are essential to further entrench the prosperity of Australia. We do not want them to be rolled back, we think that would be damaging for Australia's future. There is a lot of misinformation out there, and almost on a daily basis now the unions and the Labor Party have been caught out misleading the public and I don't intend to leave any stone unturned to make sure that the other point of view is put, and put very powerfully and put very strongly.
JOURNALIST:
Is it a vote of no confidence in Mr Andrews though, that he's not able to...
PRIME MINISTER:
No, it's got nothing at all to do with that. I mean just because you have an Assistant Minister, I mean there is an Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Revenue, that doesn't mean that I lack confidence in the Treasurer. There is an Assistant Minister for Defence as well as carrying the Veterans Affairs portfolio, it doesn't mean I lack confidence in the Defence Minister, it's a just a matter of commonsense. Mr Andrews carries a very heavy load, he's got the employment portfolio, he's got major Welfare to Work measures, he's got also industrial relations, and I think Mr Hockey who will enter the fray with enthusiasm and energy, will make a contribution. And I don't apologise for building up the firepower, if you like, in a very important battle, that's good tactics isn't it? Is this cold enough, or do you want to finish?
JOURNALIST:
Senator Joyce seems a little irritated with something you said at a Coalition dinner the other night, have you spoken to him about he plans to vote on the asylum bill?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I haven't had any discussion. Can I say, I didn't know about that until somebody in my press office mentioned it to me, and look I've reflected on my remarks and I figured in all the circumstances, they were quite rounded. And I think as you know, I never set out to give offence to any of my colleagues, and hang on, hang on, I don't, you know, I do recall during the speech I paid a very warm tribute to the Coalition and the cooperation and I particularly praised the Leader of the National Party in the Senate, Senator Boswell. I thought all my remarks were unexceptional in the circumstances, but naturally, if anybody took offence I regret that. I don't set out to do it.
JOURNALIST:
Does Wilson Tuckey get a telling off from you Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look I talk to all of my colleagues on a regular basis.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, (inaudible) the Government's thinking on relief as you say at the margins, on petrol pricing?
PRIME MINISTER:
We continue to consider that and, well, I don't have anything further to say, but the issue remains under very active consideration.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister...
PRIME MINISTER:
I thought you all wanted to go in from the cold.
JOURNALIST:
On LPG conversions....
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
JOURNALIST:
...that's the plan that you've come up with, would it be a global plan or would it exclude those states that already have such a program?
PRIME MINISTER:
We would never discriminate in any way against any state of the Commonwealth.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard there's a suggestion in this morning's press that the Government might have to amend the asylum laws as they stand to get them through the Senate. You were firm earlier that there would no changes. Do you remain firm...
PRIME MINISTER:
I am not aware of that, what paper was that in?
JOURNALIST:
I think it was in The Australian, that there might be a need for some amendments. Are you still firm that the legislation...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think all the amendments we've made are fair and reasonable and I don't, I think I was asked earlier are we contemplating further amendments? The answer to that is no. Are we contemplating further amendments? No.
JOURNALIST:
Does that...
PRIME MINISTER:
Look let's not, you know, life is an ever-moving and fascinating journey.
JOURNALIST:
Yesterday at an Indonesian book launch for Ali Alatas' book, a former foreign affairs official said that in relation to East Timor, that Indonesia had mishandled the issue, that there had been bribery of militias and he was effectively conceding some sort of culpability on the part of Indonesia. How much of a surprise was that to you and what's your response?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't think I've ever argued that the Indonesian militia, the Indonesians were free from criticism, I don't think I've ever argued that. Thank you.
[ends]