( Q-
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH JOHN JOST, RADIO
21 AUGUST 1989
E OE PROOF ONLY
JOST: on the programme today Australia's Prime Minister Mr
Bob Hawke and Mr Hawke is sitting down in front of me right
now. Good morning Prime Minister.
0 Good Morning John
JOST: Well thanks for joining us.
My pleasure. Sorry I'm late but there was a bit of a
traffic jam.
JOST: I know it is not easy. I understand that. If I
didn't leave home to get in here at 6am I'd probably miss it
myself. I was just wondering as I was listening to your
programme whether you dedicated that first song to the
pilots. JOST: Well I will ask you about the pilots?
I thought you might.
0 JOST: First up not so much about the pilots, about the
tactics of it. I suppose it would be traditional would it
not to apply for a bans cause and then I suppose if the
Pilots Federation breaches that clause to fine or have them
fined for contempt. Why is the Government suggesting that
the pilots be put out of the system? What makes them so
different? Because we have a situation now where the whole wage
fixing process in the country is operating under the
centralised direction of the Industrial Relations Commission
and the wage and salary earners of Australia in general have
submitted to that system in a way which has effected the
capacity to create one and a half million new jobs. These
people are saying well we are not going to be part of that
system. And therefore it is appropriate, as the
Commissioners put to them, well you make your mind up. Be in
it or not. If you're out of it then quite clearly with the
-2-
approbation of the whole of the organized workforce then all
the processes of the law are properly available to be used
against them. Now let me make it clear as I did In my press
conference yesterday John. I don't want to see that. I'm
not trying to push them out of the system. I desperately
would hope that they would make the decision to stay in and
to stop regarding themselves as something different. This
mythology that pilots are trying to create about themselves
that somehow they are unique because they get up there and
fly an areoplane that somehow not only are they sort of
physically above us all but in other ways. It is about time
they in a sense came back to earth.
JOST: They compare themselves to judges.
Well why? Why do they compare themselves to judges?
What in the name of anything that starts to make sense have
they got in common with judges. Look lets get down to the
facts. Lets stop this mythology that pilots are something
different. I mean in terms what are they? They are people
that fly an aeroplane. Great responsibility. But so have
bus drivers got great responsibility.
JOST: Pilots do do exams every year.* They have quite a
high standard of qualification and they have to maintain
those qualifications. Look, of course they have to have qualifications, but
in terms of actually learning to fly, to become a pilot, it
is not something flash. It's a relatively easy thing to do.
There is no mystery about flying an aeroplane. I learnt to
fly an aeroplane when I was at Oxford and flew an aeroplane.
JOST: What sort of aeroplane did you fly?
They were chipmunks, and I tell you what. You compare
these JOST: Hawke and the Chipmunk.
PM: Hawke and the Chipmunk. Yes, had a lot of fun
too. And of course that's a great thing about this
profession. People love it, they want to fly, they get great
pleasure out of flying. It is exhilarating. They want to
get their exhilarition away from their exhilariation as to
what they are worth. I mean-
JOST: Do you think they have been overpaid for 20 years?
Well I am not saying that they have been overpaid for
for 30 years. But what I'm certainly saying is that they are
not worth the 30% increase now.
JOST: Right. That is a nonsense.
JOST: Well just on the tactics you are using, because it is
a little bit reminiscent I suppose in the class of action
as say the dollar sweeps case.
Well what about it?
JOST: Well it is just interesting to me that you take that
route. It may well encourage employees, or employers I
should say in other industries or other areas to do the same
thing that you may not necessarilly like
Well I don't encourage that at all. What I'm saying
is that we have got a Conciliation and Arbitration system
which is working well in the interests of all Australians.
There's been wage restraint exercised by people considerably
less well placed than these greedy pilots. Ordinary working
men and women and many of them I might say who've had to work
a lot harder to get their qualifications than pilots. I mean
you look at a trades person. They do their 4 or 5 years
apprenticeship. They have not got the glory and glamour of
pilots, but if you look at it objectively in terms of the
training that these people do to acquire their capacity they
do relatively much more than pilots do. And yet because
these people are up in the air with this glory of flying
people around they suddenly say they are entitled to another
I mean it is a nonsense. I mean we've got, look at the
fellows who are flying in the Air Force
JOST: Judges. But why? Why do you compare a pilot with a judge?
JOST: I'm not. I'm pointing out that judges are
Judges have exercised enormous salary restraint,
enormous salary restraint. They are not part of the general
wage and salary system. They haven't had an award with all
the rights and obligations of a Conciliation and Arbitration
system. Judges haven't had. These people had the rights and
the obligations of the Conciliation and Arbitration system.
Now they want to say alright we're out. O. K. if they're out
they'll cop all that goes with being out.
JOST: Could I please put something to you on this question
of people who are on higher salaries and I suppose pilots are
a sort of a classic because they fit the band of individual
or the band of salary that I'm thinking of. Those people in
those salaries who sort of have a statutory limitation on
increases are the ones that would have depended I suppose or
would have hoped that the marginal rate of tax would come
down from 49 to 39 because that wouuld sort of somehow or
other make up that would be their sort of wages tax
write-off for exercising restraint. And I'm thinking of
people like of judges
Well there's been a movement for judges and so there
should have been because in respect of judges you had the
situation that the ranks from which they come, that's the
barristers who by and large are very well paid.
JOST: And you've got to get good Judges.
And you've got to get good judges.
JOST: And who want's to be a good who, one of those great
barristers want to go to the bench if they're going to loose
so much money.
Yes well that's obviously partly true and we've had to
take account of that. I think the community would say they
want a good judicial system and there is no discernable
objection to a situation that people who are going to be
there in that important position judges shouldn't have
got a significant salary increase. As I say, they are not
part of the award system. They're not people who are there
getting their rights and their obligations under the system.
The pilots are.
JOST: Can I just-
Just the basic point that annoys all hell out of me is
the way in which these people are trying to glorify
themselves because they fly an aeroplane. And may I say for
less than 10 hours a week do they fly the damn thing. I mean
your listeners understand, the average hours that these
people are actually at the stick Is about eight hours a week.
JOST: But you could blame management for being inefficient
on that front couldn't you. It's not the pilots' fault.
Well, what you can blame is the fact that over a
period of years the pilots have exercised their muscles and
at one stage or another, managements have caved in. Not
because they have wanted to but they thought they haven't had
any alternative. Well they've got an alternative now. I
mean the pilots have got to understand, and I hope they do
stay within the system at 4 o'clock this afternoon, but
there's not going to be a cave in by the airlines or by the
Government. They're going to start to realise
JOST: Would you use the Government's VIP fleet if the
Well just wait and see what we'll use.
JOST: It's going to be boots and all will it?
All of us John are the product of our history. All of
us. Now these people are the product of a history where in
the past where they've gone in and had a fight, pretty soon
either Ansett or TAA as it was have caved in. Now that's
their history and that's the sort of fight they think they
will go into if they go on with this. Well let me tell them
its a different fight they're going Into.
JOST: What about the Beville workers? What if they push the
wage decision forward? They could sort of tip the whole box
and dice over too.
Look, we've been going for over six years now under
the Accord and as I've said I'm getting a bit sick and tired
of people saying the Accord is finished, it's all over, what
if these do, what if this do that. I think you've got the
situation where you've got some very, very good people on the
union side, you've some very good people on the employers
side. I think of Bert-Evans and the people around him in the
metal trades employers, and you've got the ACTU. They with
the Commission, with the very wise guidance of the Industrial
Relations Commission, they'll work It out.
JOST: Just like to ask you a couple of quick ones? Well
actually about that accord though. It is a source of
constant amazement to look at it, how it does endure
But why should it be?
JOST: Well, it is interesting. I will tell you why.
Because for instance say at one stage I think when it first
came down I mean we have had various remodelings of it.
We've had full indexation promised. We've had quarterly wage
adjustments promised under it. A whole lot of things which
haven't been delivered. But I just the point about the
-6-
question is this. Is one when you are in Government you are
literally learning on the job and you find you make a deal
like that, you make a deal like an Accord one or Accord two
and you've literally got to scrap...
Look, look go back to the beginning. I'm now talking
as one of the proud fathers of the Accord, the whole concept.
And what did I say at the beginning? I said this will be a
flexible instrument. I mean you can't in life, unless you
want to be a real whacker, say look here, I've got something
which is absolutely unchangeable. I mean in the areas of
human and organizational I've suddenly found some
instrument which is absolutely inflexible when you are
dealing with the a relations between groups. But it's the
concept, the concept was a very simple one. That is that you
are much more likely trade unions, organized workers and
employers -to get the achievement of your mutual interests
if you co-operate, talk together, than if you have a head on
confrontation. Now its worked out. I mean on the side of
employers their profitability has increased. On the side of
workers they've got, as I say, a million and a half new
jobs. It's a rate of job creation four times faster than it
was before and
JOST: They've lost on their wages though.
Yes but we have delivered on the Accord in terms of
the massive improvements in the social wage. Look at what's
been delivered in terms of health care, pensions,
superannuation, education, all the things we promised we
would deliver on. So there has been that flexibility. And I
said in 1983 when we delivered the Accord, I said this will
work because it is in the interests of all the people
concerned that it shall work. There will be flexibility.
That's what there's bee-n.
JOST: Can I ask you a couple of quick ones?
Quick comments really. Live sheep exports to Saudi Arabia.
What's going on there?
Its a very disturbing situation. You've had last year
a level of exports, about a quarter of a billion dollars. As
far as I can ascertain as I have been briefed by listening to
Mr Kerin, the shipments have not been of a kind that can in
any objective way be not approved. We have therefore
arranged for a high level delegation to go there and try to
get this thing sorted out. I believe that it can be because
the reputation of the Australian farmers and suppliers is
high.
-7-
JOST: Well our sheep have pox, they have got
bi uetongue. Well wait a minute.
JOST: I mean this is what the Saudi's are saying.
Yes, that's what they are saying. I'm glad you added
that. They are saying that. What is being said by our
people here is that that's not the case.
JOST: And they pull the plug on a while he was there?
We'll we've been unable to unload the sheep elsewhere
there in the Middle East but, I mean let me say this. If in
fact what they are alleging was true then it would have to be
dealt with. But the thing is to get the facts sorted out.
JOST: It is obviously not true. I mean have they got some
sort of internal problem the Saudis?
Well I don't know. This is what we are going to find
out John.
JOST: Yes it is a fasciniating one. At the weekend there
was a push from within the ALP to revive the idea of a
referendum over the environment?
P. M: Yes
JOST: Does that idea appeal to you?
I saw that reference. Let's see as we go. What we
have discovered, painfully, in this country is that if you
haven't got bipartigsan support you haven't got much chance of
getting a referendum carried. What we've said to the
opposition, if you're dinkum you would indicate your support
for this and we could go ahead with great confidence then.
So just let's see how this thing develops.
JOST: If you could get a situation-
May I just add to this. The fundamental difference
between ourselves and the Opposition. We are dinkum about
the environment. We don't believe that the Federal
Government should not be prepared to override the States in
certain circumstances. The Opposition say no, no
interference with State rights, which means in the end if you
adhered to that position that the level of Australian
standards would be equal to the worst of the States. I don't
like that.
-8-
JOST: Well look another one. It's a long way down the track
but at the moment we have had, in the aftermath of the
Fitzgerald Inquiry, the suggestion that there should be one
vote one value in Queensland. Obviously that may not come to
fruition, the desire or wish as expressed by Mr Fitzgerald.
Does that tempt you to have another go at one vote one value
if Queensland won't clean itself up?
Well, not a temptation. But I go back to the point I
just made. I think the Australian people need to ask why the
conservative parties in this country, the Liberals and the
National Party, that unholy marriage, why are they opposed to
the concept of one vote one value? If the Liberals would say
yes we would support that we would do it like a shot.
JOST: Is it possible that you might find yourself asking
them if there was intrangience on behalf of the National
Party Well, I don't know. There is no evidence that there
is any principle on the part of the Liberals at all. As far
as the National Party well what a joke they have become.
The National Party is just rural warfare incorporated.
JOST: Yes well look I tell you there was a bit of warfare it
seems to me between Treasury and the Reserve Bank?
Is there? Well inform me John.
JOST: You have to interpet the Reserve Bank it's a
pretty delphic body as you know.
Well I have been on it. I was a member of the Board
of the Reserve Bank for about seven years.
PM: don't have any misconceptions about that.
JOST: And no doubt you will correct my interpretation.
But there does appear to be a question in whether high
interest rates will be enough to slow the economy coming from
the Reserve Bank. They feel there should be more done.
Look, when you are talking about an economy which is
growing very strongly and you're using monetry policy
together with tight fiscal and wages policy to slow things
down, it is not a question of competition or anything like
that. Economists and commentators, whether they are in the
Reserve Bank, the Treasury, the private banking system, the
acedamic World
-9-
JOST; Of course they argue. I accept that.
They are differences of opinion.
JOST: I accept that.
It's quite legitimate to have a perception expressed,
whether it's from the Reserve Bank or elsewhere, it might
take a little bit longer than some people think. What's
strange about that? I mean I doubt if you would find, if I
got you a dozen economists, whether you would get anything
other than about six or seven different opinions. If they
said what week is it going to slow down, or is it-going to be
definite that interest rates start coming down. Out of a
dozen economists you would probably get ten different
opinions. JOST: What you would say, I mean I could only agree with,
because I'm aware that you yourself for instance rather like
this idea of some sort of concessions on the interest and tax
front. Now, wait a minute, you are in a very jumpy position
this morning John, I mean jumping to positions. What I liked
was the idea of examining it. Now don't give me this
business. I mean you've got no basis saying I like the idea.
The one thing I liked was when something was there on the
table, which prima facie could have some merit, what I
demanded was that it be examined. We examined it and on
balance it was certainly not the right thing to do.
JOST: Did the suggestion come to you from the Reserve Bank?
No. About some decision to, some proposal to
JOST: Interest deductability on, you know, the
non-inflation But, you're talking about the mortgage adjustment
first of all, now you're talking about the inflation
adjustment. JOST: No, no, I'm really talking about the, I'm talking
about the tax break on interest rates.
The inflation adjustment for interest on both sides of
the ledger?
JOST: Yes. The receipts and outlays.
JOST: Yes. No, on that one, that didn't come from the Reserve
Bank to me.
JOST: Cos it would appear that the Reserve Bank likes..
Let me be quite clear. Was one of the fellows on my
staff, an economist on my staff a very good mind he said
you know this is worth having a look at. Boy did we have a
look at it. We had a look at it and so did Treasury and dear
oh dear. I mean you heard what I said on the Sunday
Programme three weeks ago. I made the assertion they will
not go to the election with this one. And how would you like
ten dollars worth of that?
JOST: O. K. Well listen, a quick question about this
Melbourne-Sydney very fast train.
Yes.
JOST: Do you support that?
Yes.
JOST: It's interesting to-me. It was suggested and Jim
Kennan confirmed it down here that the promoters of that
scheme would be interested in setting up a couple of cities
along the track, somewhere down the line between Melbourne
and Sydney. Now that, I mean it would be a huge
decentralization exercise and no doubt a huge capital expense
and it would probably involve a lot of help from governments.
P. M. Clearly the concept that's involved by the developers
is that they would have--access under legislation by
governments of INSW and Victoria to land which would be able
to be developed. And this would form part of the basis under
which they would finance the development.
JOST: Sure. That's been made quite clear from the beginning. Now
as far as the governments are concerned though the developers
have made it quite clear that they are not looking for, do
not expect financial support from governments. My support
from the Commonwealth Government which is very firm
support-
11
JOST: I was really thinking in terms of co-operation,
because if you
It would require co-operation yes for sure.
JOST: Because if you were to create a city and if so what
sort of cities are they talking about?
You are talking about developments which will make it
very, very much more attractive for people to buy land on
these routes at very very much lesser prices and in more
congenial environments than are continually crowding out in
Sydney and in Melbourne.
JOST: So you see the cities feeding Sydney and Melbourne
with workers or with their own work base.
It will work in two ways. They will, you will be able
to provide commuters who will want to go into Sydney or
Melbourne. But also I see these things developing as
economic centres in their own right. It will be a
combination of both.
JOST: It's a pretty big, it would be an enormous project
wouldn't it. I mean I can't...
Of course it is but you know what the world is
about. JOST: I'm not criticising.
I know you are not
JOST: I'm just interested in a few facts on it, because all
we've heard is, we've heard a few environmental arguments
I'm not implying John that you are criticising it but
I just find I'm a little bit surprised when people say isn't
this a big thing. What the world is about, what progress is
about is big developments.
JOST: Sure, and I would imagine that's the sort of
development that if you are going to develop that's the sort
of thing Federal Government ought be getting into.
Absolutely.
JOST: But, its interesting to know sort of city, what sort
of vision you would have for It?
-12-
Well, I have told you the vision. Its a vision that
we have a city now of Sydney of about three and a half to
three and a quarter million people bursting at the seams, by
nature limited on the one side by the ocean, on the other
side by the mountains. Limited in terms of its capacity for
proper expansion. Melbourne, relatively much better placed
but still a very very large city. People who want to be able
to get land at a reasonable price in congenial conditions. I
see the exciting vision of an opening up of a whole corridor
along the eastern states which is going to provide the
opportunity for an expansion of our economy and the
development of better living conditions for hundreds of
thousands of our people.
JOST: Mr Hawke thank you very much, but just temporarily,
because I have been given approval in another way that you
don't know about to keep you here for another 10 minutes
after the news break.
That's beaut, because I always enjoy it.
JOST: Mr Hawke, looking down the track a bit what do you
think your major difficulties will be in the next federal
election? Urn
JOST: Apart from fixing a date?
No I don't have any difficulty about that. That will
come easily. In a sense I think one of the major problems is
going to be complancency. I think the Australian people are
increasingly coming to understand the correctness of the
Governments economic policies, the commitment we have to
making the tough decistens and not just take the easy way
out. They're certainly getting increasing evidence of the
internal bitterness and division, hatreds,. lack of policy and
direction of the Opposition. I think one of the things I'll
have to guard against with myself to some extent, although
not much there but with others, will be a sense of
complacency. We have got to keep on making the, at times,
tough decisions because we can't afford to have a level of
economic activity bringing in imports at a level which we
can't afford to pay for and earn by our exporting activity.
Now, provided we keep our nerve and keep making those
decisions we will be respected by the Australian people and
we will win the election.
JOST: In your election campaign though you would have
underline that fact.' I mean you would be selling them a hard
diet, wouldn't you?
-13-
Well not just a hard diet. Go back to 1987. People,
as I have said before, told me I couldn't win then because we
had tough policies there and I said well I have a greater
respect for the Australian people than most of the
commentators seem to have. If you tell them as it is then
they understand that. You say its just hard diet. Yes it is
hard in some respects but it's not a bad story we've got to
tell in so many ways. I mean you show me a period in
Australian history when we have been creating jobs at the
rate we've created them in our six and a half years in
Government twice as fast as the rest of the world. Where
in terms of our education system when we came to office, the
legacy of the Libs, only 36% of our kids staying in the
education system. Now its 58% and rising. Where we have had
these historic achievements in terms of
JOST: What proportion of that group will get to tertiary
education? Well that's rising, which is reflected by the fact
that we have created over 200% more tertiary places than was
created under our predecessors. In this next four year
period we will be creating new places which will be
equivalant to the size of Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney
Universities. So that's to take account of more people that
are staying on in the tertiary system as well.
JOST: I take it that it's fairly easier for those people
who graduate from tertiary institutions to get jobs than it
would be say if those kids had not gone there.
PX: That's right, yes. I mean all the evidence shows it.
The more our young people are trained and educated, whether
it be in the secondary, the technical or the university
atmosphere the greater is their chance of employment.
JOST: Itd just like to whip through a few things with you.
Last week you suggested you might leave the Labor Party at
the election after the next election. You also said Paul
Keating would eventually be Prime Minister. Was that just
one option?
PM: Whyt do you think I might lead It into three elections
after this one?
JOST: You might decide to go
-14-
PM: I'm not. Don't lot that get any..
JOST: Right, we've settled that. well it jutse. that
Mr Keating obviously gets frustrated with hisslotand he's
likely to get frustrated again. No matter what his good
intentions are now he's going to get frustrated within six
months probably after the election.
PM: ( inaudible)
JOST: John Dawkins..
PM: You fellas amuse me. Paul and I make it quite clear
what the situation is. I heard you and Michelle going on
about it this morning.
JOST: It's fair enough though because a lot of people
PM: sure it's fair enough. It's a lovely free
democracy. If you and Miche 1le and all the others want to
play games about
JOST: Paul Keating was playing games this time last year
wasn't he?
PM: He got a little bit frustrated. The tact of life is
that we fixed that up very quickly and as you will find both
Paul and myself say our working relationship has never been
better. Now that's a fact so if you want to play around and
conjure up ideas and thoughts say that's beaut, that's
what our information tree democracy is about.
JOST: Do you think it'd be right then for him to be
Treasurer for ten years?
PM: You wouldn't have a better Treasurer. But I'm not
suggesting that he needs to be for ten years. You see Paul
enjoys being Treasurer. He would certainly enjoy being
Prime Minister. I'm making the point he does enjoy being
Treasurer. I've made it clear to Paul that if he' wanted
to or to try some other portfolio of course he could.
That was in no way wanting to push him. On the contrary
because I reckon he's such a great Treasurer. But in
fairness to him I have in the past raised and did he
want to think about it. He makes the point that apart from
the Prime Ministership there's no other portfolio that
really grabs him like Treasurer that's understandable.
JOST: You are satisfied that it you do go yu ultr
next time that you won't be costing Australia the next best
Prime minister?
PM: Sure, sure.
JOST: Right. Next time around if you win what reforms are
left to you? What do you do? What have you got left in you
as a leader of this country?
PM: Well, you don't change goal posts and say after this
election I'm going to get a new vision, a new set of
visions. I've been amused by some of the commentators who
say well what's the vision? We had our vision when we came
to office in ' 83 and that vision put as simply as I can was
an Australia which would be remember what the three ' r's
were when I was in opposition for that brief period? The
three ' r's were reconciliation, recovery and reconstruction.
That was the Hawke concept on which the election of ' 83 was
fought. That was a vision. we had to be reconciled as a
nation. We were in conflict one with the other. The Accord
and the negotiations that we carry on constantly the
apparatus that we have for consultation with all the
community is involved in the process of reconciliation. We
had to have the immediate recovery from the worst recession
in 50 years and then reconstruction and that reconstruction
was a reconstruction not only of our economy but of our
social welfare system and of our place in the world. And
that's what we are about and it's going to be really a
continuation of that reconstruction of Australia to make our
economy more dynamic more internationally competitive it's
going to be a continuing reconstruction of our social
welfare system so that it's more targeted upon those in need
that's what we will be doing and will increase it.
JOST: Are you sorry that you didn't get into saymicro-
economic reforms quicker?
We didi I mean, what sort of micro-economic reform do
we have in the financial system. I mean the most
revolutionary reform..
JOST: I'm thinking about the transport system..
Oh yes, but you said, your question was are you sorry
you didn't get into micro-economic reform quicker and I'm
saying in answer to that question my darling John, that we
dived right into micro-economic reform with the most
fundamental way that had ever been done.
JOST: O. K. alright, you de-regulated the financial system
idea Prime Minister and I acknowledge that but there are
other harder ones aren't there and the labor area particular
the water fronts one of them?
-16-
Yes, well I'm not dodging, I'll come to that. But
let me.. don't give the impression that this one that we did
in the beginning of bringing in 16 foreign banks,
de-regulating the financial market and floating the dollar,
that was just an easy piece of cake. I mean if it was that
easy that the champions of do-regulation and free enterprise
under Fraser and Howard and Peacock for 7 years hadn't had
the guts or the wit or the imagination to doit that's how
easy it was, So, sure in regard to the Transport Industry,
we've already do-regulated the Airline Industry into the two
Airline Policy and on the area of the w'ater front and the
Maritime Industry what we have done, is to recognise the
reality that the other people dodged for 7 years, they did
nothing. What we've done now for a period is to say, bring
the parties together, get independent advice as well and we
are now right in the process of getting the form on both the
' 4ater ? ront and in the Maritime Industry and that will be
something significant that's never been done before.
JOST: We've got two minutes left. I'd like to get on with
personal matter or. semi personal. Your son Steven Hawke he
has written a book about the Nukenbar Confrontation between
the Abori gin?,-and the Cil compante-5 and I think you are
going to launch it.
P. M: Nol you are wrong there mate.
JOST: You're not?
No
JOST: Are you proud of him?
Yes of course I am. By the way Manning Clarke is
going to launch it.
JOST: Oh Manning Well it's just and I will be
talking to him in a couple of weeks and I just thought and
wondered if you have read the manuscript or anything like
that? I've got the it was Hazel gave it to me on Friday
night and I've started to read it.
JOST: It seems to be a pretty good book?
He's a pretty good blokel
-17-
JOST: What sort I mean I know that you don't often
get asked questions about this or if you do you don't often
talk about it, but he has had an interesting life and he has
clearly reacted in a way, he has been conscious of you being
Prime minister and he has headed off..
he has made his own life somewhere else.
And yes I am very proud of him.
JOST: I gather though that you are a lot closer to your
family these days?
I have always been close in terms of love and
affection. one of the problems in my life is that I wasn't
as physically close to them as I should have been and at
times could have been. I was pursuing a) and not just
pursuing~ and just involved in a career as for the
ACTU which just involved the iconstantly long hours and
then as President as the ACTU and then going into Parliament
and through all that process I was away from them alot. I
think it is true to Bay) John., which I think in a sense you
are hinting about is now a closeness between us all.
JOST: ( inaudible)
JOST: I'm just wondering if thev',-e influencing you as sort
of a politician. I
PM: Too right they influence me.
JOST: Don Chipp went from a right winger to a sort of a
radical Liberal.
PM: If any father in these days in these days I think
whether he is Prime Minister or whatever he
radio interviewer~ he is not influenced by his or her kids is
a very strange person. I mean because... one of the things
about life people will not understand it as we come to the
end of the 20th cen turyx what a different world it was when
we were growing up. I mean,, in those days kids were to be
seen and not heard type of thing. But now it is different,
kids are both seen and are to be heard. They are not
repared and rightly not. prepared just to take the world as
t is and say will you wait until you grow up and you may be
a radio interviewer or a politician then you do something
about it. They rightly say it is our world and we want to
be heard.
JOST: Is Steven pestering you about Aboriginal affairs?
Steven doesn't pester Mel He will occasionally let
me know of a view but he is not a pesterer.
-18-
JOST: Has he put it to you that that Aboriginal Treaty
should be We've had a yarn about these things but its not in
any constant sense.
JOST: How is it going anyway?
Well Gerry Hand will be coming up with proposals
about a structure of consultation both on the Aboriginal
side and non Aboriginal side in this Budget. There have
been funds allocated for that purpose and both the
Aboriginal side and the non Aboriginal side expressing the
view that they want to be able to work through this thing
slowly. It is not something that is going to be able to be
just kicked in being overnight. It has my full
enthusiastic support at a pace which those involved think is
most appropriate.
JOST: Thanks very much for coming in todayl
John it is always a great pleasure to with you.
JOST: Well it was good of you to stay on that extra
minutes. Pleasure Johni
JOST: Thank you that was Prime Minister of Australia Mr Bob
Hawke. ends