S
PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH HOWARD SATTLER, RADIO 6PR,
PERTH -2 MARCH 1990
E OE -PROOF ONLY
SATTLER: The Prime Minister has arrived, he's on the
campaign trail, he's in Western Australia. Welcome to
the studio Prime Minister.
PM: Thanks very much Howard. Good to be with you again.
SATTLER: The pilots, they were there again today.
PM: they are everywhere.
SATTLER: Are you getting used to them? Do you know them
by name now?
PM: No, no no. I don't know them by name. Just
recognise a few faces here and there.
SATTLER: Are they having any affect at all on your
campaign? Not on you personally but on the perception
PM: All I can say is that wherever I go, into the places
which they are picketing, people just express a
repudiation of both what they tried to do to Australia
with their very very greedy claim in which they were
prepared to destroy the system and of their tactics.
That's the reaction I get everywhere I go. So they are
not the important issue.
SATTLER: The Trades and Labour Council president and
also head of the Electrical Trade Union, John Gandini,
was on the program earlier today and he said the arrest
of a pilot in Perth yesterday would do nothing for
Labor's cause in this election. That's the sort of thing
you didn't want to happen. How would you react to that?
PM: It's got nothing to do with us. The police
SATTLER: I know it's nothing to do
PM: the police have to deal with the law and order
situation. If they found it necessary that's their
decision. It's got nothing to do with us. He wasn't
arrested for long. I believe he was out their amongst
the demonstrators later on in the day.
SATTLER: He is there again today is he?
PM: He was there yesterday.
SATTLER: Was he?
PM: Same day.
SATTLER: Well what about a wider issue and the issue of
how much Australia is in debt at the moment. Yesterday a
figure came out and even though Paul Keating and I think
to a lesser degree yourself have commented on it and said
perhaps it's not the end of the section for Australia,
the timing wasn't too good was it?
PM: Yes, but we can't, and of course wouldn't want to,
fix these things, say to the Statistician well don't
bring out your figures. I mean when I called the
election Howard I knew that there would be a January
figure coming out. And there it is. But the important
thing about it is that in seasonal terms it confirms what
we know and that is that the imports are slowing down.
If you look at the three months to January compared with
the previous three months, a definite slowing down. And
very importantly Howard the thing that excited me I think
most about the figures was that if you take the last
three months and compare them with the same three months
of the 12 months earlier, there's been about a
increase in manufactured exports. That coincides with a
very important report we got earlier this week from the
Bureau of Industry Economics which talks in very glowing
terms about the restructuring of the Australian economy
and the way in which we are now exporting much more
manufactured goods. It's reflecting the very very
substantial increase in investment that's taken place in
the manufacturing industry. So in saying all those
things Howard I'm not trying to say look Australia hasn't
got any problem about it. Of course, and our policies
are directed towards it, but the underlying elements of
the restructuring of the economy are such as to give us
cause for optimism into the medium future.
SATTLER: Yes but what about things like the wool exports
going down. They went down
PM: Yes but that's really like something in the bank. I
mean you have something like half a billion dollars of
wool there that's waiting to go. The indications are now
that the market's picking up. That will go into the
figures in the near future.
SATTLER: There are people continuing to talk recession,
mainly your opponents, but what about someone like
Professor Geoffrey Blainey. I know he's no mate of
yours, no friend of the Government. At the debt
conference last night he didn't paint a terribly
PM: You're right. I'm not going to get into a slanging
match with Geoffrey.
SATTLER: By the way, he didn't do that this morning to
you too. He conceded that you were doing a reasonable
job. PM: Look, the fundamental thing about this country for
which we've got to be eternally grateful, it is a
democracy. Geoffrey has his right to express his views
and there's some things that he feels that, y'know, I
profoundly disagree with, when it comes to things in
the immigration area. He's got his right to have his
views just as the pilots have their right to demonstrate.
But in regard to the fundamentals that I repeat Howard,
you've got to ask yourself is Australia now, seven years
on, better placed to deal with the challenges of a
competitive world than it was before? The answer is an
unequivocal yes. I mean the Bureau of Industry Economics
is not a Labor Party appendage. It's an independent
bureau in the bureaucracy. It has come out, in it's
report this week, and made it quite clear that there's
been this massive increase in investment in manufacturing
industry both in plant and equipment and in buildings,
massive increase in employment. Before when we came in,
the manufacturing industry was dying. I mean the
greatest example of course Howard is the steel industry.
In 1983 BHP was going to close the steel industry. But
we said you can't do that and we've restructured the
steel industry. It's now a significant exporter of steel
right round the world. Our shipbuilding industry was
dead. It now exports the best part of three quarters of
a billion dollars around the world. Now these things
just don't transform an economy overnight. But they are
there, they are happening and we are confident that with
the restraint and co-operation that the workforce has
exercised under us, and will continue to do, we can
tackle these problems.
SATTLER: Would you agree with Professor Blainey we've
all got to work a lot harder to get ourselves out of
trouble? PM: Well always people should work as hard as they
possibly can. But let me make this point about
Australian workers. I say this to all your listeners
because most of them are either themselves workers or the
husbands and wives are workers. What has made me proud
is when I talk to industrial leaders for instance from
Japan, the United States and Europe, who have enterprises
in this country, they say to me quite unequivocally that
Australian workers, given good management, are at least
the equal of any workers in the world. I deeply believe
that. So what is required is certainly we all need to
work as hard as we possibly can, but we've got to cooperate,
we've got to work together, we've got improve
work practices and management practices. That's what's
happening. Just let me give you an example from steel
which sticks in my mind. I was talking with the boss of
BHP steel production just a few weeks ago and he
congratulated us on the change in the environment, the
industrial environment that's occurred since we've been
in and the change in his industry. He said what we used
to do these were his words to me Howard, his exact
words he said our attitude used to be that we expected
our workers to leave their brains at the gate. He said
now we realise that's wrong. He said what we're doing is
we're sitting down and we're talking with them, we're
restructuring our practices and the way we produce
things. And he said our productivity is going up in
leaps and bounds. So it's not just a question of working
hard. That's important but it's a question of working
together effectively.
SATTLER: Prime Minister, there's tremendous pressure on
you and I guess all your senior ministers not to make
mistakes during the campaign because you've got this
whole gaggle of people around you and they latch onto
just about every word you or anybody else, your
opponents, say.
PM: That's their job.
SATTLER: Were you embarrassed by Senator Button's
apparent mistake on overseas export programs and the
funding for them a couple of days ago?
PM: Yes of course. It would be dishonest to say I
wasn't embarrassed. But could I make this point, that
that was a misunderstanding on John's part in a matter of
a few million dollars. He agreed in answer to a question
that there was going to be a net reduction in the
combined plans of a continuation of an old plan and a new
plan that we're bringing in. He agreed in answer to a
question that there would be a combined reduction in
outlays. In fact there's not. Over the three years
there'll be about $ 13-16 million. I say $ 13-16 not with
uncertainty but it's whether you count a $ 3 million
program as a continuation or a new one. Now that was the
order of difference. But there's no embarrassment about
that compared to what the embarrassment ought to be of
our opponents. They are going around making promises of
outlays over $ 6 billion, over $ 6 billion of unfunded,
unaccounted for promises. They say we're going to reduce
expenditure but someone ought to tell Mr Peacock if he
talks about cutting you can't then go and spend what you
save. He has got to account for over $ 6 billion. We
will be hammering through this campaign and so the media,
I believe, will be, certainly ought to be, what about
your $ 6 billion? Where's the money coming from. The
important point is not just a point-scoring exercise but
it goes right to the heart of this question of interest
rates. Because the two things which will determine, two
things will determine whether interest rates come down.
One, whether you've got control over wages. We have
seven percent, and we've always been right in our wages
predictions. Seven percent. Under Mr Peacock there'll
be a wages explosion. And what happens to your budget?
We have for the first time in the history of this
Government run our business, that's the Australian
Government. We've run it in profit against the great
deficit of the Liberals. I've used that surplus to pay
of f the Commonwealth Government's debt. We don't owe any
debt overseas. We are net creditors. But now if he
destroys that surplus with his more than $ 6 billion
blowout and a combination of wages explosion and deficit
blowout interest rates must go up. You ask me about
Button. Sure I was embarrassed by those minimal amount
of dollars that John had not quite got right in his mind.
But it is as nothing compared to these things that I'm
talking about.
SATTLER: Does it matter to the Government if Alan Bond
goes broke? Because he's a man who's got a huge overseas
debt. PM: It's a good question Howard. I want to be as fair
and as dispassionate about that as I can. I don't think
that Australia on balance is helped if a large
entrepeneur like Alan Bond, who has a profile not only in
Australia but around the world, if he goes bust. It
probably, given Australia's size, it does a bit more than
if a big boy in America goes bust because there are so
many more of them. So I would be quite silly and
dishonest if I would try and say to you of course it
doesn't matter, there's not impact. It won't be good for
Australia's image marginally if he were to go bust. And
I'm not saying he will. I mean that's for the courts and
for Mr Bond and creditors and so on to work out.
SATTLER: It's not going to help him with the Attorneys-
General sitting down today to decide whether there's
going to be some sort of major investigation with the
Bond companies is it?
PM: No, but you must appreciate, and I know you don't
expect me to comment upon those matters either in the
courts or which may involve the courts, it's not
appropriate. I'm trying to go to the substance of your
question. The internationally, if Mr Bond were to, and
we're talking hypothetically, to go bust, then it would
have a marginal disadvantage. But if you come to within
Australia, again hypothetically if Alan Bond were to go
bust, the actual enterprises would go on. I mean the
breweries would go on producing.
SATTLER: Maybe John Elliott would get them.
PM: Yes but they'd still be, in employment terms and
activity terms, they'd go on. The same with the media.
So in terms of the internal economy of Australia it
wouldn't make any difference. I think in the
international markets whatever they may think about these
things they would've taken into account in any rate by
now.
CAhLLERs Good morning Xr Hawks, I want to ask how you can
claim that you are leading a united team when you and the
Treasurer can't agree on lower~ ing the top tax rate to the
company tax rate and an an issue an an important as the
environment. We have now got Senator Walsh at a completely
different tackc to Senator Richardson and a prominent Labor
backbencher Mr Campbell saying on air only a few days ago
that Senator Richardson is a disaster arnd ought to be sacked
arnd I wonder why your Party has to concentrate its f ire on
supposed Opposition disunity if you really had been doing a
good job for Australia over the last 7 year.
PM. Well Jeremy let's go straight to the issues raised and
then the Opposition as I am~ very glad you raised then.-On
the top tax rate there Lu no difference between Mr Keating
and myself and however you mayJeremy, try to beat that up
you won't succeed and you will appreciate that the media has
not pursued this issue. I simply said in answer to a
question would there be a poveibility of a reduction in the
top rates My answer was very specific in response to what I
said. if in the next term it appeared appropriate or
responsible then that would bes done but it was not on the
agenda and that is precisely the position of the Treasurer.
There is no difference there now. In regard to the
environment and you talk about Xr Campbell, well I don't
think Xr Campbell will you know take offence. If I make the
observation because I made the observation to him directly in
the caucus where he ha. put himself at odds with every other
single member of the caucus on issues, I pointed out to
Graeme that he doesn't really speak for the Party and he
accepts that. He is an interesting character Graeme
Campbell, he in an individual and he has got lots of very
very good points about him.
SATTLERi Can he survive, that'. what I want to know?
o PM: Well he will win his meat of Kalgoorlie,
SATTLEa. i mean within the Party
PM Yes I think he will. I mean he's a very direct sort of
bloke but there in no doubt that his commitments are
basically to the. Labor Party. Blut very interesting Jeremy
that in this context you raised the question of unity in the
oppo sitioni well here of course you have the position where
there is an absolute lack of not only coordination but there
is the deepest possible hatred between leading figures.
Could I just remind you Jeremy, these are not ay words I am
Just reading from the Sydney Morning Harald of the 31 October
last, and this is under the heading, Howard. see it's pretty
definite isn't it.
YATLj~ " No trust between us two says Howard".
PM: * No trust between us two says Howard".
SATTLERi And that's John Howard, not me.
PM i John Howard. And what he says, he said he admitted
there could be no trust between himself and the man who
replaced him, Mr Peacock. So there you have that absolutely
foundational hatred and distrust between these two people,
you will never have any cohesiveness no capacity for
coordinated action within the Liberal Party while those two
are there. And of course it was reflected yesterday Howard
if I may say so because you have Mr Peacock coming out and
saying yes interest rates will still come down, Mr Howard
just completely repudiating Mr Peacock. He said that the
prospect of any significant fall in interest rates in the
immediate future were silch, a complete and absolute
repudiation by Mr Howard yesterday of his leader and it's no
accident because they hate one another and Mr Howard, to his
credit has said no trust between us.
BATTLERt Who is right, on the issue of interest rates?
PMt Howard in right in respect of the policies of his party
because under the policies of Liberal Party there would be
absolutely no chance of a reduction in interest rates
because if you have an explosion of wages and you have a $ 6
billion blow out in prospect with your deficit because you
haven't promises, interest rates can't come down. We
believe as I said this morning in the markets that the
conditions are still there for a reduction in rates.
CALLER: Mr Prime Minister sit, do you have a pad and pen in
front of you?
PM, Well I have got a pen mate.
CALLERs Now I want you to take note please sir.
SATTLERs How long is this going to go for Ted?
CALLERs I just want to make a few comments.
O BATTLER: Ted, there is a whole heap of people waiting to
talk with the PM, you will have to make it short.
CALLERI Yes, You are not to increase the petrol tax.
BATTLER: You are not to increase the petrol tax, in that
what you are telling him?
CALLERS Yes.
ATTLERi Ok, are you getting your orders there.
CALLER: The petrol tax, for the bicentenary was increased
for 1.5 cents now that has not been removed, now I know you
are going to say that you have spent on a lot of money on
roads, yes sure you have that's because the petrol tax has
been increased but it has not kept up with inflation.
SATTLERi Ok what's your question?
CALZ 3R I Now the auto association have stated that ok, r as
not asking a question I am just making a statement.
SATTLERt Alright we know that, alright let's get the pm to
talk about
PM Let mo, your on the question of roads and and funding.
Let me give you the facts Ted as distinct fr'om the absolute
distortions and misrepresentations that have been undertaken
by many people now. Let me give you the f Acts Ted and have
you got a pen and a pad, if you have Just take these figures
down. in the 7 years under the previous government they
spent * 4# 135.5 million, got that Ted. I have spent Ted,
68,752.6 million now there has been inflation in that period
so apply the Bureau of Transport economics road construction
cost index and that gives us in same dollar terms what Mr
Fraser spent $ 9,005.6 million, I have spent $ 10,649-9. Now
Ted have you got thou. f igures down, that shown that in real
terms I have spent 18.30 more on roads than they did and that
in an annual average terms in real terms meant, it means I
have spent $ 235 million more and it you want to look at the
take the government gets f rom oil you got it in two ways.
You get it at the oil rig, the oil levy and you get it at the
petrol pump in the excise and in my last year I have spent am
a proportion of my take on roads, I have spent 19.42% against
in their last year 19.06%. So I have devoted more of the
revenue from oil to roads than they did and I have spent
18.3% more in real terms on roads# those are the facts Ted
CALLRR: Xr Hawke, a fey of my friends and I Are a bit
worried about foreign investment control and what we would
like to know is just what the difference between Labor anid
Liberal policy on foreign investment control.
PX# very good question Anthony. We have a body called the
Foreign Investment Review Board and the task of that FIRD is
to look at significant overseas investment proposals and to
advise the government as to whether those proposals for
investment in Australia are consistent with the national
interest# and we have used that YIRE it has been useful as a
source of advice and guidance to the government as to whether
proposals are in the Australian national interest and our
position is that we will continue along that path.
We believe that some and quite an amount of foreign
investment in Australia in for the benefit of this and future
generations. A lot of it represents the bringing into
Australia Anthony of know how and technology, expertise which
is going to improve the structure of the Australian economy.
Against our position Mr Peacock's policy is to abolish the
FIRE and I think you have there got it in a nutshell.
SATTLERe in the studio and smack bang in the middle of
an election campaign and of course Monday is a big day,
celebrates 7 years don't you on Monday, is that right?
PX t Yen that's the election anniversary. We have a more
important one on Saturday, Hazel and I celebrate in Alice
Springs, that's tomorrow our 34th wedding anniversary.
BATTLER: I am glad you got that right.
PMi I was right, 34. Married here in Perth, Trinity Church,
St Georges Terrace on March 3 1956.
SATTLBRt Have you got the present?
PM; Beg your pardon.
SATTLERIs Have you got the present?
PMx: It's being organised mate.
SATTLERs Is it?
PHI YOe.,
SATTLERit Today.
PM: Yes, it's being organtised.
BATTLERi Alright well have a good day tomorrow.
PMi Thanks very much.
SATTLERt Double celebration, I think a man called Mr Caesidy
has got a birthday tomorrow too, hasn't he. Some bloke who
PMi Yes he has,
SATTLERs He's not, only
PM: What do you reckon he looks mate?
SATTLERs At the risk of being sued, I won't say. Alright
celebrations all round and I suppose you hope that all that
pales into insignificance besides March 24.
CALLERs I just wanted to say, I wanted to congratulate you
on the way you handled the phone call from the listener you
had in Brisbane regarding the referendum on Asian
immigration.
PMI Thank you.
P~ e ( cont'd) seen it and I found it very disturbing because
as T said there is two parts to this question. There is a
moral thi~ ng I mean I just find it morally repugnant that
Anyone can say that you can distinguish between people on the
basis of their colour, their skcin and the shape of their head
or their eyes and so on is morally repugnant but the very
important thing Howard and you know I don't think this can be
over emphasised is for the future of our kids that we have to
understand that the Asian Pacific region in the fastest
growing part of the world, the most dynamic. We do more of
our trade there individually than with any other sector and
that wiill increase in the future and if Australia is going to
be able to grow and be art of that massive growth in the
region to contribute to it and benefit from it, then the
worst thing that we can possibly do for our kids and their
future is to give those people an indication that we regard
them an second or third class human beings because they will
simply may, rightly as you or I would if we were there, if we
were there we would say,, you want to trade with us, you want
to ' regard us as first class trading people, but we are second
or third class people when it comes to im~ igration, forget
it. That's what they would say.
SATLR That statement you have Just made probably would
have usually incited a call from members of the Australian
Nationalist Movement here in Perth, this is their
headquarters but most of them are in jail at the moment so I
am afraid they probably won't be able to call you.
CALLER Mrt Hawke in ragard. * foreign aid, At the present
time we are giving away 13/ 14 patrol boats built here in WA
to Now Guinea and other parts of the
PMs South Pacific, yes South Pacific.
CALLER: In the meantime we can't even patrol our own coast
of WA.
PM Well Peter I don't really know what the point you are
making is but let me say this to you Peter that we regard
ourselves as having a responsibility to assist the countries
of the South Pacific and that really Peter ranges from Papua
New Guinea and then it goes right across to Western Samoa and
countris, Pili and there are 13 of them now. We take the
view and it a I think basically there is a bipartisan
position here Peter that Australia as the largest nation in
this region has a responsibility to be of assistance to these
countries. This is not just a question of do goodism of a
warm inner glow, if you want to put it in starker terms than
that in terms of your security it also makes sense that We
have good relations with the countries of this region. Nov
what you have got to appreciate Peter is that these countries
have very very limited economies and for all of them fishing
in particular is a significant and for some of them almost
the only part of their economic development they have got and
they have to have some capacity to patrol their fishing
mnnano thrny Arm giijort rn drirmistmt~ hir thn fiahing uossals
PM. ( Cont'd) Of Other Countries and it makes imMinent good
sense that we should assist them to be able to look af ter~
that economic capacity that they have got. And I ans not
aware Peter that there is really any Political difference
with our opponents on this. I would think that the
Opposition will in fact endorse our program, it's something
which is intrinsically sensible for the countries concerned
but also it makes a hell of a lot of good sense f rom
Australia's security point of view.
CALLER. I have just got a question of Xr H~ awke. I would
like to know why you have not been completely honest with the
people of Australia and telling them why the pilots situation
degenerated into what It is nov.
PM You are entitled to accuse me of course of not being
honest about it. I have been absolutely honest Howard if I
could just very very quickly, not only for Neil but for your
listeners recapitulate on the facts. It is now 12 months ago
that the pilots made their decision Neil not me, the pilots
made a decision that actually issued a publication and in it
they said that they were going to take on their employers,
the government, the trade union movement and the Industrial
Relations Commission. They said the guidelines that applied
to everyone else were not for them. They had in f act
received the benefits of vage restraint because in response
to the wage restraint of . workers generally we have given tax
cuts, suaperann~ uation benefits, so the pilots got the benefits
of those. But when it came to their wage claim they said we
are not going to abide by the Coziuision, by the guidelines
we are not going to have a bar of that, we are going to take
prolonged industrial action. Their words for it, they
advised their members to prepare for what they
euphemistically called a NIP, which was a non income period.
It was their directions to their memzber., they said go and
get another job, start a lawn mowing business, be prepared
for a long non income period.
SATTLIR: It's become a bite now.
Mr Well, but bit themselves mate. They were telling their
people this was going to be a long f ight to buot the
employers, the government and the industrial relations
system, the trade union movement they were going to break
outside the guidelines for what they said they were going to
got a 30% increase on top of their average $ 80,000 a year.
That 30% increase, $ 24,000 a year increase represented more
than what a very very large number of people were earning in
a year. Now Neil what I said to them, don't do that. Stay
within the system do what everyone else has done, where-you
have got the benefits from in theme other areas like
superannuation. When they wouldn't do it I said well I am
not going to stand Idly by and see the Australian economy
smashed because if we let the pilots get their 30% as Mr
Peacock would have, if we had let them get their 30% then the
whole system was smashed, all the unions with the power to do
it would go out and after 30% and the economy would have been
( cont'd) smashed an it was in 1981/ 82 when the same thing
happened. Now those are the f acts. In the course of that
the pilots resigned# they weren't sacked they resigned and in
that situation when they resigned in pursuit of that 301 wage
claim then the airlines went about the process of recruiting
other people. Those are the facts, not opinions.
CAZLER: Nr Hawke I would like to may that I think you are
the best government Australia has ever had despite that I
want to make a criticis. zu
PM: r guess I have got to settle for that Greg ok.
CALLERt Well I don't think, the opposition is even worse in
this regard. The thing that really concerns me is this
American thinking in Australia at the moment, deregulation is
a great thing and the question I would like you to look at
after you win the election. If you look at all the economies
in the world that are doing very vells the Asian tigers,
India with a growth rate of about European countries
like Holland, West Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, theme
economies are all highly regulated and the economies that
have deregulated over the last 15 years are the economies
that are going very badly and I think the reason that, I
think the government took a lot of courageous decisions but I
think the nature of the market forces of greed and
everything, the business community have let the government
down anyway and Australia.
M~ To answer that question or those observations in the
detail that they deserve would obviously take longer than we
have got, could I just Howard try and make a couple of points
quickly which I think are relevant. I think you have got to
understand that while we have deregulated in many areas to
allow the forces of competition to operate and I & hnk they,
the best test perhaps of this maybe seen Greg, in that we
have had a rate of economic growth now twice as f ast as it
was under our predecessors and a rate of employment growth
five times faster than under our predecessors. Now
paradoxically that has got something to do with deregulation
but I would also have to concede it's got something to do
with regulation because we have had a wages policy which in a
cense has been regulated, we have had the trade union
movement exercising restraint in return for improvements ini
education, tax cuts and so on so that has been a mixture of
regulation and deregulation but that leads to me to one
point. You talk about greed, * o of the things that has
disappointed me very very much indeed in this pracess that as
we have deregulated except in regard to the wages area whet*
with cooperation from the unions we have had restraint,
business executive, have shown a fair amount of greed. We
have in fact complained to the Buuiftes Council of Australia
and the Federation of Australian Industry that they have
allowed enormous increases in executive remuneration. Now I
can see that in some areas there is a case f or some. But I
certainly do believe that there could have been a degree of
restraint amongst executive., many executives to match the
restraint that's been practised by the trade union movement.
CALLER m There is a couple of things. rsrtly, Concerning
health cars. I have a young son who has orthodontist trouble
and quite honestly we took him up to the dental school and he
had surgery and all the work done. Quite honestly it didnt
cost us a penny and if it hadn't been for Medicare there was
no way I would have been able to afford it which taken me
into the other point which I would like to congratulate you
an for setting up Medicare and I don't think enough people
give you credit and give this government credit for the
health care system that we have got, which leads me into the
point about the wages policy that the Libs seem to be putting
out and the question is where are the differences between the
Liberal wages policy, if any and you can call. it a policy if
that, as against the Labor policy?
PH: Thank you for your comments about health care. Just to
cover that quickly Howard. When we came to of fice there were
2 million Australians an you know who weren't covered and for
whom the prospect of doctors bills or hospital bills
represented a nightmare. We now have a health system which
is universal, no member of any Australian family has to worry
about meeting. those bills and it's fair because you Howard
and I who are on higher salaries compared to the rest of the
community, we pay more and I think you would agree with me
that that is fair. You wouldn~' t disagree with that so it's
univeroal and it's fair. On wages policy you are right there
because I like Howard to just get to your listeners this
point. X don't want us to be theoretical about it and saying
well would it be worse under the Liberal's wages policies
compared with the government's. we can look, we have had the
decade of the 805 now behind us and in that decade Australia
tested the two policies. In the first couple of years they
had the Liberals where they abolished the centralised wage
system and they said open slather. we had a wages explosion
and it destroyed the economy we had the worst recession in
years in this country, unemployment rising, inflation rising.
For the first time ever double digit inflation and double
digit unemployment. Now I said that there is a better way
than that and for the last 7 years we have had wage
restraint, we have doubled * our economic growth, we have had
times the rate of employment growth and in fact our growth
h~ as been that strong that I have had to slow it down a bit,
last year with higher interest rates but they are now going
to be coming off.-Now against that Zace what my opponents
are doing is promising a return to the open slather of the
at which must mean again a collapse of the economy and the
higher interest rates.
SATTLRR# One question I have got to ask you before you go,
please don't take offence. Were you okay during the Great
Debate, my listeners are saying he was so reserved, he was go
quiet, wao he well they said?
PM: I was certainly well, look let me
SATTLERe Have you been asked that before?
PMo Yes I have and Ikiave told people this. What X wanted
PMo ( ont'd) to do in the debate, it really goes back to some
advice I was back in 1959 soon after I had gone to the ACTU.
I was talking to a bloke who is a mate of mine and he was a
television producer, He said really the secret of television
Bob is, in a sense radio but television even more no, in to
be talking to the person you are talking too. Don't think
that you are talking to millions of people you are talking to
one. What I wanted to do in what's referred to as the Great
Debate, I wanted to feel as though I was in someone's
loungeroom talking with them. Now if you are sitting in
someone's loungeroom talking with them Howard you don't shout
and hector.
SATTLERt Beat up on them,
PM: No and I was hoping therefore that you know people
would feel well here's Hawkie, we know he's been around for
years, we know him, at times he can hector a bit and shout
a bit and I have been guilty of that probably haven't done an
well as I should at times. That debate was important and I
wanted people to feel there I was with them talking with
them. SATTLER, And that's why you were so quiet?
PM: I think when I had to be a bit firm I was but T didn't
want to shout and hector.
BATTLERt Left that to your opponent.
PMs I think that happened a bit that way.
SATTLBRs Thanks for coming in today. We appreciate that and
there's a hard slog to go yet, you have got about what 3
weeks to go.
PM: About that Howard, yes. it's always a pleasure to be
with you mate.
SATTLERs Thanks for joining us on the program today and I
have said to all the candidates good luck on the 24 March.
PMt Thanks very much, thanks to you and to your listeners.
SATTLERi Happy anniversary tomorrow.
PM: Thanks.
SATTLERs In Alice Springs.
PM; In Alice Springs.
SATTLER, Yes what a place.
PM: It will be about as hot 4s it was in Perth when we got
married, it was 104 the day we got married.
SATTLER: Things have been hotting up ever since.
ENDS