Australian Broadcasting Corporation
TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2005/s1430603.htm
Broadcast: 04/08/2005
KERRY
O'BRIEN: A review of counter-terrorism laws is now on the Federal Government's
agenda in the wake of the London bombings, and the kind of comments we've heard
tonight will form part of a backdrop for that review. As it happens we had
invited the Prime Minister on tonight to discuss the Government's revolutionary
new industrial relations agenda, which has caused some heartburn in recent
weeks, and he joins me now from Canberra, so we'll take the opportunity to talk
also about Abu Bakr. John Howard, what we've just heard Abu Bakr say is lawful
in this country. He's quite open that he's teaching those views to young Muslim
students in Australia, some of whom might have gone on to terrorist training
camps. Should you, the Government, do more to monitor and control someone like
this man than you're already doing, or are you satisfied with the laws as they
govern his words and actions?
JOHN HOWARD, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER: Kerry, I'm in a slightly difficult
position in relation to this. It's obvious from what that man has said that he
is a person of interest to the relevant Government agencies and I don't want to
say anything which might in some way be construed as prejudicing any future
situation. I don't know whether that's going to arise or not , but I've been in
this chair long enough to know the care that one must exercise. As to the
generality of everybody who lives in this country being required to accept the
norms and the values of this country, let me state this, that the notion that
you can be subject to two laws is a notion I reject. It goes against the very
basis of our secular society. As a wholly inadequate member of the Christian
religion let me say that I don't regard myself as being subject to two laws. I
regard myself as an Australian being subject to the laws of this country. And I
think suggestions that there is an exclusivity of religious belief in this
country is against the values we hold. And I think it's also very unfair and
damaging to those hundreds of thousands of Muslim Australians who share my view
and I'm sure the view of the millions of your viewers or hundred of thousands
of your viewers that we should respect other religious and we should try and
live in tolerance and harmony in this country. Now I hope you will understand
where I stand in relation to views that would be different from the ones I've
just expressed but I do have to be rather circumspect in relation to a
particular person. Now as far as future changes are concerned, we are examining
what, if any, changes should be made to the law. And I had a detailed briefing
from senior people in my department about that this afternoon. And I'll be
having something more to say about it very shortly.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Your Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said today Australians
should be extremely nervous about a terrorist attack in Australia. You used to
tell us to be alert but not alarmed. Why is Australia a more dangerous place
today than it was even a year or two ago?
JOHN HOWARD: I guess a lot of people feel that if a country such as England, if
London a city that we know and are familiar with more than any other city
beyond our own, can be the subject of attack and human nature probably makes us
a bit more nervous. I have never disguised my concern that this country should
be subject to a terrorist attack. I think what has shaken people out of the
London attack Kerry, is that it was apparently carried out by native-born
people. They weren't terrorists who flew in for the event and then committed
the attack. They were people who had grown up in England. I think that shook
people and it made people realise, "Well if that can happen in a country
like England with which we still identify probably more than any other country
in the world," it could happen in Australia. I think that's the
explanation. I think the attack in London
KERRY O'BRIEN: I think what you've got is our Attorney-General telling us that
we should be, not that he understands why we might be, but that we should be
extremely nervous. Now does he know something we don't?
JOHN HOWARD: Oh, I don't think that would be based on that for a moment, it's
just that different people express things differently. I mean, my view has
always been - I've expressed it on this program - that Australia could be the
subject of a terrorist attack. But that is not based on something that I am
improperly and wrongly concealing from the Australian public. But equally the
Australian public will understand that in the implementation of our laws I have
to be fairly circumspect about what I say.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Parliament resumes next week with a new Senate and you've got
scores of lawyers steaming ahead to get your new omnibus industrial relations
legislation into the Parliament by October. And there seem to be a lot of
Australians extremely nervous about that, too. Your sentiments of a relaxed and
comfortable Australia seem an echo from a long time ago?
JOHN HOWARD: I'm not as pessimistic as that, Kerry. I think one of the things
that ought to be said at the outset about industrial relations reform is that
more than at any time I can remember in the period I've been in Parliament,
this is an employee's world or an employee's mark. We have a strong economy. We
have a dwindling unemployment, we have an ageing population and we have a
shortage of workers. And the generic bargaining position of Australian workers
at the present time is stronger in my view, than it's ever been. That, of
course, will increase in my view as the years go by.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But that's not a permanent position Mr Howard.
JOHN HOWARD: Oh, I think it will - Kerry, I think we are in a very significant
long-term trend towards a shortage of labour in this country. And if you talk
to any of the...
KERRY O'BRIEN: But we're also subject to all kinds of economic conditions that
could change the landscape very rapidly.
JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, I'm is not denying that but whereas 20 years ago we had a
surplus of workers in many areas, now we have a shortage. I mean, it's only a
few months ago that you'd have been interviewing me about skills shortages. You
might still interview me about them and that would be fair enough because we do
have shortages of skills. But I do want to make the point that the notion in
industrial relations put forward by so many people that the employees of this
country are at a bargaining disadvantage generically speaking is no longer the
case. It may have been the case in the past but employees in this country are
going to get a very good deal.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Let's talk about specifically rather than generically Mr Howard.
You put yourself - and you're talking about fairness and job security and
you're talking about a person wanting to feel secure about the conditions they
have continuing. If the boss calls you as an individual employee in to discuss
an individual contract and they make plain to you that that is their preference,
they want you as an individual to sign an individual contract and they want you
to take cash instead of some of the entitlements you have now whether it's a
meal allowance, penalty rates, whether it is any one of those other things that
have been coming up in recent weeks, won't there be in many cases, won't it be
implicit if not explicit to that employee that lone employee sitting across the
desk, that if that's what the boss wants, it will be very hard for them to say
no.
JOHN HOWARD: Well a couple of comments on that. Firstly, it is now and it will
remain in the future unlawful to effectively threaten a person with the sack
unless they sign an individual contract.
KERRY O'BRIEN: That can be hard to prove, Mr Howard.
JOHN HOWARD: Well Kerry, I can only state a lot of things are difficult to
prove including things that go in the other direction in industrial relations.
But I'm simply making the point that that will be the case. It is now, it's
explicitly unlawful and it will remain so in the future. And nobody will be
required to use your words, sit there as a lone employee. Somebody can have the
bargaining done on their behalf. The bargaining can be done by anybody they
choose. It can be done by a union official, it could be done by a family friend,
it could be done by a lawyer or anybody they choose. This notion that somebody
is necessarily alone in bargaining, quite apart from the other things I've
talked about, has not been the case since our workplace relations reforms of
1997. So nobody is forced to do any bargaining on their own.
KERRY O'BRIEN: The Business Council of Australia representing Australia's most
powerful corporations foreshadowed these changes back in February when they
argued that "issues of fairness should be addressed through Government
taxes and welfare measures rather than through workplace regulation. " Do
you share that sentiment, that your IR laws should not be about issues of
fairness?
JOHN HOWARD: No, I don't, they're the words of the Business Council Kerry. I
have never used those words.
KERRY O'BRIEN: They're your prime constituents, Mr Howard?
JOHN HOWARD: No, Kerry, my prime constituents are the millions of Australians
who work for an income. I wouldn't be talking to you as PM if I hadn't presided
over the best working conditions that the working men and women of this country
have had since World War II.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But what you're now doing -
JOHN HOWARD: I'm proud of the fact that real wages have risen in the time I've
been PM by 14 per cent, far outstripping what happened under the Hawke and
Keating Governments. I do not speak for the Business Council of Australia.
KERRY O'BRIEN: We're nearly out of -
JOHN HOWARD: I value capitalism but I don't speak for them. I speak for the
millions of Australians who support my Government.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Very briefly with the time left if you could address this fact.
JOHN HOWARD: Sure.
KERRY O'BRIEN: This is revolutionary change on the Australian landscape. You
will now have minimum workplace conditions legislated by the Parliament, by the
politicians, by the Government. You will have a national system overriding all
the State system. You will now have a constitutional head of power, the
corporations head of power totally overriding the industrial relations power
which was what the founding fathers wrote in. They had an industrial relations
head of power, which you are overriding. Now do you really think - what basis
do you have for saying that the Parliament should be micromanaging to the
extent of setting workplace conditions?
JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, this is not revolutionary. I mean - with great respect,
that is an absurd proposition.
KERRY O'BRIEN: It sounds revolutionary to me.
JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, I listened to your question. It is the next stage along the
path to further reform. The corporations power in the constitution was put
there by the founding fathers at the same time as they put the conciliation and
arbitration power.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But not for industrial relations?
JOHN HOWARD: Well, that's what you assert. But Kerry we now live in a national
economy. In 1901, we were six colonies. We regarded..... People in Victoria
regarded people in NSW virtually as foreigners. We are now a single national
economy and that cries aloud for a single national industrial relations system.
That's not revolutionary, it's commonsense.
KERRY O'BRIEN: John Howard, thanks very much for talking with us.
JOHN HOWARD: Thank you.