Iraq, intelligence agenices, tax relief, Mitsubishi, ACCC, migration Mark Latham - Leader of the Opposition

Radio Interview with Jon Faine

Transcript - ABC Radio, Melbourne - 28 April 2004

FAINE: Mark Latham, good morning to you and welcome to Melbourne.

LATHAM: Good morning John. Good to be here.

FAINE: The Prime Minister said yesterday that you are playing politics with our troops whilst they are involved in combat. Is that a responsible thing to do?

LATHAM: No, we support the troops and our argument is with the Government. That is where any criticism we have got to make is directed. So we support the troops, there is a policy difference and that is the way in which we conduct it.

FAINE: So about what the Prime Minister says, you're saying your argument is with the Government. You are playing politics, you are not criticising the troops themselves you are criticising the Government but that affects the troops. The Prime Minister went there you acknowledge that it was a morale boost, so criticising must take away from their morale.

LATHAM: Well in a democracy there are policy differences and the differences on Iraq are longstanding. Labor would not have had Australian military forces there in the first place and the Prime Minister has to face up to the policy failing. He sent Australians to war for a purpose that wasn't true and they were supposed to find weapons of mass destruction that don't exist. So that is a major policy failing and if we do not debate those things in a democracy then I would have thought we are much weakened as a society. It is true to say that Labor supports the troops one hundred per cent but we are entitled as an Opposition to raise these policy differences. I mean we wouldn't be much of an Opposition if we didn't point out that the country had gone to war for a purpose that was not valid.

FAINE: If their work is important which you have acknowledged why would you rush to bring them home?

LATHAM: Well we believe it is important to have an exit strategy. The alternative is to be there for an extended period of time. One of the British Commanders was talking about ten years. We believe in Australia committing itself to the war against terror, we believe in the defence of Australia and we haven't got unlimited military resources. So you have got to make the choice and we don't see Australia playing what seems to be the new role in Iraq - managing ethnic, nationalistic tensions for the long term. We don't see that as in our national interest and in the best use of Australia's limited military capacity. So we have got to make a choice and we have developed an exit strategy and we believe by the end of the year is feasible.

FAINE: So you in effect are saying that you don't think that Iraq can be stabilised within the short term. Effectively you are saying it cannot be achieved so let's get out now.

LATHAM: We have pointed out for quite some time that the military occupation itself has become more the problem than the solution. Australia has got to make choices as other nations have about the best deployment of their military forces and our top priorities are the war against terror, the defence of Australia and from a Labor perspective we have never supported a long term military engagement in Iraq. Humanitarian, economic, civilian assistance, yes. But in terms of military priorities we have got other directions in which we would head.

FAINE: Based on what advice do you say Iraq will continue to be unstable?

LATHAM: Well it is our assessment of the situation.

FAINE: Based on what advice though?

LATHAM: If there was a definitive source of advice John, the problems in Iraq would have been sorted out perhaps twelve months ago. I don't think that anyone in the world has got a crystal clear answer to what is going on but we have made a judgement about the situation. A judgement about Australia's national interest and we are acting on it.

FAINE: But if you rely on the media for instance well that surely is not as good as relying on the intelligence community or are you discounting the advice they give now?

LATHAM: No I am not saying that but we made a balanced judgement about the situation and cast our policy accordingly. Our Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, Kevin Rudd has been to Baghdad. Obviously the Shadow Ministers involved take a range of advice on this and we make a judgement accordingly.

FAINE: The Prime Minister says you have to give freedom a fair go, isn't that right?

LATHAM: In what sense? I mean the Prime Mister's problem is that he is never able to define clearly what the job is. Originally he said the job is to find weapons of mass destruction, we find out they didn't exist, then he said the job was to get rid of Saddam and liberate the Shi'ites. The Sh'ites are now involved in the civil unrest and all the difficulties. And if the job is to be there for another ten years managing ethnic, religious, nationalistic tensions in Iraq, then we don't think that is the best use of Australia's limited military capacity. And the Government itself has said it wouldn't put peacekeepers in because Australia is stretched around the globe. And we are just recognising that reality.

FAINE: Do you trust or have confidence in Australia's intelligence community?

LATHAM: Well it is a worry. We have been calling for royal commission powers to have an inquiry acting on the Lance Collins matters that have been raised, he set out a whole chronicle of intelligence failings and difficulties. There is some more news about that today.

FAINE: Yes, Navy Captain Martin Toohey who is a Navy Barrister, says that Lance Collins is right and that he personally has been white- anted for supporting Lance Collins. So that is today's disclosure.

LATHAM: Yes well that is right. I find it adds to the argument that we need an inquiry with royal commission powers to get our intelligence capacity right. The war against terror is primarily an intelligence war and we cannot sweep these matters under the carpet, the Government has got to have a thorough inquiry into them to give the Australian people a guarantee about our national security in the future. That is absolutely fundamental, so they should act on the matters that have been raised by Collins and Toohey.

FAINE: Don't you cause more damage by having a royal commission into something that is necessarily secretive, if you try to sort it out you preoccupy them with a royal commission, public servants just be their very nature protect their turf and all the rest of it. Doesn't that distract them from the task, doesn't that make it worse rather than better?

LATHAM: Well John what is the alternative? If the alternative is faulty intelligence then consequences of that can be horrific. You need the very best intelligence capacity to ensure we are successful in combating terrorism. It is in Australia's national interests to have an inquiry with royal commission powers to act on these very serious matters that have been raised by Collins and Toohey. So this is something Government's need to act on rather than sweep under the carpet.

FAINE: Ok lets turn to domestic matters. The Age poll today published on the front page of that newspaper says that 75% of voters who were asked said they would prefer spending on services rather than tax relief. You have been promising tax relief, although you haven't given us any detail, does it change your mind?

LATHAM: Well Labor has also been delivering policies about improved services and I am not surprised by the poll in that it reflects the feedback I have been getting at community forums, old town hall style meetings where people come along and have their say and they have been talking about social issues. We normally get a few questions about national security and the economy, that is important but overwhelmingly by a factor of ten the questions are about health, education, work and family. We have responded to those concerns with our investments in saving bulk billing and improving the affordability of the educations system, our Baby Care Payment for getting the balance right in work and family. We have been investing heavily in these social policy areas and that is appropriate.

FAINE: But if you want to appeal to the business community and you want to appeal to the self employed, particularly the aspirational voter, as the Prime Minister has so successfully coined the phrase, you have to offer tax cuts don't you, otherwise you have to say goodbye to that whole constituency?

LATHAM: Well it is important to have tax relief where it can help people and we have had a policy for bringing down the superannuation contribution tax from 15 to 13%.

FAINE: But that is all in the future.

LATHAM: No that is happening in our first term in Government and that is an important policy and we have also consistently said that this is the highest taxing Government in Australia's history. And for PAYE tax payers as they go into higher brackets there is an ongoing argument for relief.

FAINE: So you would change the bracket limits? The thresholds?

LATHAM: You will find these things out in budget week and the debate that will be had then. But Labor's attitude is to ensure that we have got very strong investments in social services. We have been on the job there but we also acknowledge there is an argument for tax relief. But the important thing is to ensure that families are in good shape that they are not being denied basic community services and they are not constantly moving into higher tax brackets without some decent relief.

FAINE: We have heard you talk a lot about reading books to kids and family policy, social welfare, health all of those things but what about your business policy? The business community are surely now impatient to know what a Mark Latham Labor Government might mean for the top end of town?

LATHAM: Yes well we have announced our policy to assist small business which is a big priority fro the economy. Simplifying the BAS, which lowers the compliance costs and really does help small business. And just a few weeks ago we announced our changes to the Trade Practices Act to beef up competition laws in Australia for the private sector so that small business has fair trading arrangements in which to grow and prosper. And in particular to strengthen the abuse of market power provisions and outlaw predatory pricing which is a huge concern amongst small businesses around the country.

FAINE: That is small business but I said the top end of town. They are very worried about what you may have in store for them, you haven't said much that makes them smile so far have you?

LATHAM: Well we believe in sound economic management. We established the policies that have set up the modern Australian economy and that model remains in place. So the so called big end of town has nothing to fear from a Labor Government other than our determination to have strong trade practices law and a fair chance for small business to trade and compete.

FAINE: Well lets go through a few things. What would you do if Mitsubishi were to go to the wall?

LATHAM: We have said that we would work with the South Australian Government in the situation. We don't want to add to rumours and speculation we want to work constructively and take advice from our South Australian colleagues and they are obviously involved closely. The Rann Government…….

FAINE: What does that mean work constructively, that doesn't actually mean anything. Would you bail out Mitsubishi? would you put tax payers money into bailing out Mitsubishi?

LATHAM: I am not getting into a hypothetical. We are taking advice from the South Australian Government about what needs to be done. It is not a simple situation with the investments and the speculation at the moment.

FAINE: You are the Prime Minister say in November, it is quite possible we will have a poll in October, you could be the Prime Minister. Mitsubishi – various rescue attempts have failed and bingo it is on your desk, do you put taxpayers money in?

LATHAM: Well as far as I know the company hasn't asked for that level of support. But there are different levels of discussions going on and it is not wise to get into that hypothetical area. It just adds to speculation and it is not helpful in the current situation, so let's be realistic rather than dreaming up situations that aren't being played out now.

FAINE: Singapore buys the PXU power assets, a Singapore Government backed investment company buys the Victorian Generating companies. Does that worry you?

LATHAM: Well there is a Foreign Investment Review Board that would look at that a foreign investment review tribunal and in the normal course of events it is up to the Government to take advice from it. If there are anti competitive concerns then you have got the ACCC that looks at those things. So we have a system where Government doesn't make the front line decisions without advice. Advice from appropriate regulators whether it is foreign investment or competition law and of course we would be taking that advice in Government.

FAINE: But what does Mark Latham think rather than what does the regulatory framework come up with as advice.

LATHAM: I am not opposed to foreign investment per se but there can be certain circumstances where it is inappropriate. That is why you have got a Foreign Investment Review Board to provide advice to Government. And what do I think in other areas? Competition law is important you need to maximise competition, that is why we have an ACCC that looks at these different proposals and it provides advice to Government as well as making it's own decisions. That is entirely appropriate.

FAINE: The Business Council of Australia yesterday called for an increase in skilled migration in order to boost population growth in the future. Do you agree?

LATHAM: I think the migration debate in Australia is really about the distribution of migration settlement. Sydney has population and congestion pressures that need to be relieved so if you can do things to redirect migration settlement that is going to be helpful for the sustainability of the program. And parts of Australia, South Australia, Tasmania where they are looking for higher population growth, so to get that changed pattern of settlement migration is where Labor comes at the migration debate. Rather than the overall intake to look at the pattern of settlement is the thing that we need to get right.

FAINE: Do you want to boost the overall number though?

LATHAM: No we have got no plans in that regard. We think the settlement pattern is the thing that needs to be addressed in the first instance.

FAINE: So you reject the call from the Business Council for an increase in migration?

LATHAM: We are not supporting an increase in the migration intake as I have pointed out. Our starting point in this debate is migration settlement patterns rather than to look at the gross number and be making radical changes in that regard.

FAINE: But the Business Council say you won't get economic growth into the future unless you boost population and the only way to boost population is by migration.

LATHAM: Well I think it is a question of population settlement. A city like Sydney say has got too much population, its population is too big. Other parts of the country say they are looking for a bigger population they are looking for migration growth. And that is the issue, the real practical issue that needs to be addressed.

FAINE: The Mitcham-Frankston Tollway is, according to John Howard, a critical issue in the marginal seats in outer Melbourne that you need to win and he needs to hold pending the outcome of the next election. What would you do, would you give the federal money to the state Government?

LATHAM: Well we are going to wait and see where that particular dispute ends up. There is argy bargy and advertising campaign that has been run. We will announce our Victorian roads policy much closer to the election once the political dispute between state Labor and the Federal Liberal Government has been sorted out.

FAINE: Well that doesn't help us at all

LATHAM: You will have our policy closer to the election John and that is what people need to know. And obviously there is argy bargy and politics being played out and we are not going to jump into the middle of that. We are going to see what happens with regard to federal Government decision making on that money and we will respond accordingly.

FAINE: Well the tenders closed yesterday, there were boxes and boxes of documents delivered to State Treasury and there is no point surely, in the Labor Party now trying to give to the state Government the money that they are going to now anyway get from tolls.

LATHAM: John you will have our Victorian roads policy closer to the election and we are not going to jump into the middle of this dispute at the moment. We are going to see how it is settled if at all and make our policy accordingly.

FAINE: There is a lot being held back Mark Latham. People are being asked to judge you on things like reading books to kids and family policy, all the soft cuddly friendly stuff but we don't know what else there is in order to make up our mind.

LATHAM: Well in terms of the big issues we have got out TAFE and University policies published. We have got our national reading program. We have declared our support for needs based funding in our schools. We have got our plan to save bulk billing. Our National Dental Program to have a federal responsibility for bringing down the waiting lists in dental care. We have got a whole raft of policies. Labor's Baby Care Program that I mentioned earlier on. We have got to get the balance right in work and family. I would have though in opposition that this part of the political cycle we have got more policy than you have ever seen in the past.

FAINE: OK let's get to callers. Ken from Rosebud.

CALLER: Mark I remember you asked the Prime Minister a question about eight or nine weeks ago – will you be expanding the dental backlog in your health services? And what I saw absolutely saddened me and I rang my local federal member and complained about it. What are you going to do? I am waiting for now thirteen months for my teeth to be looked at, I have got to wait another three and a half years and apparently down in Cerberus there are six empty dentists chairs. I would just like to know what can be done about this?

LATHAM: Well Ken we need a national dental program. We need the federal Government to get involved in eliminating the existing waiting lists. There are more than 500,000 Australians just like you waiting to get their teeth fixed up. Most of them elderly and we need federal Government involvement. So we have got a dental program to wipe away the existing waiting lists and bring down the scale of this problem in the future. And that is an appropriate response, you just can't leave it to the states. There is a constitutional responsibility it happened at the time of Chifley where the Federal Government said it was going to be involved in dental care and that is Labor's approach.

FAINE: What about getting access to things like Navy dental surgeries and the like?

LATHAM: Well, if that can help then that's a commonsense solution but the best thing to so is have a national dental program and we're investing $300 million and aiming it more at delivering additional treatments to clear away the existing waiting list and do something significant about this problem. It's quite a national shame that we've got so many elderly Australians waiting for the basics of getting their teeth fixed up.

FAINE: Good on you, Ken, thank you. Ted from Altona. Good morning, Ted.

CALLER: Good morning, Mark. How are you?

LATHAM: G'day, Ted. I'm good thanks.

CALLER: That's good. My question is two parts. One, if you take government, will you commit yourself and your Party to wiping out poverty? And, two …

FAINE: To wiping out poverty?

CALLER: Yes, in Australia.

FAINE: Just wiping out poverty, Ted?

CALLER: Yes. … making sure that people are not sleeping in the streets, they're not hungry.

FAINE: OK

LATHAM: Well, Ted, we certainly want to make it a bigger issue and make a bigger national push to reduce the level of poverty in Australia. I'll be putting on the COAG agenda – that's with the States and Territories – a new approach to poverty in our first months in government, and that is to try at the basic level of public administration to get governments working together. I mean, you can go to public housing estates where some good things happen but you haven't got a concerted effort where federal, state and local government are putting their programs in simultaneously, doing it in a coordinated and integrated way, working with community leaders. I think we need a much more concerted and targeted approach in poor neighbourhoods to overcome these problems. You've got to do a lot of things. It's about employment, health, education, skills, community development. You've got to do all those things simultaneously to give society the best chance of reducing the level of disadvantage.

FAINE: Do you do that by throwing money at it then for government services?

LATHAM: I think you need extra money and our investments in health and education would obviously help. But, you know, there's research that shows that if you come in one year and do a health program, the next year you do an education one, the following year, something happens in transport. You got nowhere near the sort of result that if you do all those things simultaneously, all levels of government working together, all agencies, with a concerted integrated approach to tackle poverty. And that's something we've lacked in this country. Indigenous communities suffer from that lack of coordination and it's the same in other parts of the nation where people are living in poverty.

FAINE: Where has it worked?

LATHAM: Where has it worked?

FAINE: Yes.

LATHAM: Well, I think there's some research out of Britain and the United States that when they do this coordinated approach they get a much better result. We haven't tried it in Australia and that's what I'm keen to do through the Council of Australian Governments process.

FAINE: Happy, Ted?

CALLER: Yes. The other part I was just about to ask you is regardless of whether you take office or not, what are you going to do about the Free Trade Agreement?

LATHAM: We've got that referred off to a Senate Inquiry to have a look at. We've raised some concerns. It's not really a free trade agreement because sugar's lost out and some of the agricultural access is pretty scratchy and there are a range of concerns about the pharmaceutical benefits and the like. So, we're passing it through a Senate Committee process to see it it's a positive or a negative for Australia and then make an assessment in Australia's national interest once that Senate report has been published.

FAINE: OK, Ted. I'm going to move on. Leanne in the city. Good morning, Leanne.

CALLER: Good morning, John. Hi, Mark. Thanks for taking my call. I just wanted to ask, I've just been down to Tasmania and I actually fell in love with it so much I've bought a house down there and I'm planning on quitting Melbourne and going down. But I had a look around at some of the forests and some of the areas that people like the Wilderness Society are trying to protect. I was blown away actually by how beautiful they are and, you know, what an asset they are for us and then I had a quick look at what the Government planned to do down there – because I …

FAINE: Leanne, have you got a quick question for Mark Latham?

CALLER: Well, I … some papers about what they're going to do about the forests down there and one of them was ending the clear felling but when I looked at the maps, if they ended clear felling by 2010 there's actually going to be none of those forests that I walked through left. So, I just found this … and I wondered if Mark Latham was really going to try and address this problem and save this jewel in the crown before it's gone?

LATHAM: Well, I don't know the forests that you're walking through but on my trip there people were saying that 40 per cent of the native forests are under reserve which is a substantial level of protection and that's a great credit to people like Bob Brown as well as Labor governments in the past that have made that achievement. And the debate is about the Sticks Valley and the Tarkine. And about this question of phasing out the clear felling in old growth forests. So, there has been a process in Tasmania where people have arrived at this target for 2010 and we're waiting for the final report to see what role a Federal Labor Government can plan in assisting environmental protection in Tasmania. So, what has been achieved in the past, there are some more useful things that can be achieved for the future and we want to do that in collaboration with Tasmanians and their State Government.

FAINE: Do people ask you questions about Tasmania wherever you go or just in Melbourne and Tasmania?

LATHAM: Oh, no. I've had them in Darwin where we had a community forum in Darwin where the Tasmanian forests were raised so it's something that's raised right around the country. We hear about the environment … it's like Kakadu, it's a national issue.

FAINE: It's a national issue.

LATHAM: It's a national issue and there needs to be a national responsibility for preservation in Tasmania. For instance, there's been a reduction in federal funding for world heritage areas in Tasmania and that's unsatisfactory. We just can't expect Tasmania to carry the full load. There's got to be a federal government contribution as well.

FAINE: Dean on a mobile. Good morning, Dean.

CALLER: Yes, good morning. It's Deanne, sorry.

FAINE: Thank you.

CALLER: A question to Mr Latham. In regard to economic policy, I don't think or hear much from the funding issues around initiatives that you talk of and I'm just wanting to know when we're going to hear about how you're going to fund these things?

LATHAM: We've been talking about that consistently. We've identified more than $6 billion of savings in the Commonwealth budget and that's the budget discipline that helps us fund our social investments in education and health. So, our approach is to eliminate waste and mismanagement, to make savings at the centre of government so you can get that money out to communities and families on the edge. For instance, we just produced a $2.3 billion baby care payment that was fully funded by eliminating areas of government waste. That's Labor's approach.

We want to invest in the future, sure, but in terms of responsible budget management, we've got to make the savings now. We're not sitting around waiting to see what happens with the surplus in a couple of weeks' time. We've been on the job since the last election identifying over $6 billion of budget savings.

FAINE: Are you satisfied with that answer, Deanne?

CALLER: Yes. As I said, it's not something that we hear. I don't hear Mr Crean talking too much about his initiatives in terms of fully funding all of the initiatives and policies that you're actually referring to.

LATHAM: Well, that's been our approach and it's there in the documentation as the policies go out and we'll keep that up into the future.

FAINE: So, we'll have to wait and see when the Budget's delivered and what the response is. All right, Deanne. We'll judge it then. And Dean, this time, in Bentley. Good morning.

CALLER: Good morning, Mr Latham. I'm just calling to find out if you're going to go ahead with the heroin prescription trial?

LATHAM: Which trial is this? Sorry, if there's one locally in Bentley, I'm not …

CALLER: No, no, I mean …

LATHAM: … exact detail.

CALLER: In your policies leading up to the election.

LATHAM: Well, there's only one trial. The injecting room in Sydney …

FAINE: In Kings Cross.

LATHAM: Yes, Kings Cross. So, we're waiting to see what results come out of that. But I'm unaware of any State or Territory that wants to set up a new trial so we're down to one in Kings Cross and our judgement about that will be determined by the results that come from it. There's no point having a trial or an experiment if you're …

FAINE: … support, or in principle, disinclination to support it?

LATHAM: My attitude is to support the things that work in practice. I mean, heroin addiction is a very complex issue and there's a range of solutions, some of them cold turkey approach, the hard discipline, the zero tolerance approach. If the trial at Kings Cross results in a certain community and it probably is less suited to that Kings Cross community, then that's something we should learn from and back the things that matter and work in practice. It's not a matter of theory or dogma, I think we've got to look for things that get results and back them.

FAINE: So, the fact that something may work for Kings Cross doesn't mean that you do the same thing everywhere else?

LATHAM: No, certainly not. Every community is different. If it's just something unique to Kings Cross that's working there, you'd think well just continue in Kings Cross but not be used in any part of the country. So, you've got to learn, in practice, and also understand that this is a complex problem and every community circumstance is different.

FAINE: Phil in Bendigo. Good morning, Phil.

CALLER: Hello, yes. I think it's great that Mark has been talking about children, etc, over the last three to four months. I'd like to put forward a little bit of a policy idea in a sense and see what he can talk about that. The idea is that there's a crisis in foster care throughout the country …

FAINE: It's a State Government issue, isn't it, Phil?

CALLER: Oh, well, no. It can be but what I'm putting forward is for the Federal Government and the States to go 50-50 in actually coming up with an idea to pay foster carers a proper salary - $40,000/$50,000 – so that would need federal input and it's obviously an issue … I mean, you could say that reading and schooling is essentially a State issue but Mark has, you know, put forward ideas.

FAINE: Let's get an answer from him on your suggestion, Phil.

LATHAM: Well, we can't fund every project and every good idea. We've got to have limits and that's not one that's on our list. We've got our funding priorities in the areas that we've been talking about this morning but we can't do everything and I'm afraid, Phil, that's not one that we're going to be able to support.

FAINE: Thanks for your suggestion, Phil. Last question from me. The Canterbury Bulldogs players cleared by the police. Is this an example of trial by media? How do they get their reputations back?

LATHAM: Well, it's obviously difficult in the circumstances. But the legal process is the thing that matters. Media speculation comes and goes but if there's been a thorough police investigation and they've been cleared, then …

FAINE: Did the media go too far?

LATHAM: Well, you'd expect reporting of this. People in high profile positions in the public eye and in the media do report these things. But I think everyone knew at the end of the day it was going to come down to a police inquiry and we've now got the results.

FAINE: Mark Latham, thank you indeed for dropping into the studio and taking our listener's calls as you tour around Victorian marginal electorates.

Ends. E & OE