Abbott: My Plan For A Stronger Economy, A Stronger Australia

Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has addressed the National Press Club in Canberra on his “plan for a stronger economy and a stronger Australia”.

The keynote speech was Abbott’s first major speech for the new year. He maintained his political attack on the Gillard government and made only broad commitments.

  • Listen to Abbott’s speech

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

  • Listen to Abbott’s responses to questions

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

MY PLAN FOR A STRONGER ECONOMY AND A STRONGER AUSTRALIA

Four decades after Donald Horne ironically tagged Australia as “the Lucky Country”, the Gillard government is relying on good luck rather than on good management to secure our nation’s future.

The government often cites the fragile international economic situation but fails to propose any new policies to respond to it. It claims ownership of the fundamental strength of the Australian economy even though its own actions have weakened it. And it boasts of a future return to surplus while actually delivering the four biggest budget deficits in Australian history.

Labor’s economic strategy is to hope that China’s strength will keep our economy growing. It’s lazy, complacent economic management from a government which is much better at deception and dirty tricks than at the hard work of actually running the country.

The Eurozone crisis is a terrible verdict on governments that spend too much, borrow too much and tax too much yet our prime minister is lecturing the Europeans while copying their failures.

In just four years, Labor has turned a $20 billion surplus into $167 billion in accumulated deficits and $70 billion in net Commonwealth assets into $133 billion of net debt. That’s $6000 for every Australian man, woman and child.

At the heart of Labor’s failure is the assumption that bigger government and higher taxes are the answer to every problem. [Read more...]

Julia Gillard’s Carbon Tax Speech At The National Press Club

Prime Minister Julia Gillard addressed the National Press Club today on the government’s carbon tax policy.

The Prime Minister stressed that the policy was a major and difficult reform. “And in reform, what matters is having the right vision for the country’s future, making the big decisions which get us there, bringing people together to get it done. So now we have had the debate. Now we move from words to deeds. We’re going to get this done.”

Gillard momentarily lost her composure when speaking about her feelings: “It doesn’t come easy to me to expose my feelings as I make these decisions. I was the shy girl who studied and worked hard, and it took time and effort but I got from Unley High to the law and as far as here, where I am today. I’ve brought a sense of personal reserve to this, the most public of professions. And the rigours of politics have reinforced my innate style of holding a fair bit back in order to hang pretty tough.”

In response to a question from Channel 7′s Mark Riley about the responsibility of the media, Gillard suggested a starting point would be to “stop writing crap”.

Listen to Julia Gillard’s speech (30m)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Listen to Questions and Answers (34m)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Listen to Gillard’s “Don’t write crap” response (4m)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

This is the prepared text of Julia Gillard’s address to the National Press Club.

The issues that have brought me here to the Press Club as Prime Minister have been big ones. Laying out my vision for Australia in a national election campaign and making my case in the leaders’ debate. Reflecting on the formation of a new Government and announcing our plan to rebuild Queensland. [Read more...]

Joe Hockey’s Budget Reply Speech

The Shadow Treasurer, Joe Hockey, has delivered the traditional Budget reply speech to the National Press Club, in Canberra.

Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey addresses the National Press Club

  • Listen to Hockey’s speech (31m)

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

  • Listen to Hockey’s responses to questions (29m)

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

  • Listen to Hockey’s response to a question from Fairfax journalist Peter Martin (2m)

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Prepared text of Joe Hockey’s Address to the National Press Club.

THE WRONG BUDGET FOR THE TIMES

The Budget is the most important economic statement of the year. It provides the Government with an opportunity to detail its response to the policy challenges of the day.

It is also a unique opportunity to lay down a policy road map that will contextualise Government statements and give confidence to business and consumers that the nation is navigating a clear and decisive course. [Read more...]

Combet: Tackling Climate Change Is In The National Interest

This is the text of Climate Change Minister Greg Combet’s speech to the National Press Club.

Tackling climate change is in the national interest

Today I will explain the steps the Government is taking to tackle climate change by putting a price on carbon pollution.

The foundation of any such policy is the climate science.

The evidence of atmospheric warming is very strong, and the potential for dangerous climate impacts is high. The scientific advice is that carbon pollution is the cause.

Globally, 2010 was the warmest year on record, with 2001 to 2010 the warmest decade. 2010 is the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th-century average.

In Australia, each decade since the 1940s has been warmer than the preceding decade. With rising temperatures we can expect to see more extreme weather events, including more frequent and intense droughts, floods and bushfires.

The environmental consequences translate readily into economic costs – as well as potential negative impacts on water security, coastal development, infrastructure, agriculture, and health. [Read more...]

Julia Gillard Addresses National Press Club; Laurie Oakes Steals The Show

As speculation about an early election continues, the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, addressed the National Press club today. [Read more...]

Rudd Addresses National Press Club On Financial Crisis

The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has made his first appearance at the National Press Club since last year’s election.

He spoke about the global financial crisis and the package of measures announced by the government yesterday.

  • Click the Play button to listen to Rudd’s speech:

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Wayne Swan’s 2008 Post-Budget Address to the National Press Club

The Treasurer, Wayne Swan, has addressed the National Press Club, in Canberra, on the 2008-09 Federal Budget.

The post-budget address to the Press Club is a political tradition. The Opposition Leader, Brendan Nelson, will address the club on Thursday.

Click the play button to listen to Wayne Swan’s address:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

I want to do something a little unusual at the outset and also thank the good people of the Commonwealth Treasury. What an extraordinary team of talented, committed, hard working people. It’s been a real honour to work with them on this Budget.

As you know, about 16 or 17 hours have passed since we handed it down – the first of a new Government, and a new era. It’s the inflation?fighting, future?investing Budget the nation needs.

By now, you’re familiar with the initiatives, with the decisions we took, the important forecasts, and the like. I don’t want to repeat all that today. [Read more...]

Liberal Party Director Analyses Election Defeat

Brian Loughnane, Federal Director, Liberal PartyThe Liberal Party’s Federal Director, Brian Loughnane, has addressed the National Press Club on the coalition’s election defeat.

Loughnane said it was clear the coalition’s defeat was attributable to longer term strategic issues than short term tactical issues of recent months.

Click on the play button to listen to Loughnane’s address:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

[Read more...]

Education Minister Julie Bishop Calls For Higher Standards In Schools

The Education Minister, Julie Bishop, has attacked education standards in Australia, calling for performance-based pay for teachers and improved standards of literacy.

Quoting Margaret Thatcher, Bishop argued that increased funding over recent decades had not led to increased standards.

In an address to the National Press Club, Bishop reiterated the federal government’s policy of literacy and numeracy tests and attacked the States for not being accountable.

Click the PLAY button to listen to Bishop’s speech:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

This is the text of the Address to the National Press Club by the Minister for Education, Science and Training, Julie Bishop.

Preparing children to succeed - Standards in our schools

Julie Bishop, Minister for Education, Science and TrainingToday I will talk about preparing children to succeed by raising standards in our schools.

I am yet to meet a parent who does not want their child to succeed in school to the very best of their ability, so they can succeed in life.

Parents are concerned about standards in our schools.

They don’t want a revolution.

They want their children to have access to a quality education.

They want to be assured that the school education their child receives will give them fundamental skills to get a job, undertake further training or go to university, and to provide the skills they will need for life – such as financial literacy.

Are our schools providing an education of the highest standard that will give students the skills and knowledge for the jobs and careers of the 21st century?

Or are they out of step with the aspirations of students and parents, and the needs of employers?

Has the education sector grown complacent about academic standards in schools?

Generally, in fact invariably, whenever the issue of quality in education is raised, the finger is pointed at funding.

So let’s look at funding.

The majority of students in this country are in public schools.

State Governments own, operate, manage and provide most of the funding for State Government schools, with supplementary funding from the Commonwealth.

Federal funding for State schools is calculated on a percentage of the State’s investment – and has been for decades.

If State Governments increase their investment the Federal investment increases automatically.

Contrary to the claims of Labor and the unions, the Howard Government has provided record funding to State Government schools every year since 1996.

Funding has increased by almost 120% since 1996 while enrolments in State Government schools increased by 1.1% over that time.

When the unions say there is inadequate Federal funding, it is really a criticism that State Governments are not investing sufficiently in their schools.

State Governments accredit and regulate non-government schools, while the Federal Government provides the majority of taxpayer funding.

Enrolments have increased by more than 20% since 1996.

State Governments have primary responsibility for Vocational and Technical Education, including TAFE colleges, while the Federal Government significantly supplements funding, and is funding the establishment of the Australian Technical Colleges network.

State Governments own and regulate public universities, while the Federal Government provides virtually all taxpayer funding – (I should point out that the States are in fact a drain on university finances by taking almost $150 million more in payroll tax each year than they provide in support.)

Education is a shared responsibility in this country between State Governments and the Federal Government.

When Labor tries, for example, to isolate the Federal funding component from total public funding for government schools it is trying to disguise the fact that more taxpayer funding is provided per student to State Government schools than non-Government schools.

67% of students are in State Government schools that receive 75% of total public funding.

In terms of funding for education, it is not just a matter of quantity, it is a matter of quality. It is how the funding is spent.

Increases in public spending have to lead to higher standards.

The Howard Government is investing a record $33 billion in school education during the current four-year funding agreement.

However, governments cannot simply increase the level of investment year after year, cross their fingers and hope that it will inevitably lead to higher standards.

In her memoirs, Margaret Thatcher noted that although there had been increases in public spending for UK schools it had not led to higher standards. She cited the case of the Inner London Education Authority, which spent more per child than any other authority in the country yet achieved some of the worst examination results.

Tony Blair, in what he has termed his “Education Revolution” has focussed on improving the quality of teachers and schools to lift standards.

Notwithstanding the billions of dollars invested in schools in Australia, there is evidence that standards have declined, particularly in the teaching of the fundamental areas of literacy and numeracy.

As the landmark Teaching Reading report from the National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy said:

“Reading competence is foundational, not only for school-based learning, but also for children’s behavioural and psychosocial wellbeing, further education and training, occupational success, productive and fulfilling participation in social and economic activity, as well as for the nation’s social and economic future.”

The same can be said for numeracy.

Employers complain of young people lacking basic literacy and numeracy skills.

Universities admit they are offering remedial classes in English and mathematics, to bring first-year students up to an acceptable level.

The Australian Defence Force Academy says that many Year 12 school leavers are not ready for university mathematics despite achieving good results in Year 12 maths and finishing in the nation’s top 15%.

The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) assessed the literacy and numeracy skills of 15 year olds in 41 countries in 2003.

The PISA testing revealed that 30% of Australian students failed to achieve a reading ability necessary to meet the demands for further learning in our rapidly-changing world. 12% did not meet the lowest benchmark.

The equivalent international test for mathematics revealed in 2003 that 36 % of Year 4 students and 35% of Year 8 students achieved only the lowest benchmark or did not even reach the lowest benchmark. We are talking very basic maths here.

All State and Territory Governments gave a commitment in 1998 that every child commencing school from that year would achieve the minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standard within four years. Every child.

This has not yet been achieved.

Currently, States and Territories have their own assessment programs and tests to determine minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standards.

Data from each test is then subject to a lengthy, and I mean lengthy, equating process so that it can be reported at a national level.

Consequently the latest results available are from 2004.

These tests only assess minimum standards below which a child would have difficulty progressing at school – that used to mean they would fail.

There was very little change in the failure rates in the same grade between 2001 and 2004.

But the number of students failing increased the longer they were at school.

In 2004 the percentage of students failing was 6.3% in Year 38.8% in Year 517.9% in Year 7.

Student’s results were getting worse, not better.

Statistics can tell one story.

The personal anecdotes are also concerning.

Last Friday I received an email from a parent in Queensland. I phoned him. He teaches at a Queensland university.

His 13-year-old daughter cannot spell. He has raised his concerns with the school and was told to buy her a computer so she can use a spell-checker.

A teacher in Queensland wrote to me recently:

“I am a member of the Australian Education Union but do not feel that they speak for me on many issues. I have spent many years as a primary school teacher frustrated by what I feel are diminishing expectations of students and also by the vague curriculum guidelines that we have to work with.”

From New South Wales:

“As someone who has run very large and small businesses, I can speak with some experience and frustration at the poor literacy and numeracy skills of those coming through the education system.”

I have received hundreds of such letters from across the country.

The Australian Government’s view is that we must introduce higher standards to lift performance, particularly in literacy and numeracy.

The Australian Government is insisting on national literacy and numeracy tests, which will be administered for the first time for all students in Years 3, 5, 7 and Year 9.

For the first time students in different states will sit the same tests so that there will be increased accuracy of results, increased efficiency through reduced duplication and increased timeliness of national results and increased comparability State by State..

For the first time, there will be a national assessment of language conventions including grammar, spelling and punctuation.

Parents will be able to track their children’s progress against national standards between Years, 3, 5, 7 and for the first time in Year 9.

This is particularly critical.

Research from the Australian Government’s Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth shows that the strongest influence on tertiary entrance performance is literacy and numeracy achievement in Year 9.

While the Australian Government will continue to take a leadership role and insist on higher standards through greater national consistency, I am constantly reminded by State Labor Education Ministers and education unions that the Australian Government does not own or operate any schools or employ any teachers.

They expect to receive increased Commonwealth funding, but they don’t expect to be accountable for it, and I am told, not so politely, to butt out.

Education is a national priority and it is too important to be left at the mercy of State parochialism and union self-interest.

Last week, in support of my push for greater national consistency in curriculum, I released a report of the Australian Council for Educational Research, which compared curriculum in key subjects across the 8 State and Territory education systems.

It revealed substantial duplication in some subjects, and wild inconsistency in others.

The report makes a compelling case for national consistency in our curriculum, assessment and reporting.

I support its recommendations and will take a proposal to the education ministers’ meeting in April, seeking their cooperation.

However, the immediate response from State Labor Governments was illuminating.

Premier Iemma says New South Wales does not want the “dumbed down” curriculum of other States. Apparently if you don’t live in New South Wales you are being “dumbed down”.

The Victorian Education Minister does not want the “dumbed down” curriculum from other States, (presumably including from NSW.)

The Queensland Minister argued that we didn’t need nationally consistent curriculum because the States are continually “leapfrogging” each other. (That’s the point! They are always out of step with each other.)

And my memory of leapfrog was that you were meant to leap in a forward direction.

Not one of them answered the fundamental question – In a country of 20 million people, why do we need to develop 8 curricula in 8 jurisdictions?

And with an increasingly mobile workforce, why should students and teachers be disadvantaged when they move interstate from one education system into another? We will work with the States to achieve what the public believes must be achieved.

Our goal should be that every child reaches the highest standard possible for that child.

The aim should not be to just meet minimum standards.

Some of the greatest gains in literacy and numeracy are to be made in our most disadvantaged school communities, including our indigenous communities.

Raising academic standards and improving educational outcomes for Australian students involves making some hard choices.

It means making decisions that State Labor Governments, education unions and other vested interests will not like.

For we must open up our education systems to greater public scrutiny.

This will be resisted because it will highlight something that has been obvious to students, parents and principals – there are good teachers and schools, and there teachers and schools that need to improve their performance.

And that is why Federal Labor will not be able to deliver on promises to reform school education.

They will not take on State Labor governments nor the all-powerful teachers unions.

There is resistance to reform at every level.

As a report released this week from the Centre for Independent Studies, entitled Teachers and the Waiting Game states: “If public schools are to thrive and flourish into the future, the power nexus between teacher unions and state governments must be broken.”

The Federal Opposition spokesman on education has already confessed that he “doesn’t support imposing anything on the States in the education area”.

The Australian Education Union recently threatened to withhold campaign funds unless Federal Labor backed down on calling for greater teacher accountability.

What more will the Howard Government do to achieve higher standards in our schools?

Principals must be given greater autonomy over their schools.

In particular, principals must have power over staffing.

How can we expect a principal to guarantee the quality of education in their school without some control over who is employed at that school?

The Australian Government already requires the State Governments to provide principals with some responsibility for budgets and at least a say over staff appointments.

These were relatively modest measures.

Many school principals across Australia cite as their biggest frustration the fact that centralised education bureaucracies parachute teachers into schools or summarily remove valued teachers, against the wishes of the school community and the teacher.

Just when they have secured an excellent teacher, who brings special skills and extra commitment to that school, State education bureaucracies transfer them out.

I propose to work with the States to move even further in the direction of principal autonomy and ensure they have the power to hire and fire teachers based on their performance, just as the head of any organisation or enterprise is able to do.

As the CIS study observed “Centralised staffing systems are the bastion of teacher unions, which fiercely protect regulations that shelter poor teachers and privilege longevity over performance”, noting that “poor teachers are more likely to be shuffled between schools than disciplined or dismissed, with serious repercussions for the teaching profession as well as students.”

Giving the power to principals will fix the problem of State Governments, captives of the unions, unable to deal with under-performing teachers.

International studies show that one of the characteristics of effective schools is the autonomy to make important decisions that impact on the quality of education they offer.

There must also be greater accountability to parents at the individual school level.

The States have a wealth of data about individual schools, yet they refuse to make it public.

Otherwise it would expose the truth that not all teachers are equal, not all schools are equal, and there are vast variations in how schools are resourced and how they perform.

The community has a right to know how individual schools are performing.

Parents would be in a better position to decide which school is the right one for their child if they were able to compare schools in relation to:

  • staff qualifications and turnover
  • suspension and expulsion statistics
  • attendance and retention rates
  • raw academic scores and improvements in scores demonstrating progress over time
  • post-school first destinations; and
  • feedback data on parent, student and teacher satisfaction levels
  • Making this type of information public gives parents informed choice when deciding which school their child will attend, and also creates an incentive for the school to continuously improve.

    We cannot hope to raise standards in our schools if we continue with the fallacy perpetuated by State Governments and unions that teachers do not deserve incentives and rewards for better performance.

    Teachers are a precious national resource. After parents, teachers are the single most important factor in a child’s educational outcomes.
    Like other professions, teachers should be recognised and rewarded on merit.

    We must move beyond the low salaries and artificial salary caps that are imposed on the profession, and supported by education unions in their one-size-fits-all, lowest common denominator mentality.

    I will put to State Governments a proposal for the inclusion of a performance element in teacher salaries, focusing particularly on teachers in disadvantaged schools who are making a significant difference to their students’ achievements, and work with the States to improve the status of the teaching profession.

    Let me tell you about a school in Victoria – Bellfield Primary – that exemplifies much of what I am talking about.

    It is in one of the lowest socio-economic areas in the State and was among the lowest achieving schools in literacy and numeracy.

    In 1998, only 33% of Year One students could read with 100% accuracy – the Victorian average was 67.4%. Likewise for other years in the school.

    By 2003, the number of Year One students reading with 100% accuracy had improved from 33% to 97.4%. Similar results were achieved throughout the school.

    It went from being one of the lowest performing to one of the highest achieving schools in the State in literacy and numeracy.

    The principal John Fleming, who drove these outstanding results, is now employed in a private school.

    There are other dedicated teachers who are striving to make a difference in some of our most challenging and disadvantaged schools.

    I want to see teachers of the ilk of John Fleming and schools like Bellfield rewarded for the difference they make to the lives of young Australians.

    And I point out that the successful teaching methods employed by John Fleming are in line with the findings of the Teaching Reading report, to the effect that the focus in teaching literacy should be on phonics instruction.

    I urge the Deans of Education at our universities to adopt the recommendations of that report in relation to the way university students are instructed to teach reading in our schools.

    In addition to performance-based pay for teachers, I believe there must also be rewards for schools that are able to improve student performance in the fundamental skills of literacy and numeracy.

    With the start of national testing and assessments in 2008, we have an opportunity to identify the schools across the country which are adding value to the lives of their students, by significantly improving their literacy and numeracy skills.

    These schools will be rewarded.

    The 2008 tests provide another opportunity. The Australian Government already provides reading assistance vouchers to students who fail to meet minimum State literacy standards in Year 3.

    As we are testing Year 9 students for the first time in 2008, we must once again step in to raise the bar.

    Given the importance of literacy attainment in Year 9, those students who fail to meet minimum standards will also be supported.

    To ensure a continuous supply of specialist knowledge in schools, the Australian Government will also explore alternative pathways into the teaching profession.

    There are people with valuable knowledge, experience and expertise, who don’t have a Bachelor of Education, but who are keen to bring their talent to our schools.

    I am asking Teaching Australia, the body established by the Federal Government to raise the status, quality and professional standing of teachers, to provide advice to the government on alternative pathways for teacher registration.

    We need a teacher training and registration process that is nationally consistent, not only for the benefit of the current teaching workforce, but also to make it easier for potential teachers to enter the profession, including as adjunct teachers.

    This will increase the diversity and skill base of the profession, and help address issues such as teacher qualifications in science and maths, and specialist subjects – particularly in conjunction with performance pay and more flexible working conditions.

    Building on our existing reform agenda, these measures will go a long way to achieving higher standards in our schools.

    We need to ensure our students leave school with at least the fundamental skills to ensure they can get a job, directly from school or after further education and training.
    How will young Australians judge the quality of their education?
    By the opportunities and options available to them – entry to university, vocational training, a job, a career, and the life skills they acquire.

    Our schools must have stronger links to employers and the business community.

    Business leaders must engage in the future of our nation’s children and our education system to ensure that students leave school with strong literacy and numeracy skills and are ready for further education and the workforce

    I am already supporting our universities to build links with business.

    We are ensuring the VET sector is in constant dialogue with business and industry.

    This is an issue of national importance to our long-term economic prosperity and I will shortly establish a Schools-Business Dialogue, bringing together in Canberra this year business leaders, parents, teachers, educators and State Education representatives, for the purpose of determining better ways for business and schools to engage and exchange ideas.

    This will be a forum that focuses on the quality of education – and the most efficient use of existing resources.

    We must build a bridge between business and schools, so there is a greater connection between what students learn at school and what employers believe are the necessary skills for the workplaces of the future.

    That bridge will ensure the goals of educators are aligned with the expectations of employers.

    Parents and the community can then have more confidence that the nation’s children are being prepared for success.

    John Howard’s Australia Day Address to the National Press Club

    John Howard, Prime Minister of AustraliaAustralia Day embodies a “profound truth and a simple irony”, according to the Prime Minister, John Howard.

    According to Howard, “the truth is that people come to this country because they want to be Australians. The irony is that no institution or code lays down a test of Australianness. Such is the nature of our free society.”

    Addressing the National Press Club in the Great Hall of Canberra’s Parliament House, Howard fielded many questions about yesterday’s reshuffle and the position of the National Party, but his speech focussed on what he said was “the secret of Australia’s greatness – our sense of balance”.

    This balance can be seen in the balance between private and public economic activity, the balance in national identity between unity and diversity, the balance between history and geography in our global strategy, and the balance in our politics between rights and democratic responsibility.

    In a speech that called for a new approach to the teaching of history in schools and which argued against the need for a bill of rights, Howard also called for tolerance and respect in the light of the Cronulla riots last month.

    • Listen to Howard’s National Press Club Address.

      Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

    This is the transcript of the Address to the National Press Club by the Prime Minister, John Howard, in the Great Hall, Parliament House, Canberra.

    A sense of balance: The Australian Achievement in 2006

    Thank you very much Mr Randall. Tomorrow, with a simple yet eloquent pledge, about 14,000 people from more than 70 countries of origin will become Australian citizens. This Australia Day celebration of citizenship embodies a profound truth and a simple irony.

    The truth is that people come to this country because they want to be Australians. The irony is that no institution or code lays down a test of Australianness. Such is the nature of our free society.

    It would however be a crushing mistake to downplay the hopes and the expectations of our national family. We expect all who come here to make an overriding commitment to Australia, its laws and its democratic values. We expect them to master the common language of English and we will help them to do so.

    We want them to learn about our history and heritage. And we expect each unique individual who joins our national journey to enrich it with their loyalty and their patriotism.

    Australia is a magnet for people from all corners of the globe not because of what it might become, but because of what it has become. It harvests the hopes and dreams of mankind because of the quality of life it offers the ordinary citizen – lives of opportunity and belonging; of growth and of balance.

    This achievement is higher, rarer and more precious than we commonly suppose.

    Not so long ago, the Economist Intelligence Unit released a ranking of life in major cities around the world. It found that of the 12 most liveable cities on earth, five of them are here in Australia.

    Of the top dozen, almost half in one country, this country with only a third of one per cent of the world’s population. This remarkable achievement went largely unnoticed in our public debate. Yet it evokes what, to my mind, is the secret of Australia’s greatness – our sense of balance.

    Today I want to locate this nation’s sense of balance at the centre of the modern Australian achievement and to explore its character. The balance in our economic life between the public and the private, the balance in our national identity between unity and diversity, the balance between history and geography in our global strategy, and the balance in our politics between rights and democratic responsibility.

    Balance is as crucial to a well-ordered society as it is to a full human life. It should not be mistaken for taking the middle road or splitting the difference. Nor does it imply a state that is static or a nation at rest.

    Quite the opposite. A sense of balance is the handmaiden of national growth and renewal. It helps us to respond creatively to an uncertain world with a sense of proportion.

    Keeping our balance means we reform and evolve so as to remain a prosperous, secure and united nation. It also means we retain those cherished values, beliefs and customs that have served us so well in the past.

    The great struggle of Australia’s first century of nationhood was to reconcile a market economy with a fair and decent society. At the start of the 21st century, we have found a healthier balance in our political economy between public and private – one in keeping with the times and the contemporary character of the Australian people.

    We encourage individual achievement and self-reliance without sacrificing the common good. We value our independence and chafe against bureaucracies that deny us choice and the capacity to shape our daily lives. Yet we are determined not to let go of the Australian ethos of a fair go for all.

    The permanent challenge for Australia is to avoid the extremes of big, overbearing government on the one hand and laissez-faire indifference on the other.

    There is much in American society which I admire, but I have long held the view that the absence of an effective safety net in that country means that too many needy citizens fall by the wayside. That is not the path that Australia will tread. Nor do we want the burdens of nanny state paternalism that now weigh down many economies in Europe.

    After more than two decades of reform, our economic performance is better than in the past and better than in most comparable countries. Fifteen years ago, Australia’s income per capita had fallen to 19th in the developed world. Today it’s recovered to be about the 8th highest. Total household disposable income has grown in real terms by more than a third over the last decade. Over the same period, real private sector wealth per capita has more than doubled.

    Broader measures of our national well-being are even more striking. Australia is now 3rd out of 177 countries on the United Nations’ Human Development Index which takes account of achievement in education enrolment, adult literacy levels, per capita GDP and life expectancy. And it’s not just statistics that tell the story of Australia’s economic renaissance. A report released last year on Australian Social Attitudes found that Australians are much more confident in the economy than they were a decade ago. Eighty per cent of people surveyed said that they were now proud of Australia’s economic achievements.

    Strong economic management has given Australia a government–generically speaking, in comparative terms which is lean but not mean. As a share of GDP, and this is a statistic worth repeating and emphasising in the context of current debate about the balance of revenue and expenditure. As a share of GDP, this country now has the second lowest level of general government outlays in the OECD, at 36 per cent; slightly lower even than in the United States and Japan and significantly lower than the average in Europe.

    The elimination of net government debt by this Government compares with average government debt across the OECD of approximately 50 per cent of GDP. Yet the real genius and achievement of modern Australia is an ability to clear new hurdles of reform without leaving behind the most vulnerable members in our society.

    Work done at the OECD has shown that the distribution of social benefits in Australia is so progressive – and the level of taxes paid by the poor is so low – that this nation redistributes more to the poorest 20 per cent of the population than virtually any other developed country.

    This Government has reinforced Australia’s safety net, but we also believe in the principle of mutual obligation. By this I mean not only that individuals ought to do something in return for the support they receive from society, but also that in order for society and the government to help people in need, they need to be willing to do something to help themselves. Far from undermining social protection, policies that promote responsible behaviour and self-reliance are essential pillars of a compassionate Australia.

    We strike the right balance between state support and personal responsibility in the provision of human services. Our health and education institutions are far from perfect. But by global standards their quality is high and they are well-resourced. In the years ahead, we must continue with reforms that make our hospitals and schools respond to the needs of individuals and not those of bureaucracies.

    The great test of our policy balance in coming decades will be our ability to reconcile inexorable demographic change with demands of Australians for even greater choice in education, health, family support and work opportunities.

    This will only be done by staying the course with reforms to the way we work and to our welfare arrangements. The first of the baby boomers are now turning 60. This milestone roughly coincides with the beginning of an expected decline in Australia’s labour force participation rate over coming decades.

    Today, there are roughly five working age Australians for every Australian over 65. In two generations that figure will have fallen to about 2.5. To sustain our prosperity in the face of this trend we must ensure that young Australians have skills for a lifetime. And we must reward them when they work.

    The social attitudes report that I mentioned a moment ago also had something to say about what ordinary Australians think of the Australian Achievement. It found that, compared with a decade ago, fewer Australians are ashamed of this nation’s past. I welcome this corrective in our national sense of self. It restores a better balance between pride in our past and recognition of past wrongs.

    Australians have not lost sight of the mistakes and injustices of our past, especially in the treatment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the first Australians.

    We know there is further to go on the road to Reconciliation with indigenous Australia. As I’ve said before, as a Government we are willing to meet the Indigenous people more than half way on this road.

    By sharing responsibility, governments and communities can help indigenous Australians build better lives, free from welfare dependency and based on solid economic foundations. If sometimes slow, progress is being made based on indigenous and non-indigenous Australians working side-by-side. With the 40th anniversary of the historic 1967 referendum approaching next year, our aim should be to deepen this legacy.

    At the Centenary of Federation five years ago, I said that Australia’s crowning achievement, borne of its egalitarian tradition, was its social cohesion. I still believe that. No country has absorbed as many people from as many nations and as many cultures as Australia and done it so well. The strength of a culturally diverse community, united by an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, is one of our greatest achievements and one of our great national assets.

    Some have questioned my optimism, especially in the wake of the violence in Sydney earlier this summer. These events brought shame on all involved. Australians, whatever their background, deserve to be treated with tolerance and with respect.

    Racial intolerance is incompatible with the kind of society we are and want to be. Within limits, all Australians have the right to express their culture and beliefs and to participate freely in our national life. And all Australians have a civic responsibility to support the basic structures and values of Australian society which guarantee us our freedom and equality. The criminal behaviour of last December should be met with the full force of the law. And I do not believe it calls for either national self-flagellation or moral panic.

    Our response should reflect this nation’s unswerving commitment to racial equality, that coupled with an absolute determination to ensure that all sections of the Australian community are fully integrated into the mainstream of our national life. And that involves a willingness on the part of the collective Australian nation to achieve that and an acceptance by all sections of the Australian community that that outcome should be achieved.

    On these bedrock principles rest both rights and responsibilities that apply to all Australians.

    In the 21st century, maintaining our social cohesion will remain the highest test of the Australian achievement. It demands the best Australian ideals of tolerance and decency, as well as the best Australian traditions of realism and of balance.

    Australia’s ethnic diversity is one of the enduring strengths of our nation. Yet our celebration of diversity must not be at the expense of the common values that bind us together as one people – respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual, a commitment to the rule of law, the equality of men and women and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need. Nor should it be at the expense of ongoing pride in what are commonly regarded as the values, traditions and accomplishments of the old Australia. A sense of shared values is our social cement. Without it we risk becoming a society governed by coercion rather than consent. That is not an Australia any of us would want to live in.

    Again, our goal must be to strive for a balance in questions of national identity and cultural diversity. And for the most part I think we achieve it. We’ve drawn back from being too obsessed with diversity to a point where Australians are now better able to appreciate the enduring values of the national character that we proudly celebrate and preserve. We’ve moved on from a time when multiculturalism, in the words of the historian Gregory Melleuish, came to be associated with ‘the transformation of Australia from a bad old Australia that was xenophobic, racist and monocultural to a good new Australia that is culturally diverse, tolerant and exciting’. Such a view was always a distortion and a caricature.

    Most nations experience some level of cultural diversity while also having a dominant cultural pattern running through them. In Australia’s case, that dominant pattern comprises Judeo-Christian ethics, the progressive spirit of the Enlightenment and the institutions and values of British political culture. Its democratic and egalitarian temper also bears the imprint of distinct Irish and non-conformist traditions.

    Of course, each wave of new settlers to Australia influences our culture and character, helping to forge new attitudes and traditions. From our art and literature to our scholarship and diplomacy, greater cultural diversity has changed how we see ourselves and how we view the world. It has contributed to our more enterprising and entrepreneurial society. We should have faith in what we have achieved and what we have become.

    Quite apart from a strong focus on Australian values, I believe the time has also come for root and branch renewal of the teaching of Australian history in our schools, both in terms of the numbers learning and the way it is taught. For many years, it’s been the case that fewer than one-in-four senior secondary students in Australia take a history subject. And only a fraction of this study relates to Australian history. Real concerns also surround the teaching of Australian history in lower secondary and primary schools. Too often history has fallen victim in an ever more crowded curriculum to subjects deemed more ‘relevant’ to today. Too often, it is taught without any sense of structured narrative, replaced by a fragmented stew of ‘themes’ and ‘issues’. And too often, history, along with other subjects in the humanities, has succumbed to a postmodern culture of relativism where any objective record of achievement is questioned or repudiated.

    Part of preparing young Australians to be informed and active citizens is to teach them the central currents of our nation’s development. The subject matter should include indigenous history as part of the whole national inheritance. It should also cover the great and enduring heritage of Western civilisation, those nations that became the major tributaries of European settlement and in turn a sense of the original ways in which Australians from diverse backgrounds have created our own distinct history. It is impossible, for example, to understand the history of this country without an understanding of the evolution of parliamentary democracy or the ideas that galvanised the Enlightenment.

    In the end, young people are at risk of being disinherited from their community if that community lacks the courage and confidence to teach its history. This applies as much to the children of seventh generation Australians or indigenous children as it does to those of recent migrants, young Australian Muslims, or any other category one might want to mention. When it comes to being an Australian there is no hierarchy of descent. Whether our ancestors were here thousands of years ago, whether they came on the First Fleet or in the 19th century, or whether we or our ancestors are amongst the millions of Australians who have come to our shores since the Second World War, we are all equally Australians – one no better than the other.

    So tomorrow let us indeed celebrate our diversity. But we should also affirm the sentiment that propelled our nation to Federation 105 years ago – one People, One Destiny.

    Australia’s standing in the world has never been higher. We are seen as a fair-minded and generous country. We are seen as a country that stands up for what it believes in. We are respected for who we are, for the quality of our ideas and for the unique perspective we bring to our region and to the world. The divisive, phoney debate about national identity and what it means for our influence in the world has been finally laid to rest. Australia is a liberal democracy with global political and economic interests and a proud history of defending freedom against its enemies. We do not have to smother or apologise for our place in the Western political tradition in order to build our relationships in Asia or in any other part of the world.

    To grasp what I mean when I say that Australia occupies a unique intersection of history, geography, culture and economic circumstance is quite simple. Simply look at what we do. Last December, Australia was at the centre of the inaugural East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur, a symbol not just of our geographic proximity or trade links with Asia but of the values and relationships we bring to regional engagement. Two weeks ago, we convened the first meeting of the Asia Pacific Partnership on Climate Change in Sydney, illustrating our capacity to build regional coalitions and to lead on issues of global significance. In a couple of months time, Melbourne will host the Commonwealth Games – an event that combines our history, our passion for sport and Australia’s unrivalled capacity to stage major events in a friendly and sophisticated environment. In August, the Trade Minister will host a meeting of the Cairns Group, marking two decades of Australia’s crusade to free up world agricultural trade. And in November, Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the Group of 20 nations will gather in Australia as the Treasurer leads efforts to update and strengthen the world’s financial architecture.

    The Government’s commitment to capture and harness the opportunities of globalisation for the betterment of all our people is a major driver of our international strategy. In the 21st century, for the first time in history, we are witnessing the emergence of a global middle class. Of all the deep trends in global politics, few will match this one. Previously, the vast bulk of the world’s middle class citizens lived in the industrialised countries – in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Japan and Australia. This is no longer the case. It’s estimated that India and China combined could easily produce middle classes of 400 to 800 million people over the next two generations – roughly the size of the current middle-class populations of the United States, Western Europe and Japan combined. Based on what we know about the relationship between income growth, health standards, political participation and environmental stewardship, the growth of this global middle class represents an enormously positive development for the world and for Australia. It also illuminates the historic nature of the Australian achievement as a global pioneer of good government and human development.

    Of course, our world is also fragmented and in conflict. This is the fifth year that we have lived under the shadow of global terrorism and nothing suggests that shadow is lifting any time soon. Terrorism remains the defining element in Australia’s security environment. Australians and Australian interests continue to be a terrorist target, both abroad and at home. This tests our sense of balance no less than our resolve. We know what our enemies think and what they are capable of. They hate our freedoms and our way of life. They despise our democratic values. They have nothing but contempt for a diverse society which practises tolerance and respect. Australia must continue to work with friends and allies in the fight against global terrorism. And in 2006, living with the threat of terrorism also means recognising that national security begins at home.

    Our social cohesion and national unity is pivotal in enabling Australia to contribute effectively to the international effort to combat terrorism, and to safeguard Australia domestically. This Government will do what is necessary to protect the Australian community, but we will do it in a way that does not diminish us as a community or as a nation. This means finding the right balance between the legitimate interests of the community on the one hand and individual civil rights on the other. And inevitably this will be a matter for passionate debate.

    Some Australians have argued in recent times that the balance has moved too far. They want to shift it in the other direction, principally through a Bill of Rights. I believe this would be a big mistake for our democracy. A Bill of Rights would not materially increase the freedoms of Australian citizens. It will not make us more united, indeed I believe it would lessen our ability to manage and to resolve conflict in a free society. It would also take us further away from the type of civic culture we need to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. No matter how skilfully crafted, a Bill of Rights always embodies the potential for misinterpretation, unintended consequences or accidental exclusion. History is replete with examples of where grand charters and lyric phrases have failed to protect the basic rights and freedoms of a nation’s citizens.

    The strength and vitality of Australian democracy rests on three great institutional pillars: our parliament with its tradition of robust debate; the rule of law upheld by an independent and admirably incorruptible judiciary; and a free and sceptical press of the sort that we politicians simply adore. I’ve called this trilogy in the past the real title deeds of our democracy, a political inheritance that has given us a record of stability and cohesion that is the envy of the world. I have never been persuaded by those who claim that the road to good government is via taking more and more decisions out of the hands of the people’s elected representatives. It my passes my comprehension that people should devote their life and their energy to securing a place in one of the Parliaments of the nation and then spend much of their time suggesting that decisions should be passed by that Parliament to unelected individuals or unelected bodies. In our parliamentary democracy, politicians are elected to make decisions on behalf of the community. They are elected by the people and, ultimately, they are answerable to the people for the decisions they make. To draw these decisions away from the legislature and the executive and to invest them in the hands of the judiciary would irrevocably change our democracy. And it would hamper our ability to respond to changes in a way that reflects the realities we now face.

    And incidentally, does anyone seriously contend that we can improve the education of our children, raise our national productivity, or better care for older Australians by further entrenching the language and culture of rights in our public discourse? Together, responsive democratic institutions and an active civil society provide more effective protection for the rights of Australian citizens than any charter of rights could hope to achieve.

    Let me again cite the Australian Social Attitudes report on the state of our civil society. Contrary to the pessimism of some commentators, it found that Australians are not losing trust in each other. The voluntary sector – the lifeblood of active Australian citizenship – remains strong and healthy with 86 per cent of respondents belonging to at least one voluntary association. Australians have lost none of their volunteer spirit or the democratic temper for which they are renowned. Our ability to poke fun at those in positions of power is undiminished. We cannot abide pretentiousness in our public officials and we laugh at those who take themselves too seriously.

    Warts and all, I believe in our unique democracy because I believe passionately in the virtue of politics. The political philosopher Bernard Crick put it well when he said ‘The moral consensus of a free state is not something mysteriously prior to or above politics: it is the activity (the civilising activity) of politics itself.’ With all its compromises, parochialism and imperfections, this place of mere politics works as the great balancing wheel of our national life.

    Australia is one of only a handful of nations to have carried the torch of democracy through a turbulent 20th century. We began that century the first nation ever to come into being following a people’s vote on a democratic constitution. We ended it staging the most successful Olympic Games of all time.

    So far in this new century, we’ve made a good start. Our economy is strong. Our society is cohesive. Our nation is respected around the world. Our democracy is robust. If there is a lesson I’ve drawn from the last almost ten years as Prime Minister it is that Australia’s greatness is not found in its Gross Domestic Product, the size of its defence budget or its international standing – important though all of these things are. It is found in the good and decent and generous character of the Australian people. Tomorrow, let us renew our faith in the Australian achievement. We have great cause for optimism, if we keep our balance.

    Thank you.