Brussels, 14 June 1962
134. Secret
I understand that it has been suggested by the Australian Government that Australian experts could usefully attend meetings of Working Parties when matters of particular interest to Australia are under discussion, and that you may be intending to instruct me to raise this possibility with the Six.
2. I recognise the question of Australian attendance at Working Parties was left open in March but three months have passed since the previous exchanges with Australia, Westerman has meanwhile given the Six a full exposition of Australian views, and we are up against time, if we are to obtain a vue d’ensemble by end of July. This objective would be seriously prejudiced if we had to risk loss of time and momentum in discussing the proposal in Deputies and providing time in Working Parties for hearing Australian representatives.
3. It is true that the Six might turn down the proposal but this is by no means certain (even the Dutch have given indications of being prepared for further Commonwealth participation).
4. There are the following further implications:
(a) The groundwork which has occupied the negotiations for most of this year has now largely been completed, and there is very little technical work which will be useful between now and the achievement of the vue d’ensemble. Effectively the only Working Party now meeting a sept is that on Horticulture, and confusion and loss of time would result if at the present stage of negotiations we set up Working Parties on subjects which have already been well worked over at expert level.
(b) Other Commonwealth Governments would be encouraged to follow Australia’s example. The interests of individual Commonwealth Governments are not always the same and this would present some very difficult problems for the participating Commonwealth Governments as well as for the negotiations themselves.
(c) Australian and other Commonwealth views and interests are bound to run counter to our own on occasion. This is a negotiation between British [sic] and the Community in which we have undertaken to try to get arrangements which will safeguard essential Commonwealth interests. If we now have to conduct even part of the negotiations in the presence of Commonwealth representatives, it is going to be harder, not easier, to maintain smooth relations with the Australian and other Commonwealth Governments.
(d) It would not be any help to extend the Westerman example and allow Australian etc representatives to be heard for a short time at one of the Working Parties and then withdraw. The Six would, no doubt, behave politely to the Australian representative, who would not therefore be brought face to face with the obstacles we have to surmount in the course of negotiations.
(e) Our judgment on whether to put matters to Working Parties would have to be taken with the Australians etc in mind. Thus lead and zinc, beef, and mutton would all have to go to Working Parties in order to satisfy the Australians, whereas, from the point of view of the negotiations themselves, reference of these subjects to a Working Party would be at best a waste of valuable time and at worst might further complicate the issues involved.
5. Although I understand how difficult it may be for Her Majesty’s Government to appear negative towards this Australian request at this time, I am afraid that it presents us with a real problem from the point of view of the negotiations. I therefore feel bound to record this delegation’s view that it would be very undesirable to put forward now a request for further Australian participation and to express the hope that, on balance, it may be found possible to persuade the Australian Government to drop the idea.
[UKNA: DO 159/60]