British High Commission, Canberra, 17 September 1970
1043. Confidential
Visit of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster
Mr Rippon visited Australia 15–17 September. Apart from a dinner given by the Department of Trade and Industry for him to meet representatives of agriculture, industry and finance in Sydney, the whole of his time was spent in Canberra. In discussions with Ministers, he made it plain on repeated occasions that, while Britain had every sympathy with Australia and would do her best to represent Australian interests, the only concession which could in practice be expected was on the transitional period which we should try to make as long as possible. He was for the most part well received and it was apparent that there has been a fundamental change in Australian opinion since 1961. Now, while they are still worried about the impact on individual agricultural sectors, most of the emotion has gone out of the issue. There is much greater self-confidence about Australia’s future and a general recognition that if we can get reasonable terms for ourselves we must go in. Nevertheless, it seems likely that Mr McEwen will continue his efforts to secure support for an attack in the GATT on the application of the existing Common Agricultural Policy in an enlarged Community.
2. The main substantive discussion was with Mr McEwen and Mr Anthony, Minister for Primary Industry. Throughout the discussion McEwen was in a somewhat dour and petulant mood. He said that he had found, in contrast to 1961, little encouragement in London and utter indifference in Brussels. So he had been forced to fall back on Australia’s legal rights under GATT. He had never claimed that Australia had the same case as a developing country and he would certainly not try to climb on New Zealand’s back. But something had to be done for those primary producers who would be deprived of their livelihood, and a transitional period would be of little value particularly since the benefits would taper off. He tried at one point to suggest that Mr Barber’s Luxembourg speech implied that in relation to sugar we should not restrict our efforts to developing Commonwealth countries. Anthony supported him by pointing out that Australian agriculture was going through its worst period since the depression and our membership of the Community would accentuate present pressures. He said there was a general feeling that Britain was pre-occupied with the Community and insufficiently concerned about the Australian agricultural situation.
3. Mr Rippon took them over the essentials of our position. We should have to try to make provision for those developing countries and dependencies which simply could not otherwise sustain themselves. But change had to come and we could not take responsibility for the inevitable effects of changing trade on Australia. We would do our best to present the Australian case but it was not realistic to expect more than a transitional period. Our efforts would be concentrated on securing as long a period as possible for agriculture, so that it might be five to seven years before the full effects would be felt. Once we were in the Community its agricultural policy would change but we could not make this conditional entry.
4. Anthony took a hard line in a television interview on the night ofMr Rippon’s arrival and repeated this in a separate discussion with Mr Rippon.
5. The Minister of External Territories raised with Mr Rippon the question of Papua/New Guinea and emphasised how heavily dependent the territory was on the UK market for coconut oil and pyrethrum in particular. Papua had of course originally been a British colony and the territory had close affinities with the Solomon Islands. Mr Rippon said it would be difficult to contemplate any special arrangement for a territory which was dependent on a country outside the Community. He added however that Papua/New Guinea could be used with the Community as a good example of the need to find some solution for the Community’s relationship with emerging territories as a whole. Mr Barnes asked if Mr Rippon would receive a delegation from Papua/New Guinea which was planning to visit London and other European capitals later in the year. Mr Rippon promised to do so.
6. Mr Rippon’s main public appearance was at the National Press Club. His speech […] was well received and questioning was not hostile.1
7. Australian Prime Minister is still recovering from the minor operation (removal of a fistula) which he had last week, and sent a message through Mr McEwen saying that he much regretted not being able to see Mr Rippon. Mr McEwen gave Mr Rippon a parliamentary lunch which was well attended by ministers and senior officials, and I gave a dinner attended by representatives of industry and agriculture from Melbourne and elsewhere as well as by the ministers and officials mainly concerned.
8. It was a pity that the Prime Minister was out of action and the two leading Liberal ministers, McMahon and Bury, were attending international meetings overseas. Between them they could certainly have given Mr Rippon a more balanced picture of Australia’s reaction to our joining the Community. The fact is that the Country Party are playing internal politics and using the genuine problems which our entry will create for Australia as part of their perennial struggle to differentiate themselves from the Liberals and justify their existence as a separate party. Given the prospect of McEwen’s retirement from politics early next year, Anthony, as Deputy Leader, clearly feels his chief’s mantle falling on his shoulders, and has started to talk equally tough. From reactions in the press and in the country (including Queensland which I recently visited) Australians as a whole seem at present to be rather bored with McEwen’s campaign. This would of course change when our entry becomes more imminent.
9. It was a very useful visit. In a tactful and agreeable way Mr Rippon was able to leave the Australians in no doubt of our real position.
1 Document 269.
[UKNA: FCO 30/804]