London, 21 June 1972
You wrote to me on 12th May about the difficulties experienced by some Australians in relation to our immigration control. 1
I attach the greatest importance to the prompt and courteous treatment of passengers passing through our immigration control, and immigration officers are left in no doubt about this. Inevitably, with the enormous numbers of passengers concerned, and with conditions as they are at some of the ports, there will be the occasional awkward case. One recognises, moreover, that when passengers are tired after long journeys, and are anxious to get on to their destination, they may be more than ordinarily sensitive when officials ask them questions which it is their duty to ask. This we try to take into account. In general, I believe that the immigration control is operated courteously and sympathetically. Although more than 30 million passengers a year are dealt with by immigration officers very few complaints are received, and of these even fewer are found, on investigation, to be justified.
I am sorry to learn that some Australians feel that they are no longer welcome here. This, as you say in your letter, is not so; but it is no easy matter to convert those who hold these views, particularly because of the unbalanced criticism that appears in the press in Australia whenever there are difficulties involving an Australian, sometimes I think without much regard to the merits of the individual case. The fact is that Australians arrive here in increasing numbers year by year and that hardly any encounter difficulty. You will know that substantial and increasing use is made of the working holidaymaker concession which enables young Australians to stay here for up to three years and to take employment during their stay.
I have had the complaints made by the Agents-General investigated, so far as we have been able to identify the incidents, and the enclosed summaries set out what we have been able to discover.2 The cases of Mr Ayles and Miss Thomas do not seem to contain justifiable grounds for complaint. Despite intensive enquiries we have not managed to trace the case of the Australian lady with the German husband mentioned by Mr Bovell. If you can let me have full details, I will gladly look into it. Nor have we been able to identify the occasion of Sir Murray Porter’s experience at Dover, and it would help if you would let me know the date and time of Sir Murray’s arrival, and the Continental port from which he embarked. It would be particularly helpful, if the immigration officer stamped Sir Murray’s passport, to know the number shown on the stamp. I can then look into this.
I do not think that the two cases in the summaries justify the Agents-General in their general criticism of the way in which the Home Office, including immigration officers, operate the immigration control. Officials give effect to Government policy, under instructions from Ministers, and they are required under the immigration rules to act without discrimination. It is difficult to refute a general complaint that ‘there is a mounting impression that Australians are not welcomed in Britain with anything like the same friendliness as in previous years’. I feel sure personally that immigration and other officials normally treat all visitors courteously. I am equally sure that there is just as much good feeling towards Australians in this country as ever. Whatever may be the attitude of the Press and other media, I trust that the general climate of opinion in Australia is not as critical as you say.
To the extent that there is criticism, I believe that it can only be based on a small number of difficult cases, and I very much hope that you and the Agents-General will do what you can to put these matters in perspective. I shall certainly try to do this myself. When difficulties do arise, as they are bound to occasionally, I hope that you will let me know at once, giving the fullest possible details.
1 Document 332.
2 SeeUKNA:FC024/1313.
[UKNA: FC0 24/1313]