355

CABLEGRAM, WALLER TO PRITCHETT

Canberra, 27 November 1972

15135. Confidential

Immigration into Britain

Thanks for your 19078/79. 1

2. Perhaps I might comment first on your telegrams which throw valuable light on the situation which is causing difficulties for you. I think the basic fact about the agitation against the riew British immigration regulations is that this agitation is being stimulated and sustained by expatriate Australians and other old Commonwealth expatriates in the United Kingdom (and only to a minor extent by potential expatriate Australians in Australia). Although the Australian Press has covered recent events in British Parliament and Press fairly intently, editorial comment in Australia has been relatively mild and not too widespread. At the same time, the British High Commissioner told me that they are not receiving letters of protest from the Australian public and indeed are not even receiving many enquiries as to how the new rules will apply. Likewise, Australian Government departments and particularly the Department of Immigration, are not receiving much mail on this subject.

3. Also a most important factor is that neither the Prime Minister nor the leader of the opposition have deemed it necessary or desirable to make this matter in any way an issue in the present election campaign, (although there was a reference to it by Morrison MP over the weekend).

4. Regarding your 19079,2 I think Braine should be handled very circumspectly. I think you might respond to him by telephone as in paragraph 18 of your 190783 revised as follows:—

(I) Use (A), drop (B) for the moment and amend (C) as follows:

The Australian Government has no wish to become publicly involved in this matter which it regarded as primarily the concern of the United Kingdom Government. The Government has however kept itself fully informed regarding the new regulations by high level contacts both in London and Canberra. The Australian Government now feels it should hold its hand until informed of any revision of the rules that might result from recent events in the House of Commons.

(II) Revise (D) as follows:

Should the United Kingdom at an appropriate stage propose consultations with Commonwealth countries, the Australian Government, for its part, would be happy to co-operate.

5. As additional background to use with Braine and for other purposes, the following is the text of an oral statement made by the Prime Minister in Brisbane on 24 November.

Begins:–

‘ We don’t like other people interfering in our affairs and we would react if there was criticism by other Governments of our legislation.

So I would not be prepared to be critical about what happens in the British House of Commons.

What I can say is we have been in close touch with the British Government and they have kept us pretty well informed of what has happened.

Now we know that the British are looking at the regulations again and we are ready if they would like us to participate in any ministerial consultations in order to ensure that Australians are treated in a way that we think is satisfactory not only as Australians but as members of the Commonwealth.’

ENDS

6. You should seek an early opportunity of mentioning this to the FCO and also informing them of the lines of your response to Braine’s approach. You might also bring the Prime Minister’s remarks, as above, to the attention of the Agents-General.

7. Regarding the statement about Australia in this week’s ‘Economist’, to which you refer in para. 5 of your 19078, we should not favour your sending them a reply for publication. We feel that any reply might only stimulate the ‘Economist’ to further controversial activity.

8. We agree strongly with the point in para. 9 of your 19078 that British offices abroad should be fully briefed to answer any enquiries about the application of the new rules. (We also agree that in their own interests it would have been desirable for the British authorities to give us some advance notice of the new rules but we do not wish to refer to this since the British themselves have now offered us the prospect of consultations on these matters.) We also believe that the way in which the new rules are administered, if and when they come into force, and their clear explanation to the public will be just as important as the rules themselves. It has in fact been our experience that since Commonwealth immigration became a problem for Britain, the administration of the rules, as they affected Australians entering Britain, have been generally flexible.

9. Finally, I do not believe that this week, with ministers unavailable for consultations, is the time for a statement from the Australian Government dealing with the merits of the matter, particularly since we do not know what revisions, if any, the British Government will decide to put forward when they present the Bill to Parliament again. l think any developments in Australia during this week will depend on what, if anything, may emerge on this matter in Australia during this time. It would seem reasonable to ask the Agents-General and others in London who feel strongly on this matter to moderate their understandable feelings during this time, since agitation by them at the London end can only cause embarrassment here at home.

1 Documents 352 and 353.

2 Document 353.

3 Document 352.

[NAA: A1838, 6711/3 PART 6]