Canberra, 20 December 1972
Secret
The High Commissioner who called on instructions and at his own request referred to the bout de papier he had earlier left with Sir Keith Waller.2 The Prime Minister said that he had seen the bout de papier and discussed it with Sir Keith Waller. He said he thought that the proposals looked too lofty—especially that for consultations at senior ministerial level. He would prefer informal discussions between officials. The Prime Minister said that he had two things in mind in coming to this point of view:– firstly, there was clearly a dispute in the Commons between the Labour and Conservative Parties and within the Conservative Party itself on this question. He did not want the Australian Government’s attitude to be drawn into British political controversy. The second consideration was that he did not want any impression to arise that Australia was so akin to Britain that we should automatically become involved in solving Imperial legacies. He was aware that the British Government faced a number of problems arising out of the disintegration of its former empire and the Prime Minister thought the most helpful thing Australia could do in such a situation would be to adhere firmly to the line that the solution of these problems was essentially a British responsibility. The Prime Minister was insistent that people abroad must not get the impression that Australia had any responsibility for Britain’s colonial aftermath.
2. He sympathised with Britain’s problem arising from its earlier ‘open door’ policy of entry by British Citizens from Commonwealth countries. While he did not want Australia’s attitude towards immigration questions to result in Australia’s being regarded as the South Africa of the Antipodes, he thought it rational and natural for people already settled in Australia to decide who should immigrate here.
3. He said that the best the British Government could expect from his Government was that it did not comment on such issues. This was a view he had adhered to for over ten years and he had deliberately avoided commenting on Britain’s entry into the EEC and likewise on questions of immigration to Britain.
4. The High Commissioner said he thought it might be helpful if there were to be discussions at officials’ level so that details of what was envisaged might be considered by both sides. He was hopeful that Australian officials might be able to provide some practical advice in the solution of existing problems. The Prime Minister agreed this might be helpful and that informal discussions between officials could take place but not consultations at senior ministerial levels. He would be much happier not to be asked to have consultations at senior ministerial level as he did not want them. The British Government should believe that he would not say anything that would embarrass them; he had not done so on the EEC and he would not do so on the immigration question.
5. The Prime Minister said he hoped Lord Carrington would not ask for discussions on this question but he would be prepared to have private and informal discussion on the matter with Lord Carrington provided this did not lead to subsequent press or parliamentary comment. The High Commissioner said he had no doubt that the proposed immigration rules had had some effect on Anglo-Australian relations and had caused pain and grief to some Australians. He felt many Australians thought they had been hard done by and he believed there was some fence mending to be done. The holding of officials’ talks could demonstrate that there were no bars to getting together on practical questions. The Prime Minister agreed. He said he wanted to cut down on advertising on immigration in Britain and he thought we had been unwise in paying for so many British people coming to Australia as many of them went back to the UK. The High Commissioner wondered, in fact, how many went back to Britain to stay and referred to the psychology of immigration and cheap forms of transport which resulted in people going back to their country of origin to check if they had made the right decision in migrating in the first place.
6. The Prime Minister said that some of the actions he envisaged might be regarded by some as anti-British. For his part he might not intend to publicise them in this way. He intended to cut down on a lot of monarchical paraphernalia. Australia and Australians must grow up a bit more. Some of our past associations with Britain, e.g. in Malaysia and Hong Kong, had been more to Britain’s benefit than ours. However, he thought it best for him not to profess these views or protest too much concern but rather to take it coolly. The High Commissioner said he hoped that relations would return to an even keel. On the immigration question, Britain had to avoid any charges of discrimination on grounds of colour. He said there was a dilemma between strong feelings of kinship for Australians and the need to convince the coloured Commonwealth that there was no discrimination. He appreciated that it went against the grain for Australians to ‘walk through some other gate’. Immigration, therefore, was an irritant. He said that he thought that the purely confidential officials’ discussions, to which Mr Kirk had agreed, should assist and wondered if these might take place in early or mid–January. The Prime Minister said that he agreed with this and that the timing could be worked out between the officials concerned. As far as Lord Carrington was concerned he would be prepared to discuss the immigration question privately, informally and without commitment.
[ matter omitted ]
1 Mr R.S. Laurie from the Department of Foreign Affairs also attended.
2 Document 365.
[NAA: A1838, 67/1/3 PART 7]