Australian High Commission, London, undated [October 1971]
Points—Australia House: Arguments for Continuing Present Arrangements
Foreign Affairs’ comments tend to assume that the relationship with Britain is essentially diplomatic in character. It is basically a cultural relationship which feeds our institutions, our language, our social and political concepts. As long as Australia is a small country with the problems of geography and growth, the input from British parliamentary democracy is bound to be of a profound and leading significance for us beyond the ordinary reaches of diplomacy.
2. Our constitutional relationship is special as exemplified by the status of the Queen as our Head of State and the appointment of governors for the States and the Governor-General for the Commonwealth. The presence in London of an Agent-General from every state of Australia is a mark of the special nature of our relationship with its far-ranging interests.
3. The only other models of significance in relation to Britain are Canada and New Zealand. The Canadians are bi-lingual and are required to suppress to some degree the affairs of their connection with Britain. The New Zealanders are a small country with a small unitary government whose Prime Minister can normally accommodate the role of Foreign Minister. The historic reasons are thus still important and an effective influence in creating a need for special relations.
4. A general defence of the present arrangement must look behind this role in comparison to the United States. We can do little consciously to impress American public opinion in our favour although we have made great efforts to do so but our standing in the United States is very much in the hands of the United States which extends no more special consideration to us than they do to 50 or so other countries with which they have alliance; we get our turn. The British on the other hand still regard Australia as having ties of considerable binding force to the degree that without any written treaty Australia would call for a British contribution to its defence if in our isolation it proved necessary. There are changes and we need to adapt to them but we should avoid consciously taking steps whose only effect can be to weaken the strength and quality of special relations. For Australia, Britain is the alternative great power to the United States. It is in our hands to influence the strength of our standing in Britain.
5. The role of the British High Commissioner in London is that of a political figure who has access to the highest policy-makers in the British Government. He is chosen, as it were, to be one of their number and not merely for qualities as an accredited diplomat. Although the professional diplomatic outreach of the Office of a High Commissioner may be criticised he performs and is chosen for his role as the man who moves into the inner circles of political London. There is no comparable facility available to any of our ambassadors anywhere in the world.
6. It can be argued that our relations with the United States are conducted too much as a diplomatic exercise, that power is dispensed not so much by the State Department but by the major congressional committees and the lobbies and interests that bear upon them. It can be held with reason that by conducting our relations with the United States purely as a diplomatic exercise we fail to reach the centres of power and influence in the United States where decisions affecting us are being framed. This is the reverse side of the coin to London.
[NAA:A1209, 1971/9449 PART 1]