Canberra, 8 August 1972
Confidential
Sir Keith Waller called to see me by arrangement to discuss the Australia house transfer, including date.
2. He brought with him Mr L.H. Border. 1
3. Sir Keith referred to the Minister’s letter of 2 August to the Prime Minister.2 He then referred to what he saw to be next steps. These included:—
- a further letter from the Minister to the Prime Minister;
- a message from the Prime Minister to the High Commissioner;
- a message from the Prime Minister to the British Prime Minister;
- a message from the Minister to the High Commissioner.
4. He left me a full list of steps, now marked ‘A’, and a set of drafts, now marked ‘B’.3
5. I read the drafts. I said there may be one or two points to raise, though basically I understood the steps.
6. But I believed there were some prior questions—of a deck-clearing kind.
7. I had seen the Foreign Minister’s letter to the Prime Minister. But also I had seen the Prime Minister’s comments on it.
8. I quoted them to Sir Keith. They were to the effect that the High Commissioner would need to be advised; that the Prime Minister still had some reservations; and that some subjects, which were written down as The Palace and the Commonwealth Secretariat, etc, would need to be ‘reserved’.
[ matter omitted ]
11. As to date, I noted that the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister would need to be ready to announce one when Parliament met. Further I believed it should be a date before the High Commissioner goes. Any date was arbitrary, but two possibilities were 1 September and 1 October.
12. I noted that Mr Bowen’s letter was written in terms of the Prime Minister having agreed to one date or the other. I could understand that inference, though I did not think the discussion while I was present was as specific as that. I was to make a proposal to the Prime Minister.
13. Sir Keith said that the letter was written on the basis of Mr Bowen’s report and understanding of the outcome. He had signed the letter—which is substantiation of his understanding.
14. I then mentioned to Sir Keith that there were various points I had listed as requiring special consideration.
15. I gave him the attached list.
16. Items 1, 3 and 4 concerning the Queen, Prime Minister to Prime Minister relationships, and direct access by High Commissioners, did not appear to come under any question.
17. On item 2, Commonwealth Secretariat, Sir Keith said he believed the function of relationships with the Secretariat should be with Foreign Affairs but he did not regard it as an issue. Mr Border said that it would have to be clear that the responsibility belonged with one department or the other.
18. We then came to departmental arrangements and the Public Service Act deputy—item 5.
19. Sir Keith referred to a number of posts where the appointment by the Foreign Minister is subject to the concurrence of the Prime Minister. There would be no difficulty in adding the Deputy High Commissioner to this list.
20. I said first that I ought to have made a special reference in my list to the appointment of the High Commissioner. Sir Keith agreed.
21. Regarding the deputy—I understood the Prime Minister to be looking beyond ‘concurrence’ and to have the power of nomination.
22. Sir Keith said that for his part he could not accept that. It would be up to the Minister—but he would advise him not to accept it.
23. I said Sir Keith was puzzling me and there may not even be a great deal of difference in what we were each saying. It being a Public Service Act appointment, it seemed to me that the Prime Minister would have a claim to make it anyway.
24. Sir Keith said that against that background he thought it was not worth while continuing the discussion. He could not see how the Foreign Minister could accept the responsibility for a Mission and then be denied power of initiation of appointments.
25. I said I thought he was overdrawing the point.
26. He said he did not at all think so. On what I was saying, and having regard to expressions of ‘reluctance’, it appeared that the best thing would be for the Prime Minister to cancel the arrangement to transfer Australia House to Foreign Affairs.
27. Sir Keith then moved to leave the office.
28. I said he should stay—this was not a breaking point. Surely it was something we could discuss.
29. Also, we had not yet got down to a date, which was something I wanted to do.
30. He said he did not think he should stay. There appeared to be no progress to be made. I had had plenty of time to come to arrangements—some months. I had not done so. He had been very patient. He would have to report to his Minister.
31. I acknowledged his patience. I said again I wanted to talk about dates and have arrangements for transfer made.
32. He said he did not feel inclined to stay.
33. I again said I wished he would.
34. Sir Keith then withdrew—Mr Border joining him.
Note for discussion with Sir Keith Waller—Australia House special relationships
1. The Queen—honours, royal visits, constitutional links embodied in the monarchy.
2. Commonwealth Secretariat—Prime Minister and head of Government association.
3. British Government—Prime Minister to Prime Minister relations and direct communication.
4. Direct access of the two High Commissioners.
5. Departmental arrangements—‘Permanent Head’ Deputy.
The above matters to remain under the Prime Minister.
Other matters
6. British migrants—special role of Australia House.
7. Systems of Government—Australia and Britain—direct success.
1 Lewis H. Border, Deputy Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs.
2 Document 389.
3 See NAA: A1209, 1971/9449 part 2.
[NAA: Al209, 1971/9449 PART 2]