Canberra, 15 August 1972
Confidential
I write concerning arrangements for the transfer to you and your Department of responsibility for administration of Australia House.
Over the 60 years that Australia House has been part of the Prime Minister’s Department, it has developed many features which distinguish it from other overseas posts. Many of these I am anxious to maintain and I think it appropriate that I set out my views of the basis on which I consider it should continue to operate and provide service for the very wide range of interests now looking to it for support in one way or another.
First, London is the normal residence of Her Majesty the Queen. As Queen of Australia, important relationships have to be maintained between the Palace and the Government. I think not only of such specific matters as honours and the planning of Royal visits, but of the more general constitutional links embodied in the Monarchy. In the past Australia House, under successive Prime Ministers, has constituted an important link in the chain. I wish this link to continue with undiminished strength. Accordingly, responsibility for relations with the Sovereign will remain with me and my Department.
Second, there are our relations with the British Government. Starting at the Prime Minister level, you will remember that I have already said expressly to Mr Heath that any transfer of responsibility for the administration of Australia House would not in any way affect the practice of direct communication between the two Prime Ministers—a channel which is valued by us both. With this will be associated the existing special right of access by our High Commissioner in London and the British High Commissioner in Canberra, and the consequential access to my Department by him and his staff on a normal rather than a special basis.
Normal matters of Foreign Affairs will of course rest with yourself and your Department, as indeed has been increasingly the case in recent years. But what must be made clear is that direct access to myself or my Department is to be viewed constructively as reflecting the broader and deeper links between the two countries and not as an unwelcome derogation from the full ‘foreign affairs’ relationship with Britain.
Largely because of the very close similarity between our system of government and the Westminster system, Australia House has developed to permit intimate and direct access between departmental representatives in London and their opposite numbers in the British Government. Reciprocally, the British High Commission here has certain specialist direct links, and reasonably free access to departments; for example the British Defence Liaison Service with the Defence Department. This kind of intimate and productive relationship works well because Australian and British personnel have virtually opposite numbers in most Departments—there have been many examples where direct interchange has been effective, such as in the Cabinet Office, Labour and National Service, Supply and the Armed Services.
In other Departments, such as Civil Aviation, the Post Office and Education and Science, British problems and practices are similar to our own.
This has meant the development in Australia House of what I believe to be a unique pattern by which on the one hand we have not only allowed, but welcomed direct and continuing liaison between our Australian representatives and their British counterparts.
It has been a conscious policy of the senior levels in Australia House to avoid attempting to control or co-ordinate the many separate channels which flow both ways between Britain and Australia. I want this arrangement to be continued and developed, because the relationships we have with the British are so much deeper over a broad area than those with other countries that any attempt at formal regulation or control at levels below the High Commissioner—whether by Foreign Affairs or by any other Department—will have the effect of restricting them and of reducing their full value.
Given the wide range of departmental representation—mostly at senior level—in Australia House, it has become traditional for Australia House to have at its head a former Minister and, as his Deputy, a Commonwealth public servant of permanent head status. In this way, Australia House can better function as a microcosm of the system in Canberra and represent Australia’s attitudes and aspirations in an up to date and authoritative fashion.
I wish this arrangement to continue after the transfer of responsibility for Australia House to the extent that appointment of High Commissioners should continue to be the Prime Minister’s decision. This will involve reaching understanding with you about the lines of responsibility under which the High Commissioner would function.
Similarly, there is a need to discuss with you the methods of appointing the Senior Deputy High Commissioner.
Among his functions, the Senior Deputy High Commissioner would have responsibility, next to the High Commissioner, for relations with the Palace. He would also have responsibility at the official level for relations with the British Cabinet Office and with the Commonwealth Secretary on those matters of interest and concern to me. He would act for the High Commissioner during his absences.
To strengthen the representation of my Department in Britain, following the introduction of the new arrangements, I am also considering the establishment of a position in London to be occupied by representatives of my own Department.
He would assist the Deputy High Commissioner in these areas and particularly maintaining and strengthening relationships with the British Cabinet Office.
Next, London has become the centre of operations of the Commonwealth Secretariat. The Commonwealth Secretariat, and many of the organised activities associated with the Commonwealth, derive from meetings of Commonwealth Prime Ministers and Heads of Government, and in this area responsibility must remain with myself and my Department.
On other matters with which the Secretariat is concerned, arrangements will need to be made from time to time between ourselves and our own and other Departments to ensure that representation at Secretariat meetings of a specialist nature is appropriate and competent. It is not necessary at this stage to list particular functions but, provided there is a full circulation of all papers, I would expect it to be possible to reach agreement on particular issues as they arise.
Finally in this series of points, it is worth nothing that nearly half our population are either themselves migrants from Britain or are the children of migrants. For them, Britain has a special place not occupied by any other country in the world and Australia House has seen it as part of its role to assist and serve these people. I understand over half of the hundred thousand and more Australians who visit Britain each year appear in the House at some time or another during their stay. Many of their visits are not for purely tourist reasons, but involve establishing, maintaining or confirming the many links we have at all levels with Britain. It is not only that there are an increasing number of commercial and industrial enterprises being set up in Britain—and eleven of our Banks are established in London—but there is a continual stream of university graduates and public servants visiting the country for further training. Although care for the affairs of numbers such as these is not a normal part of the functioning of other overseas posts, Australia House must continue not only to cater for them, but positively to welcome and assist them.
As to timing, I agree that the transfer of responsibility should formally take place at an early date now. I question whether 1 September is a practicality at this stage and therefore I suggest 2 October.
However, while it may be useful to establish a particular date for routine and administrative functions such as accounting, I consider that on matters of continuing policy it would be preferable to make arrangements on the basis of an understanding that any new matters arising during October would fall to be taken up by yourself and your officers.
Other matters could be handed over at an appropriate stage, but without making a handover during October mandatory where in the interests of the efficient discharge of business it is preferable to allow the existing officers to complete their handling of a matter. At the same time, I would not expect that, except in relation to the matters for which I and my Department will continue to be responsible, any residue would remain after the end of the year. Here again, I am sure that it is best, within this general principle, to leave detailed arrangements to be made on a departmental basis.
In conclusion, I want to stress the special role and functions which have been the reason for the administration of Australia House over so many years by Prime Ministers and their Departments.
The links between Britain and Australia are both broad and deep. Australia House has evolved to sustain and fulfil them and I am sure that you and your officers will do everything they can to carry on the tradition by ensuring that the administration of Australia House continues to reflect the unique importance of the British relationship.
[NAA: A1209, 1971/9449 PART 2]