British High Commission, Canberra, 29 November 1967
Confidential
With reference to my letter of 25 October, there has been a new development here in the field of the Loyal Societies.
2. Sir Robert Menzies asked me to call on him when I was in Melbourne on 25 November, and we afterwards had lunch together. He told me that he was disturbed at the growth of indifference towards Britain in Australia and at the weakening of the ties between the two countries. He thought the time had come to set up what we described as a ‘British–Australian Society’. He was in touch with Sir Alec Douglas-Home on the subject and was prepared to start launching such a society at this end. He made it clear that what he was thinking of was something akin to the ‘Runge’ proposal,1 but wider than it and subsuming it. This would be a high-level society, including industrialists, but by no means confined to them. It would have no premises, but would otherwise be akin to the Australian–American Society, and would launch functions and contacts for high-level visitors in both directions. There would be a parallel body at the British end.
3. I brought Sir Robert up-to-date on the latest measures designed to get closer co-operation among the Loyal Societies. He welcomed this, but said that what he was thinking of was something quite distinct—something which, in his view, was badly needed however successful we might be in inducing the existing Loyal Societies to co-operate more closely.
4. In fact what he has in mind is something more or less identical to the bilateral British– Australian Society which was discussed as a possibility in paragraph 7 of my letter to you of 23 June, 1966. In discussion with him, I ran over the obvious objections to such a plan. First, saving Sir Robert’s respect, I said that we wanted to go for the younger people and not to form yet one more body full of distinguished elderly members. Nor did we want a society identified with any political party. Menzies entirely agreed. It would be his idea to enlist prominent people of a much younger age in the group which would launch the new society. This idea would be symbolized by asking one of the younger members of the Royal Family to become President of the Society—for example Princess Alexandra—perhaps under the overall patronage of Prince Philip. Secondly, while none of the other Commonwealth representatives here would be in the least likely to be upset by the launching of a bilateral British–Australian Society, the New Zealanders, I thought, might resent such an exclusive grouping. Sir Robert replied that in that case we might include the New Zealanders and call it ‘The British–Australasian Society’. Anyway this should not, in his view, be a decisive objection. (In fact I suppose a possible solution might be to have a parallel British–New Zealand Society in Britain and New Zealand if there seemed to be a need for that.) Thirdly, I pointed out that British Ministers visiting Australia already had too many claims on their time in both Sydney and Melbourne, and a new society would represent just one more commitment to be added to their programme. Sir Robert said he thought that on the contrary the new society would provide an excellent forum for the public pronouncements Ministers naturally wish to make while in Australia.
5. His plan would be to start off with separate groups in Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra, plus an overall organisation covering all three. Expansion to the other State capitals could be considered later. He himself would propose to invite eight to ten people to dinner with him in Melbourne shortly to consider how to get the organisation started there.
6. Sir Robert added that he would be reporting all of this in a letter to Sir Alec Douglas-Home.
7. I think, myself, that there is a great deal of force in this idea. Since you and I discussed it in correspondence last year, the situation between Britain and Australia has been radically changed by the Defence White Paper of last July and the devaluation of the pound.2 Despite all the efforts of my staff and myself, it is becoming more and more difficult to convince the Australians, first that Britain still counts for anything much in the world, and secondly that Britain still cares about Australia. In this new situation, I suggest with respect that we should not be either too purist about the multilateral quality of the Commonwealth mystique, or too perfectionist about the risk of duplication with other existing bodies (Loyal Societies, ABTA, BNEC, Australia Club in London). The work done by the existing Loyal Societies is excellent within its limits ; but those limits are, I suggest, disturbingly irrelevant to the realities of Anglo-Australian relations as they are today. What is needed is prompt and dramatic action to revive interest in the bilateral Anglo-Australian relationship. I believe that this can best be achieved on the lines proposed by Menzies.
8. If I am right, then we ought to get a move on with this, not only on general political grounds, but also because in the nature of things we cannot expect Bob Menzies to be with us very much longer in full vigour. (In fact he was very tired at the Melbourne Scots Dinner on 25 November and had to be supported out at the end of the evening.)
9. When Menzies asked me what I thought of these views, I said frankly that I had had some correspondence with you about this sort of proposal earlier on and that we had both been sceptical about it; but that in the present changed situation here I personally agreed with him that it was a good idea. Sir Robert made it clear that he would not expect me to get involved with the launching of the idea, which would come much better from Australian sponsors like himself.
10. It is I think clear that, whatever we say, Menzies intends to go ahead with his plan. I hope you will agree that in present circumstances we can accept this, and give it, as appropriate, unobtrusive support.3
11. I am sending a copy of this letter to Ian Maclennan4 in Wellington.
1 Sir Peter Runge, Chairman, Tate and Lyle, formerly President of the Federation of British Industry, 1963–65. The ‘Runge’ proposal suggested an Anglo-Australian dining club for businessmen.
2 See Document 80, note 2, and note between Documents 87 and 88.
3 Subsequent developments included the formation in both countries of business and industrialist forums, the Melbourne Group in Australia in January 1968 and the Cook Society in the UK in June 1968. The initiative lost momentum when Menzies suffered a stroke in 1968 while on a visit to the UK. Also, while Australian representatives preferred informal contacts, the UK side wanted something more official along the lines of seminars and conferences organised by the Ditchley Foundation, a trust set up in 1958 at Ditchley Park (a stately home in Oxtordshire) to promote Anglo-American relations but later with a brief covering international cooperation and understanding. Johnston wrote to the Commonwealth Office in October 1968: ‘Frankly, I am a bit concerned that, owing to Menzies’ illness, this whole initiative may run into the sand. He understood the caution of the other Australian members, and his idea was to go slowly because of it, but eventually to steer things in the direction of a formal Anglo-Australian society. When, and if, he is restored to full vigour, he will be able to continue with this process. There is certainly nobody else at this end willing or able to do it’ (UKNA: FCO 241178, letter, Johnston to James, 2 October 1968).
4 British High Commissioner, New Zealand.
[UKNA: FCO 24/178]