London, 17 February 1970
Restricted
Mr Wiggin2 sent me a copy of his minute of 16 February to you proposing that the Secretary of State should give a combined party for the Australian and Canadian Agents General.
2. I fully take Mr Wilford’s point about the need to limit calls on the Secretary of State’s time. But there are certain potentially embarrassing constitutional factors, not fully brought out so far, which I feel should be taken into account in recommending whether a combined party should be held or not.
3. The constitutional position, as you know, is that by some anomalous quirk of Colonial history the Australian States have maintained a direct relationship through the Secretary of State with the Queen of Great Britain. This is a connexion which they do not wish to get rid of. This may seem odd but it is part of the wish of the Australian States to preserve their independence of the Federal Government in Canberra, a battle which they seem to be fighting with more fervour and vigour as each year passes. What it amounts to, therefore, is that our anomalous position vis-a-vis the States might have the embarrassing effect of embroiling us in a touchy and delicate matter concerning Australia’s internal politics. Naturally, we want to do everything we can to avoid this and the line which we have followed has been to stick to the letter of the constitutional position and thereby not appear to be favouring either side.
4. The representatives of the Australian States in London, their Agents General, are, of course, well versed in all this and tend to pick up anything which might derogate from their constitutional right of a special and direct relationship with the Secretary of State. Hence, when the Secretary of State gave his party for the Australian Agents General last March, no representative of the Australian High Commission could be invited.
5. The position of the Canadian Agents General is entirely different. There are no comparable rights of access on their part and they operate formally and neatly through the Canadian High Commission.
6. To give the above rather dry exposition some life, I might mention that at last year’s party one of the Australian Agents General told me how right and proper it was that the Canadian Agents General were not present, the position of the latter, of course, being quite different. This may sound silly but it does show how much all this seems to matter to the individuals and the Governments they represent.
7. I would suggest therefore that a combined party for both the Canadian and Australian Agents General, while it would please the Canadians, might well only have the result of alienating the Australians. There would also be the difficulty of the presence or absence of the Canadian High Commissioner. To avoid all such embarrassment it might well be that we should do our best to keep the two sets of Agents General apart. If it is, nevertheless thought best to have them both together, we must make the recommendation realising that constitutional implications will be read into the event.
8. I can see that this is to suggest an extra burden on the Secretary of State’s time. But might this not be lessened if a sequence could be worked out whereby the Secretary of State entertained the Australians in the Spring and the Canadians in the Autumn. Or vice versa? The Canadian party could, if necessary, come first this year and the Australians have theirs, after an eighteen month gap, in the Autumn. As you pointed out in your minute of 2 February, the party itself need only be quite short, say a half-hour or 45 minutes of pre-lunch drinks.
9. I am copying this minute also to Mr Maya3 (with a copy of the minutes under reference) who may like to comment from his own and his Department’s knowledge of the individuals concerned.
1 B.G. Smallman, Commonwealth Co-ordination Department, and D.P. Aiers, South-West Pacific Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London.
2 C. D. Wiggin, American Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London.
3 A.L. Mayall, Protocol and Conference Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London.
[UKNA: FCO 68/201]