London, 19 January 1973
Confidential
CONFIDENTIAL
Australian Attorney-General
The officials accompanying Senator Murphy, the Australian Attorney-General,1 have now seen the Department. From what they have said, it looks very much as if Senator Murphy is going to be quite uncompromising on the question of the attention which we should give to the wishes of the Australian States. As I understand it, the law is on Senator Murphy’s side and that if he insists, we should legislate even against the wishes of the States. Naturally we would want to avoid this position but it is not clear that Senator Murphy is going to let us escape this dilemma.
2. From my observation, the Lord Chancellor2 and Senator Murphy do not hit it off at all well. The Lord Chancellor will be seeing Senator Murphy on Monday evening and there is obviously material for a first class row. You will be seeing the Senator on the following day. I think it would be prudent for you to have a word with Lord Hailsham in order to ensure that a row does not take place since the problem will be difficult enough to handle without ruffled personal feelings.
3. Incidentally, Sir John Pagan’s3 elaborate farewell party in the near future could easily turn into a ‘demonstration’ on behalf of States’ rights, especially if there is news of any rows with the Senator during his visit. The department is producing a brief for yourself and for the Lord Chancellor but l think a cautionary word would be wise in the present circumstances.4
1 L.K. Murphy, Attorney-General, Australia, and Minister for Customs and Excise, l972–75.
2 Lord Hailsham, Lord Chancellor in the Heath Cabinet, 1970–74.
3 NSW State President of the Liberal Party of Australia, 1963–66, Federal President, 1966–70; Agent-General for NSW in UK and Europe, 1970–72.
4 Home minuted: ‘This is awkward. If constitutional proposals are to be made they must surely be made from P.M. to P.M. & that after consultation with the States? A word with the experts please.’
[UKNA: FCO 24/1643]