Television interview between
B. B. C. Correspondent. John Osman. and
the Prime I'Linister. 11r. Harold Holt 7th Julv o 1266
Q. Mr. Prime Minister, what significance do you attach to Mr.
W-ilson's forthcoming visit to Moscow?
1M. HOLT: Well, I hope it will do something to improve relations.
I said in America earlier this week that I thought we had to
try every means we could to break the impasse ahich has
developed around the world. As I said there, you can't go on
thinking that the world is divided into " goodies" and " baddies"
and all the goodies are on your side and the baddies are all on
the other, because I am sure the other fellow is thinking just
that way himself. We know there are intelligent people in
both sections.
Q. You would welcome, wiould you, any reconvening of the
Geneva Conference with Britain and Russia as co-chairrnn?
11R. HOLT: In respect of Vietnam?
Q. Yes.
I. HOLT: I would wiant notice of that particular question but we are
all working for a negotiated peace and if this is an effective
way of securing it we would be glad to go along with it.
Q. But you are not altogether convinced about this
IllR. HOLT: Viell, I don't kno,, wt-hat is proposed. It's a long time
since I looked at the details of the Geneva negotiations but
effective negotiations in iihich 6. e secure a result which is
not just a piece of plaster patched over the problem would be
welcomed by us.
Q. Can you tell me how you feel about Mr. Wilson's
disassociation of Britain from the American bombing near Hanoi?
! Lii. HOLT: Mr. Wilson has his problems and the view from here may
be a different view from the view we see down under. But,
from our point of view, 1ve regard what is happening in Vietnam
as a great critical struggle for people throughout the world,
eventually reaching the people throughout the world, not just
confined to South Vietnam itself, and for us it is part of
the future of Asia which is being resolved here and a very
important part of its future progress.
Q. So it would be fair to say that you are disappointed in
Mr. \ ilson's disao3ociatiDn?
12R. HOLT: I recognise the problems that he has, but we would, of
course, have liked this to be recognised as a necessary part
of the policy which I had gathered the United Kingdom
Government had given its general support to.
Q. Do you think that these obvious divergences in policy
between you and M~ r. Wi~ lson are likely to have any long
term effect on Anglo-Australian relations?
TM. HOLT: No, certainly not. The Anglo-Australian relationship is
not only deep but abiding, and the fact that there will be
differences from time to time history doesn't stand still.
Events are moving fast in our part of the w.-orld. I pointed out
this morning that one in four of young people in Australia are
mnigrcants or people who have come there as the result of parents
being migrants, and so it's not always the same Australia but
always I hope there w~ ill be this warm relationship with the
United Kingdom.
Q. Now you have said that it is a matter for regret that
Australian forces for the first time in history are not
fighting in association with those of the United Kingdom.
Would you like to see greater British support for the United
States in Vietnam, and I mean particularly men as viell as
mterials?
MM. HIOLT: We would like to see a United Kingdom presence there
giving moral support. I don't think anybody ;. 7i11 be looking
for substantial British forces, but the United Kingdomn
Government has made its oosition clear on this and we respect
the fact that they will have given their own full consideration
to all aspects of the matter and they have come to their
decisions as wie have come to ours. I am only mentioning what
we would like to see.
Q. V" Rhat do you mean by a British presence there?
MR2. HOLT: dell, if there were British troops, even in some limited
nu~ mber, present, as there are from other friendly forces around
the area. The Thais for example are contributing a military
establishment of quite limited degree, but at least the
Americans don't feel they are being left to carry this
tremiendous burden for the world as a whole.
Q. You were reported under fire in a section of the Australian
press for being what they call " chillingly naive" in your
endorsement of American policy. What do you have to say about
-this?
IR. HOLT: Well, if I cam remain chillingly naive after 30 years in
public life, it just shows that one can preserve the freshness
of innocence untouched, but really w-hen I think back to the
time when a Labour Prime Minister declared that Australia would
be behind Great Britain in the military challenge of that time
to the last man and the last shilling, I don't think he was
being naive or fulsome in his supoort of what he believe in at
that point of time.
Q. You are also accused, I must say in the same section of
the Australian press, of -an abject surrender of Australian
initiative in foreign policy. Have you anything to say about
that?
M. HOLT: 0ell, I think it's almost too stupid to requr nase
and I'm glad to feel from n'y own quite intimate consultations
and comm~ unications, both with the President of the United States
and the Prime Minister of this country, that the views that
Australia expresses on matters of consequence are noted and are
not v~ ithout effect.
3.
Q. Apart from Vietnam, the whole w-ider question of British
commitment east of Suez is still the subject of speculation.
Will you be seeking assurances from Mr. Wilson that Britain
won't water down her commnitments too much?
MR,. HOLT: No, because I've already had the assurances which related
to the arrangements we discussed earlier in the year. I'm
much more concerned east of Suez, in the positive developing
economic sense. I don't think the United Kingdom can afford
either to turn its back or remain aloof from the great developments
i. 7Lich are occurring in this area which is stirring into
activity to a very impressive degree.
Q. I understand that discussions are continuing between
British and Australian military teams about the long-term
possibility of establishing bases in Australia as an alternative
to Singapore. How are those talks going?
EM. HOLT: W'e ll, w,-e've carried out our side of the bargain as we
have discussed it w-. ith Mr. Healey earlier in the year. There
have been good talks at the staff level against contingencies
which could occur in the future. We feel it is desirable to
maintain a British presence in the North and with us in
association wuith British troops stationed there. Wle feel that
not only is this defensively preferable, but it does help to
provide this moderating-_, stabilising influence which is a great
contribution which British character and prestige can contribute
to the emergence of a more stable, more prosperous and more
secure South East Asia.
Q. A final question, and on another subject. You are a
former Treasurer and you will be seeing the Chancellor of the
Exchequer. Will you be making any protest about recent British
investment restrictions on developed Commonvrealth countiies?
1' 2. HOLT: No, protest is too strong a word. Whvat I w.. ould hope to be
able to show,-the Chancellor is that it is in the long term
interests of the United Kingdom to encourage the development of
my own country. We hold our reserves principally in sterling
and, as Australia becomos stronger, more densely populated and
more secure, not only do our reserves increase, strengthening
your owin, but we are able to play a larger part in the defence
and international aid in that area of the world.
Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister.