-South Africa
Australia's Migration Policy
Future relationship with South Africa
Possible Royal Visit
Governor-General
P. M.' s lead in arguing South Africa's
internal affairs
Discussions with Dr. Luns Dutch
West New Guinea
MFIC E OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR AUSTRALIA IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
Australian News and Information Bureau, Australia House,
Strand, London, W. C. 2 Telephone: TEMple Bar 2435
LONDON, 19th March, 1961.
PRIME INISTER' S AUSTRALIAN
PRESS CONFERENCE
On
Australian conference Sunday, March 19, the Prime Minister, Mr.
Press in conference at the Savoy Hotel.
follows Menzies, received the
A transcript of the
MR. MvENZIES:" I notice that there is a good deal of speculation, and
perhaps something more, about the final stages of this
conference, so perhaps I might as well add my own little
bit to it. For some time it looked as if we could
evolve a form of communique which would confirm South
Africa's membership, while at the same time containing
a fair summarised statement of the criticisms of South
Africa's racial policy and of Dr. Verwoerdts reply.
In point of fact as I have followed this and I took a
very active part in it, in drafting various things Dr.
Verwoerd was at first very reluctant to adopt the form
of communique that was suggested because he felt that it
was too much like a concerted judgment on South African
policy, the language ho thought being put in a rather too
positive way. Ultimately, after considering his
position, he agreed TUhat the communique should go out in
that fashion. And quite frankly, I thought at that
time that the problem looked as if it were over. But
when he announced, or Mr. Macmillan announced, that he
was agreeable to a communique of this kind, he was
promptly told by several of the Prime Ministers that it
was not good enough. One or two of them indicated quite
plainly that they did not accept his continued membership;
that if it became necessary to move for the expulsion of
South Africa they would do so. At least half the Prime
Ministers there made it clear that they would pursue this
matter evory time there was a meeting, and between
meetings, on any convenient opportunity.
" In other words, looking at the substance of the matter at
least half the Prime Ministers there indicated that they
did not want South Africa in. Dr. Verwoerd I thought,
with very great dignity, accepted the logic of that
position and indicated that he would withdraw his
application. Personally I don't think he had any choice.
I would have withdrawn the application had I been in his
place. " One reason I know he had in his mind, I thought did him
very great credit; that was, that if he had remained and
in some way or other his application for contined
memborship had been agreed to I don't undertake to say
how it could have been under these circumstances but
suppose in some way or other it had, then he would have
remained in and would have divided his colleagues into
those who would continue to want to be rid of him, and these
who would continue to want to have South Africa as a
member of the Commonwealth. Rather than expose the
-2
rest of' us to that risk, he decided to remove his
application and avoid that possibility.
" I1 think, of course, that this is the most unhappy
affair. I make no secret of my own view. I
wanted to koep South Africa in. Last year at the
Conference we all agreed that South Africa's racial
policy was a matter of domestic jurisdiction. We
all agreed and that was why we did not discuss it in
full conference. Quite true there has been a good
deal of international argument about it since, but it
will be remembered that the former Prime Ministers'
conference was after the incidents at Sharpeville and
after there had been world-wide reaction,, and we all
agreed, upon that occasion, that this was a matter of'
domestic jurisdiction. This year Dr. Verwoerd
indicated that he would waive that point because he
thought that we ought to clear our minds a'.~ out the
question of policy. He did not abandon the
proposition that it was domestic, but he said ( in
effect), ' Very well, I am prepared to sit in here
and now and have an argument about it'. And he
expressed his own case very powerfully and at
considerable length. But even though there has been
a great deal of international agitation this is still
a matter of domestic policy in South Africa. South
Africa doesn't seek to apply thai policy to any other
country. It is as much a matter of domestic poli~ cy
for South Africa as Australia's migration policy
is a domestic matter for us. And to have a
member of the Commonwealth virtually excluded from the
Commonwealth on a matter of domestic policy, presents in
my opinion, a rather disagreeable vista of possibilities
f or the future. We may object very strongly to racial
discrimination practiced in one country. We might
equally object very strongly to the absence of any form
of democracy in another; we might take exception to the
absence of parliamentary machinery, or the presence of
imprisonment without trial; or any of these things that
lend themselves to exam-ination if we adopt the attitude
that one of our tasks is to examine each other's
policies. A. nd that is why I think this is a very
unhappy development.
" It is quite true that every Prime Minister except the
Prime 1Minister of South Africa was critical of all or
some aspects of South Africa's policy. I don't need
to go into that with any elaboration, but I have up to
now acted on the principle which I believe is sound
that I do not make public comments on the policies of
another member of the Commonwealth; a very good oldfashioned
rule that, and it did a lot of good when it
used to be practiced. But since the thing is all
out now and this has been thrashed out and most people
have made statements about it, I just want to say this:
My objection to the poliz3y of apartheid is, in simple
terms, that in my opinion it won't work. It is a
policy of separate development. It is a policy that
accepts that the white man occupies the superior
po~ itirn. In other word'it is the same policy that
existed in all colonial establishments until a few years
ago. The South African Prime Minister says, and with
great sincerity he is a man of singular integrity, a
most impressive man He says: ' We are spending far more
money on education and health for the Bantu population
than any other African community.' That is quite right;
he h-ad figures to support it. He indicates that every
step is being taken to raise the living and the
educational standards of the Bantu. That is very good.
Excellent. But I don't lelieve that when that object
-3
has been achieved, the Bantu is going to be satisfied
and adopt the second rate position in the general social
structure or in the political structure of South Africa.
In other words the more this policy succeeds, in a sense
the more certain is it to fail in the long run. Now
that's a purely practical abjection. I have not,. like
some, moralised about this matter. That, in brief, is
my view as to why their policy is wrong. Of course it
has some, to me, some inexplicable detailed consequences.
" I told Dr. Verwoerd that I just did not begin to
understand why he adopted the view that there should not
be an exchange of diplomatic missions with other African
and Asian members of the Commonwealth. I said we did
that kind of thing very successfully in Canberra and
nobody see-med to be very concerned about it. We ate in
each othei's houses and so on. But he had his own reasons
, and he said that it could not be done. I thought that,
psychologically, this had a bad effect. You know, that
seemned to be carrying it a bit too far."
" How do you see the future, relationship of South Africa with
other Commonwealth countries?
" Well, I'm very troubled about it because a lot of people
don't understand anything about the Commonwealth. They
seem to think the British Commonwealth is a court of morals
or law. You sit down and sit in judgment on each other.
It never was so. You meet to discover what you agree
about, not to discover what you disagree about. I spoke
about this last year in the Smuts lecture. We are not
sitting in judgment on one another. That is not the point.
We can talk very intimately and frankly with each other.
We learn a lot from each other. Occasionally you go away
and find that your mind has been influenced more than you
thought by something that was said. But there it is.
Apparently, the character of our deliberations is. to be
changed. I think it a great pity. But in parti cular,
this is the last time we will ever have a discussion on
racial policy in the Commonwealth itself; in a meeting of
Primne Ministers. South Africa is out. Somebody may
want to discuss the racial policy of some othei: member of
the Ccmmonwealth,' but so far as South AJfrica is concerned,
we will never have a discussion of this kind again.
Now the discussion is going on. The passions of other
people were roused on this matter and they won't be
silenced. But instead of having the discussion in a
meeting of a limited number of heads of Governments, who
are men of experience and restraint, this thing will now
be put into the United Nations; it will be debated hotly
in the General Alssembly; it will be transferred in other
words to areas where there will be much less restraint and
much more passion, I think that is a pity a gieat pity.
" There is one other point I would like to make about my
approach to this refusal of membership or expulsion. You
don't -admit a Government to the Commonwealth, you admit a
nation. The other day we didn't admit Archbishop
Makarios, we admitted Cyprus; and one of the foundation
members of the Commonwealth is South A-frica South Africa
the nation. We did not admit only those people who had a
vote, to wit the Europeans, we admitted the whole who
included nine million Bantu. True, they don't have the
vote. But there are one or two other Commonwealth
countries in which the voters are by no means in the
majority let us put it as delicately as possible. You
don't, in due course, put out the Verwoerd Government, you
put out South A" frica all of its people. How do we
know whether the Bantu, as they come along, are not very
very hopeful of such protection as they can get by the
QUESTION:
-4
Commonwealth association? I don't know, but I can guess
that they might be. How do we know what the attitude
is of people who are for the time being in the minority
among the voters people who support the Opposition in
South AIfrica? Governments come and go; that is a very
healthy reflection. But, in effect, South AIfrica has
gone, includling all those who are ' pro' this policy and
those who are against it, and those who are pro the
Government, anr3thcse who are against the Government. I
think that misconceives the nature of the Commonwealth;
the Commonwelth as I have known it for many years at any
rate."
QUESTION:
ANSWER: QUESTION: ANSWER:
S QUESTION: ANSWER: QUESTION: SWER: & r STION:
' iTSWER:
QUESTION:
ANSWER: " htwas the answer to that argument, si?
" Teanswer was a lemon. That didn't cut any ice".
" Do ycu thidkthat she's out fcr good now?"
' Well, frankly, I do. If I were being very tactful now I
would say ' Well, of course, in a year or two you will be
back with us'. But the world doesn't work that way.
Nor do I think that this decision is likely to have a
tempering effect upon South Afi-ican racial policy. it
may very well stiffen thcir attitude. I don't know.
I hope not. But it's possible.
" Dr. Verwoerd has referred to venomous attacks from the
Africans, the A1sians, and he also included Caad"
" No I won't namXe any names, butv certainly the most extreme
speeches were made at the very closing stages, at this time
when I thought we were probably going to get by with a
statement of the criticisms and the answers, and with
continuance of membership. ' Venomous' is not my word,
but there were very pungent attacks made then, as I said."
" Sir, on this precedent, do you fear any attacks possibly
on Australia's migration policy?"
" Well, once the precedent -Ls established it's obviously a
possibility". " Was there any hint of that?"
" Oh, no. From nobody. They all-concentrated this time
on the one thing. I made a glancing reference to it
myself".
' What would our attitude be if
" That is like, ' If
I can't answer that
they know what mine
mightn't be there".
QUESTION: ANSWER: you had a brother would he like cheese'.
one. I know what mine would be and
would be. But leave it at that. I
" In the case of Australia, Sir,-our own future relationships
with cur new foreign government -I take it that the ( South
,' frican) High Commission will take on another diplomatic
sttu" " Yes, We've never contemplated any of these things like
boycotts or things of that kind. Somebody did suggest
very powerfully that we ought to boycott South 1frica, so
I sent around word to find out what things we bought from
South Africa. What were the main items? When I got the
answer back it turned out that ninety per cent. of the people
engaged in the production of those things were black people.
I said I didn't think there was much sernse in penalising
these fellows under the guise of helping them. I don't
think economic measures are going to be taken in Australia;
certainly not by us".
QUESTION: ANSWER: QUESTION:
r SR:
QOESTION: ANSWER: ANSWER:
ESTION ANSWER: QUESTION: " Is there any indication how other members of the
Commonwealth might feel about the continuation of
Commonwealth preferences. They apply mainly of course
to Britain, we know that. They do give South Africa
the same privileges in the British market as we enjoy,
and Now Zealand."
" I would be guessing if I tried to speculate about that.
No doubt there will be a lot of consequential matters
that have to be looked into. I don't think most of
us have had time to think about those yet".
" Mr. Menzies, two or three of the Sunday papers today
refer to the possibility of a visit by the Queen to
Australia fairly soon. I wonder if you have any
comment on that?"
" When was a Sunday paper without that atty You know
my rule on this matter. I am having a discussion with
the Queen about Royal visits in general; you know, trying
to look ahead, but that is as far as it has gone. But
any announcement of those things is to be made, as always,
by the Palace, not by me. Nor do I want to infer that
we are likely to have any early visit by a member of the
Royal family. I have a list of requests that I brought
with me that I am going to discuss with the Queen next
week". " Can you give any indication, Sir, as to when the name of
the new Governor-General will be announced?"
" No. I wish I knew the name of the new Governor-General.
Until I know that, I can't put a timetable on it".
" It still hasn't been settled then?"
" No" l
" Will you be seeing the Queen again before you leave?"
" Yes".
" Do you know what date?"
ANSWER: QUESTION: ANSWER: " On Friday".
" Coming back to the Conference, Mr. Menzies. There is a
reference from Melbourne saying that there is a debate
boiling up now on you taking the lead in arguing the
constitutional objection to interference in South Africals
internal affairs; it is suggested that you may have taken
on yourself a role which will be difficult to explain to
our Asian neighbours. Do you foresee any difficulty in
that?" " Not at all. That sounds almost like one of the Sydney
papers which has a bee in its bonnet on that problem. I
must say I find no difficulty whatever in explaining
myself to our AfSrican and Asian neighbours in conference
none. We are on the best of terms. Anyhow, my
principal duty and role is to express the mind of my own
Government, not the mind of other Governments. When I
am no longer able to do that, I will go out."
4 -6
" Mr. Menzies, can you tell us anything of your
discussions with Dr. Luns of the Dutch Government on the
future of Dutoh Now Guinea?" 1
" Will you mrake any comment, Sir, an the latest position
of West New Gune?
" As~ far
been no
time. as I know, the position is as it was. There has
change. Our policy has been stated time after
There is no change in that."
QUESTION: ANSWER: VOICES:
0 " It seems to be a little hotter than it was".
" Well, you know, we keep on getting stois about that.
Anyhow, I have nothing to say about that. Right?"
" Thank you, Sir". ( Conference closed).
9
QUESTION: ANSWER: QUESTION:
ANSWER: