63/ 112
PRESS CONFERENCE GIVEN BY THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
SIR ROBERT MENZIES PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTP1L1* IA.
AT PARLIAiAMNT HOUS, CANBERR, ON MONDAY,
SEPTEMBER 1963 AT 5 P. M. ON THE OCCASION OF THE
VISIT OF THE PRIME MINISTER OF JAPAiN, MR. H. IKEDA
PRIME MINISTER
QUESTION P. M. Perhaps before questions are put, I just ought to
surmiarise today by saying that I had a little talk
this morning with the Prime Minister. We then went
into the Cabinet room where I had ten or eleven
Ministers to meet him. We had a very interesting
and valuable private discussion with him which I
think we all njoyed very much and this afternoon,
after one or two visits that the Prime Minister
had to make, I have just had an hour and a half
with him again and we finally settled the terms
of a cormzunique which will, no doubt, be distributed
quite soon. All of these discussions were very
useful. I think I would sum them up by saying
that the position of Japan in the Western Pacific
and down here in the South-West Pacific is
increasingly important. Japan is not only a very
powerful country and growing stronger, with
cons idorable economic development and great
talent, but is a free country with a democratic
system of government and I believe, and we
believe, increasingly important in this section
of the world. Quite important anywhere in the
world but particularly important because if you
take the free countries on the eastern littoral
of China, then quite plainly Japan has the
greatest strongth, the greatest influence and,
we think, is approaching all these international
topics in a genuine spirit of goodwill and this
is warmly reciprocated here. This visit has given
us, on both sides, an opportunity of restating
it and being able to say quite honestly that the
relations have grown in strength and in genuinenosa.
( This was translated by Mr. Matsuoko for the
benefit of the Japanese press party who were
present) I represent the Asahi Shinbun and am very grateful
that you are giving us this conference today, Sir.
I have two questions to ask. The first concerns
Malaysia. Prime Minister Ikeda has expressed the
view that a summit conference with the leaders of
Malaysia, Indonesia anxdthe Philippines, could help
stabilise the position. What do you think of the
practicabiJity of this idea?
Well I'd prefer not to say anything very
conclusive on that matter. The Prime Minister
himself developed that notion with us today
very clearly. There are problems, of course.
For example, if there were to be a summit
conference, presumably it would be between
President Macapagal Soekarno and the Tunku.
Would the Tunku be there as the Prime Minister of
Malaysia? Presumably he would. I can't quite
see him attending in any other capacity. If so,
it would seem to me that one advantage of such
a conference would be that it would involve a
recognition on the part of the Philippines and
Indonesia of the existence, the genuine existence
of Malaysia, which would be a step forward. / 2
-2
P. M.
( Contd.)
QUESTION P. M. But I don't profess to know what the Tunku Abdual
Rahrian has in his mind. I can quite imagine that
he fools that the existence of continued threats
to Malaysia, cither by way of what is called
confrontation or by active incidents along the
frontier, are perhaps rather inconsistent with a
peaceful negotlation around the table. On the other
hand of course, he may very well say, " There is
nothing I'm not prepared to discuss, because I have
no ambitions to serve except to preserve Malays~ a
and encourage it and enable it to go on and be*
prosperous and successful. But we are on the sidelines
here. We don't decide these matters. If you
were to say to me, " I1s it a good thing to sit ar'ound
a table-and have no hostilities outside?", then of
course that would be a very easy one to answer.
What is really needed over the whole of this matter
is that thireats should come to an end and that it
should be recognised that you have new three groups of
people the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia
all of them anxious to go on with their own business, 7
I hope and to be prosperous and to raise their
economic standards, and all of them I 4r--uld hope,
willing to live in peace with the o hers. So stated,
it is sixiple enough. If a conference can contribute
to such a result, then it is a good thing but I [ lave
had a long experiunce of conferences and I must say
that I usually like to have a bit of work done first
before the conference begins so tUhat it is possible to
discover whether there is a reasonable prospect-of
arriving at some useful conclusion. That doesn't
mean I reject the idea; it merely means that I am
not just automatically putting my stamp on it.
You have said that it is generally acknowledged that
there is a growing goodwill between A'ustralia and
Japan and a great growth in trade. It is recognised
that this should be pursued and expanded. Have you
any positive ideas as to how this right be done in
the future course of development of goodwill and
further expansion?
I think that this will comeo by inevitable circu~ mstances.
We had a little talk about that this morning. -There
is no doubt about it, we are very large traders with
each other today, There is a very substantial
balance of trade in favour of Australia because of
the nature of our exports. We are all ag-reed that
this trade will develop. It will go on expanding.
It will roach greater and greater proportions as
time goes on. This is inevitable because of the
pattern of the trade between us. We produce and
sell things that Japan needs and Japan is going through
a rapid phase of economic development, the national
income is rising, its capacity to buy things that we
produce and sell will rise and, of course, inevitably
there will be some increase of trade both ways. I
don't think that anybody expects that the trade
between Japan and Australia can be brought into
ba~ lance in a hurry if at all because of the nature
of what the trade is. We are sending things to
Japan like wool, wheat, and fo-) dstuffs which Japan
needs and which, to that extent, she is not producing
herself. Japan sends to us manufactured goods and
we are, of course a substantial manufacturing country
Ourselvos, so thaoi the problem is not just a simple
mathematical one. But we all agree the visiting
delegation and ourselves that all the prospects are
that there will be steady increase in the already
substantial voluzro of trade between the two countries,
-3-
QUESTION P. M.
QUESTION P. M.
QUESTION P. M.
QUESTION P. M.
QUESTION g
P. M. Australia like Japan, is an anti-Communist country.
However Australia has in the past few years exported
a very large quantity of wheat to Communist ChnaDoyouLntend
to contimnr exporting wheat in this volume and do
you consider this has any relation to political attitude
to Communist China and, in particular to the question of
whether Communist China should be admitted to the United
Nations? Well, that is a group of questions. In the first place,
I imagine I think rightly that Japan does not have any
artificial prohibition of trade with Communist China
but, like ourselves, she abstains from exporting
strategic goods. So do we. It is quite true we have
sold, in the last two or three years very large quantities
of wheat to China and we are quite prepared to carry that
on. We grow a lot of wheat and we like to sell it. We
eat some of it inside Australia and we sell the rest.
Yes, we will go on selling wheat to Communist China under
existing circumstances. This doesn't have any effect on
whether we recognise Communist China diplomatically or
not, We don't. It has no bearing on whether we would
support the seating of Communist China in the United
Stations because we have not supported that. We think
that there are very high political reasons for those
policies but they don't in any way cut across ordinary
relations in matters which are not the subject of
strategic importance.
Can you give any indication at this stage of the timetable
for the restricted trade practices legislation?
Well, it is not yet in the form of legislation. As you
know, a genedl description of the ideas was made in
Parliament. It was done deliberately to expose it to
criticism over a considerable period of time. There have
been many criticisms, some destructive and some
constructive. As I said recently, the best ones that
we had, we had recently from the spokesmen of the
Manufacturing Industries Advisory Council and those
matters are now under consideration. But when Cabinet
has given consideration to those ideas, then for the
first time will it be possible to put what proposals
emerge into legislative form. That is not something
t'at may be expected in the matter of a few weeks.
Sir Robert, talking of timetables, could you give us a
timetable of any plans you might have for an early
election?
Well that I am proposing to have an election is beyond
all doubt, but when, I don't know.
Is there any justification for having an early election?
Oh I think I could justify an early one, a medium one,
a ate one. Anyhow, it is all right. There is nothing
hidden that shall not be made known.
Was there any significance behindthedecision to defer
a decision on the choice of the new bomber?
Oh, no. vc have had an evaluation team overseas. It
cane back. It produced a great deal of material
massive material. This matter has then been put into
examination by the Defence Department as a whole and
I expect that the next Cabinet or perhaps the one
afterwards will get the result of that examination.
There is no significance in what you might think
P. M.
( Contd.) QUESTION P M. to be delay. There was bound to be some tine because
this is a vast matter, running irnto very significant
defence ideas and also into a great deal of money
and therefore we want to feel perfectly certain that
when we muake a decision it will be the right one.
That's all.
Did you discuss defence co-operation with Mr. Ikeda,
Sir? No,