F 77/ 131
FOR PRESS
PRIME MINISTER'S ADDRESS TO THE ROYAL COMMONWEALTH SOCIETY, LONDON
3 JUNE 1977
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today, just five
days before the 1977 Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting opens
at Lancaster House. It will be the first time that I will have
attended one of these meetings. No doubt, I will be better equipped
to speak about the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting after it
is over. But as so often happens, it is the demands of the itinerary
rather than logic which determines the order of these things.
Perhaps from the start I should make it clear where the Australian
Government stands in respect to the Commonwealth of Nations. I
know there has, in the recent past, been some disappointment at
Australia's apparent reluctance and coolness towards the modern
Commonwealth. My Government, by contrast with the past, takes a
positive constructive approach to the Commonwealth association.
The Commonwealth obviously has its limitations, but within those
limitations it has the scope and the potential to play a distinctive
part in world affairs.
The members of this society must have heard millions of words on
this subject, expressing attitudes towards the Commonwealth ranging
from the reverent to the sceptical. I intend to add a few more on
Australia's perspective on the Commonwealth and international affairs.
This perspective seeks to be as realistic and purposeful as possible.
It does not equate realism with a fatalistic acceptance of things
as they are. Far from it. But it does accept that progress can only
be made on the basis of an objective appraisal of reality. It
recognises that the golden age of international peace and security
still evades our grasp super power rivalries persist; nations
still resort to the threat and use of force; human rights are still
flagrantly violated in many areas; problems of basic human deprivation
-starvation, disease, illiteracy and over-population continue
to affront the conscience of the world.
Given the composition of the Commonwealth, these problems are acutely
relevant to our forthcoming meeting. Power in the material sense
military and economic strength, population, access to sources of
energy and raw materials still remains the major factor of
international affairs. / But
But realism requires that we recognise that power is not based
only on material resources. Power also flows from courageous and
imaginative leadership, from the ability to articulate mankind's
deepest aspirations, and to inspire people to confront great challenges
with purpose and determination. In this respect, the Commonwealth of
Nations has a significant potential. In a period where most organisations
are linked by common ideology, regional and economic interests,
the Commonwealth appears to some as an anachronistic relic of Empire.
To others, as a puzzlingly diffuse institution. The bonds that once
united the Commonwealth: a common monarchy; a common citizenship; the
Westminster system; the contacts fostered by the British Empire; a
common language; the great tradition and practice of English common law;
have either disappeared or are receding into the background. Yet, the
Commonwealth has survived. It has done so because, transcending its
origins, it has developed as an autonomous grouping of nations. A
few decades ago, it consisted of a few white countries it was tightlyknit,
homogenous and essentially British. Now with a membership of
three dozen, it is one of the largest international associations.
Homogenity has given way to diversity. The dominant role of one nation
has been supplanted by an egalitarian relationship. A largely Anglo-
Saxon group has become a truly multiracial group. The very diversity
of the Commonwealth, which some regard as a source of weakness, is in
fact the key source of its strength. There can be no doubt of the
Commonwealth's significance. It is manifest in the Commonwealth Heads
of Government meeting. In terms of the number of nations involved, and
the population that is represented by them; and in terms of gen'uine
diversity of race, of regional representation, of size, and of stage
of economic development, it has few rivals.
The Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting is a unique occasion on
which up to three dozen leaders take more than a week from their normal
duties to attend. They attend not because of habit but because the
meeting provides an unparalleled opportunity for extensive discussion
of vital issues.
The Commonwealth provides. the opportunity to test our views in a forum
in which nearly all interests are represented in which there is a
greater intimacy and equality than exists in the United Nations; and
where the rivalries engendered by the presence of superpowers are more
distant. Because meetings do not try to reach binding decisions, members are not
obliged to adopt hard negotiating positions. We can enjoy the rare
privilege of talking to each other, not at each other. We can derive
the greatest value from personal contact between Heads of Government
aimed at exploring and understanding each other' s viewpoints.
The Commonwealth has shown a remarkable resilience and capacity to
adapt to change, both in the international environment, and in-its
own nature, function, and range of concerns. Given the magnitude of
softe recent changes and the diversity of nations and cultures
represented in the Commonwealth, survival is no mean achievement.
Survival, however, is not enough. / The. real
2
-3
The real question is " Survival for what?" There are many things
the Commonwealth can achieve if we, its members, have the will and
determination not to submit to the effects that habit,. routine
and repetition can have on our enthusiasm and energy. We can more
effectively use the Commonwealth not by trying to convert it into
something it is not; not by altering its essential characteristics;
but by using them more extensively. For example, it may be that we
can become more effective if we can expand our consultations on a
regional basis as a supplement to plenary Commonwealth Heads of
Government meetings.
Before coming to London, I consulted with Commonwealth leaders in
the South East Asia-South Pacific region in order to gain the benefit
of their views before the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting.
My aim was not to develop an Asia-Pacific Commonwealth " bloc", not
to pursue narrowly conceived interests or compete with other groups.
Rather, it was to identify common ground and possible areas of
disagreement, and to get the maximum benefit from the Commonwealth's
tradition of informal discussion.
I found the discussions most useful, and I think there may be value
in expanding the process of informal regional consultations among
Commonwealth countries. I see no need, however, for new standing
bodies nor for a regular timetable or fixed attendance for such consultations.
Meetings should take place only as the need for them is
identified, and attendance should be determined by the interest of
members in the subject under discussion. In this way, the Commonwealth
could come to play a valuable role As a channel of communication
within the region and between the region and the wider international
community. I stress that I am not thinking in terms of concerted policies,
which would be inappropriate and completely unworkable. My main
concern is that the Commonwealth should realise its potential as
the generator of ideas and initiative; as the promoter of a spirit
of urgency and determination in approaching critical problems; as
an example and as a goal, both to its other members and other
countries. I now turn to two issues which will be very prominent on our agenda
next week: Southern Africa and the new international economic order.
Southern Africa is the most pressing area for action to secure human
rights. Policies based on the false and pernicious premise of one
race's superiority over another, one race's right to subjugate another,
are the most flagrant violation of fundamental human decency. They
offend the moral sense of every person, every nation, concerned about
the dignity and quality of man. Their continuance diminishes the
humanity of every one of us. Apartheid cannot succeed even in terms
of its own logic. A policy that pretends to foster equal social
development but which involves permanent separation of the races
and imposes permanent political inferiority on one race will not,
and cannot, succeed. The proponents of apartheid claim that they
are pursuing policies of educational and economic equality. Even
if this claim is taken at face value, apartheid must fail. The more
/ people
.4-
people achieve educational and economic equality, the more they will
reject political inferiority. There should be a rapid move towards
majority rule in Zimbabwe. A failure to achieve this and achieve it
quickly will most likely lead to disaster.
All reasonable people believe that the overwhelming majority of
African leaders despite their abhorrence of racism still want
an equitable solution based on negotiation and reason. Resolving
the problem by violence would leave scars not only on the participants
in the violence but on all the nations of Africa for as long as we
could see into the future. We must not allow racism to poison
international politics in the way that religious fanatacism poisoned
them in earlier centuries.
The Commonwealth's present composition and its past associations
place the Commonwealth in a good position, to make it clear that
there is no international support for policies that seek to maintain
the superiority of one race over another.
Apart from the other grounds on which racism can be condemned, it has
prevented single minded attention being paid to the real and intractable
problems of economic development, and the material relief of human
suffering. No Government can turn its back on these problems. No
one can assume that they are somebody else's responsibility.
Developing countries must examine whether the best use is being made
of their resources. Developed countries must accept the necessity of
a process of adjustment. In this respect, aid, trade and commodity
policies need to be examined. These are among the issues encapsulated
in developing countries' call for a new international economic order.
The Commonwealth has a continuing and substantive involvement in these
issues, of the Commonwealth's thousand million people, nearly 90% are
from developing countries, and a large proportion of these are countries
where per capita incomes are ' extremely low. The Commonwealth should
promote constructive responses to the more pressing economic concerns of
the international community. These concerns have been staring us in the
face for years. Politicians and officials have spoken about them in
meeting after meeting. But talk can become a substitute for commitment
for really facing problems. What is needed is a real determination to do
something about inequality and deprivation. Aid is one issue which has
for many years figured as a substantive element in relations between
members of the Commonwealth. Recently, the form and terms of aid have
become the subject of close scrutiny. This is partly because the problem'
of aid and debt are interlinked and the debt burden of developing countri
is a pressing issue. This is one area in which change is possible, and
in this respect Australia's record is relevant. Our aid is provided
overwhelmingly in the form of grants. Consequently, it has not contributed
to developing countries debt problems. Given the seriousness of
the debt burden of many developing nations 0it might be desirable that
others consider adopting the same policy. Similarly, consideration shoul
be given to the untying of aid. Untied aid is more beneficial to the
recipient than tied aid which sometimes is little more than an indirect
subsidy to donors own industries. Even where circumstances dictate that
aid must be in the form of a loan, there may be scope for other donors
at their own initiative, to liberalise the terms of their aid, including
official development assistance loans. / Another
Another important aid development is the agreement reached at the
Conference on International Economic Co-operation ( CIEC) to establish
a special action' programme designed to alleviate the balance of
payments difficulties of developing countries. The principal developed
nations will provide a total of $ 1 billion in the form of quickly
disbursable aid. Australia regards this programme as important and
will contribute to it.
The transfer of resources between rich and poor is only one aspect of
the developed world's response to the problems of development. The
problems developing nations have in gaining access to the markets of
developed countries are at least of equal importance. Many developing
countries are vitally dependent on the earnings of a limited range of
commodity exports. Restrictions on market access and sharp fluctuations
in export earnings seriously erode the developing countries' capacity
to pursue appropriate development strategies.
Australia can understand the problems faced by developing countries
that want stability for their agricultural commodities and reliable
access to markets. We have felt the impact of the combined effect of
our products being excluded from traditional European markets and the
effects of excessive E. E. C. subsidisation of produce on our exports to
third markets.
Closely tied to the problems of market access is that of commodity price
stabilisation. It is of the utmost importance to ensure that prices
are maintained at a level fair to producers and equitable to consumers.
Accordingly, the highest priority should be attached to successfully
concluding the current round of negotiations for individual commodity
agreements. These negotiations have in recent months been overshadowed
by debate on the establishment of a common fund. This is a complex
and important issue which deserves close scrutiny. Should such a
fund be established and we support this in principle care must
be taken that it preserves the autonomy of individual commodity
agreements. A fund may also take due account of the appropriateness
and feasibility of buffer stock financing in respect of the individual
commodities involved. Any common fund which may be established should
be workable and appropriate to its purpose.
Finally, there is one issue more compelling and more fundamental in
human terms than any other that of malnutrition and in some cases
outright starvation. It is an intolerable situation that some
of the third world's children are undernourished. There are various
approaches to the problem. The International Fund for Agricultural
Development ( IFAD) is directed to a significant expansion of agricultural
production in the developing countries. Implementation of the
1974 World Food Conference resolutions will ensure increased food aid
flows to the most needy. Improving trading arrangements for grains,
for example through the successful negotiation of a new International
Wheat Agreement, will create the basis for a more predictable and
reliable market in foodstuffs.
Action on all these fronts is necessary. Here the Commonwealth
should also be able to make a distinctive contribution. Both food
surplus and food deficit countries are represented among its members.
Their experience should be pooled in a common effort to seek to
/ identify
-6-
identify the major factors that need to be taken into account
in improving national and global food security.
The magnitude of the problems I have referred to could easily
provoke despair. They must not do so. What is required is commitment,
determination and imagination. There are many developing
countries including several Commonwealth members which have achieved
sustained and impressive economic expansion. Their success reminds
us that for some at least the international economic system has not
proved to be a barrier to growth. It is also a reminder that the
division between developed and developing countries is not fixed
and unchanging.
If the Commonwealth is to convince the world of its relevance and
vitality, it must do so in terms of its contribution to the major
issues of our time. It is well equipped to do so. In the last quarter
century the Commonwealth has demonstrated its resilience and flexibility.
It is now time to demonstrate our capacity to make a
constructive, positive contribution to resolving the economic
and social problems which are emerging as the dominant ones of
the next quarter century.
I hope that I have said enough to give an insight to current
Australian thinking on the Commonwealth of Nations, and to identify
some of the opportunities that I believe the association offers to
help create a better world.