PRESS CONFERENCE GIVEN BY THE PRIME MINISTER RT. HO. L. MEZIS,
AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 9TH TULY,_ 99 AT
PRIME MINISTER: I think perhaps the best thing for me to do is
just to talk a little bit about the various matters that
I have had to look at in the course of my journey. If
I show any signs of going to sleep half way through, will
you give me a nudge? I have averaged about 3 hours a
night sleep for the last eight days when I visited the
tropics. Theie was no conference this year of a formal kind
but by the time I got back home I had had talks qui'le
extensive talks with, I think, ten heads of Government.
I saw Mr. Nash at some length in Auckland; Mr. Diefenbaker
and his Cabinet in Ottawa; I saw -the President
and Mr. Nixon and Mr. Herter in Washington; I had talks
with the World Bank in Washington; and with the International
Monetary Fund Mr. Jacobsson, the head of the
I. M. F. in Washington. I had some discussions in New York
with our financial agents there. And then of course,
Mr. MacMillan and his Cabinet-Chancellor Adenauer-
President De Gaulle-the new prime Minister of Holland
Mr. De Quay; and wiih the Foreign Minister of Holland In
Zurich. Then I saw the new President of Pakistan in
Karachi President Ayub. I had some very long and
interesting conversations with Mr. Nehru in Delhi; and
then I saw the new Prime Minister and some of his senior
ministers in Singapore. So it was a pretty good roundthe-
world survey of problems and discussions with them.
I think before getting on to the political aspects
of the journey it was a very absorbing journey. I
didntt have well, I almest had no private spare time.
But that was well compensated for by the fact that I had
some tremendously interesting talks with. leading people.
In Washington I'll come back to these other large
problems I had discussions with Mr. Black of the World
Bank, and with some of his senior executives, about Mt.
Isa, and I also saw Mr. Jacobsson of the International
Monetary Fund who told me that he could be quoted as
saying that he found the discussions that we had very
interesting. I asked him two things: One, whether the
annual consultations with the fund by countries with
balance of payments problems that applies to a great
number of countries, of course including our own
might take place this time in ALstraiia. And I am
hopeful that that will happen. I also invited him to
come out here himself.
QUESTION: That is in this coming September?
PRIME MINISTER: Yes well it is some time later this year.
I thought it would be a good idea if he came out
himself. He said he would likeftol he accepted it in
principle, but it is a matter of time-table with him.
. My business with the World Bank had, of course,
particular relation to the Mt. Isa railway project. It
is quite true that in any projected borrowing from the
World Bank, the borrower would be the Commonwealth of
Australia. But the World Bank is a bank for reconstruction
and development, and it is not merely a matter
of lending money and feeling sure that it will get it
back. No question of that arises. The real question is:
If it makes a loan is that loan assisting scme piece of
positive economic levelopmentY And therefore it has
been particularly concerned to know what contract or
arrangement would be made between the Queensland
Government and the Mt. Isi company. I have, from time
to time explained to both of thorn what the principles
of the sank are and the k~ ind of problem that has to be
met. But I have had a feeling for some time that it
would be of very great advantage if the Queensland
Government anu the company talked around the table with
the Bank, so that they both would not have to rely on
what I had to say about it. They could be informed
themselves on the sprit and discuss it on -the spot.
So I had two objectives in my discussions there.
One was to find ouic whether the World Bank was interested
in the Mt. Isa project; whether it thought that in the
broad it was a good one; and whether it would like to
be associated with it in some way. Of course, unless
those questions could be answered in the affirmative,
all other discussion would be academic.
It became quite clear that the answer was " yes" to
all those questions. They are interested in the project
and they think that it is a good one, looking at it
broadly and I am sure that they would like to be
associaied with it. But they have their owm financial
principles which they have applied to other countries
and other prospective borrowers, and which they would,
therefore, need to apply to us with respect to that
matter. The second question was whether, there having been
some breakdown in negotiations, the positiLon of the Bank
was completely inflexible. And it became clear that that
was not so; there was some room for manou-', i; e But it
would involve of course, some movement on the part of
the company, in particular -and incidentally of the
Queensland Government.
So I said " lVery well, under these circumstances,
will you be satisfied if I invited, through my colleagues
at home, the Queensland Government and the company to be
represented, in the one case by their Treasurer, and in
the other case by the Managing Director of Mt. Isa
Mr. Fisher and to suggest that they come to Washington?"
They agreed to that very willingly.
I was not there when the discussions occurred
but there were some discussions, which apparently did not
achieve finality. I do not regard the matter as
necessarily concluded by those discussions. It is a
matter which I will have to take with my Treasury
colleagues. There are very great difficulties about it
there always have been but I still think there is some
room for accommodation.
I was very fascinated when I arrived in London to
be told in the press that as I got aboard the plane at
Idlewild, I said I was very optimistic about a loan. I
have no need to tell you that I did not see any pressmen
at Id2lewild. I had no statement whatever-to make about
a loan, nor would I be such a fool as to prejudice
discussions with the Bank by making any statement that
looked cheerful about it because it is a difficult
matter. Nobody knows behter than I do about the Bank and
its methods. We have had a good deal of succex with them.
QUESTION: It was reported out here, Mr. Menzies, that the Bank had
imposed impossible conditions on the company, Would it
be possible for you to say a little bit on that?
PRIME MINISTER: I do not think so, I do not think anything is
gained by that. 1 did not see that, but I imnagine that
what that means is that the company would not be
prepared to go so far as the Bank thought it ought to go
for the making of a loan. But you must forgive me for
not offering any opinions on those matters because I have
yet to see the detailed reports of their discussions in
Washington.
QUESTION: Did the limiting of lead a. nd zinc 1lt fcL: a j them
at all?
PRIME MINISTER: I do not think that had anything to do vit it.
I have not heard anything that would suggest that that
was a factor.
The whole problem there is how far the cccnpany is
prepared to go in guaranteeing revenues to a reconstructed
railway line which would amortize the cost of
the railway line the bulk of which was tc be found by
borrowing, partly from the Bank and partly. perhaps.
on the market in the United States. But ih is all
matter of how far one is prepared to go ane n~ ow far th,
other is prepared to go. Apparently tLey Sid n~ ot reach
a composition. I did not, for one moment,. thi. nk it was
easy; but I am sure their discussions wil kave value
because each now understands the otheris peint of view
at first hand.
QUESTION: Before you leave that subject, did you also inite the
World Bank to hold their next meeting here?
PRIME MINISTER: No. That question did not arise.
So that that proble~ m as between ourselves and
Queensland and the company is still unresolved, But I
myself do not regard a composition as being impossible,
provided that all the people concerned are prepared to
exhibit an accommodating mind.
But one must under the position of the Bini, because
it has many clients in many countries many appl~ icants
in many countries. It just cannot, off-hand, apply a
generous rule to us which it refuses to apply to perhaps
three or four other countries. And therefore it is a
matter for very close, sensible discussion.
However, I will be taking that up witt my colleague,
the Treasurer, and I will be informed, because 1 know
that while I have been away there have been discussions
between Mr. Hiley from Queensland and my oi-nm people.
Well, naturally I have had no opportunity o'f discovering
the details of Lhose matters,.
QUESTION: Does the success or failure of~ the World Fank ! can m~ ean
the end of the whole question?
PRIME MINISTER: I do not know. But it vould be veoy useful to get
a loan from the World Bank,. It is always a useful thing
for us in Australia not being entioely flu&~ with
capital ourselves to be able to bring irn capital from
outside. Therefore, a World Bank loan or a. Wll~ J Street
loan, or whatever it may be, has considerable national
advantages, not only in supplying capital bu~ t in helping
on the balance of payments side of the problem.
QUESTION: In your discussions with the World Bank and our own
financial people in New York, did you raise the possibility
of further loans from the World Bank on a general
basis for Australia this year?
PRIME MINISTER: No, I did not, because you have to remember that
the World Bank has made us loans on a pretty general
basis to a very large extent 300,000,000 dollars
and I think the position of the Bank today is that in
future it does not exclude the possibility of further
loans, but it would like to have them related to a
project, which is the rule they have always applied,
or almost always applied, in their lending policy. And
this is a project which has great merits great
attractiveness but economically, from their point of
view the essential thing is: Can we be sure that the
development of the mine and the development of production
and the increase in export earnings by the production
of additional material, will be matc~ hed by some undertakings
which will make the railway proposal which
represents about: 30, O00,000 successful?; So that the
railway will be rebuilt and in due course paid for.
The two things balanco and that is intelligible.
However, I do not want to go into the details of
that matter, because they have had their discussions.
They have not arrived at a composition on this matter,
but as I say I will know more about that and what
the possibilities are, from our point of view, when I
have seen the details of their discussions; I haven't
yet.
QUESTION: Has the Bank suggested at any time, Sir, that this is
the sort of project we ought to finance for ou' selves,
and that our priority for borrowing has slipped down
compared with other countries who are on their list?
PRIME MINISTER: No. The Bank is genuinely interested in this.
It feels that it is the kind of thing that fits into the
Bank pattern; but it is not prepared and I do not
criticise it at all to make any substantial abandonment
of its general rules. We are not its onl~ y customer.
QUESTION: Do you think, Sir, the Bank would be more interested in
a less ambitious construction programme?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, I have heard a rumour in the last twelve
hours or so that there is some less ambitious programme.
But that is all I know it is a mere rumiour to me,
so I prefer not to discuss it. But it was not the size
of the project that was the point of disagreement as far
as the Bank was concerrv'd,. It was how far the contract
between the Queensland Government and the company would
be satisfactory to it as a lender of the money.
QUESTION: Sir, when you say there is room for some movement by
the parties, is there room for any movement in the
Commonwealth's attitude
PRIME MINISTER: My dear fellow, we have worked like slaves on this.
COMMENT: I know, Sir.
PRIME MINISTER: I cannot think of a solitary thing that we have
not done that we could do. I myself have put in an
immense amount of time on it. We are not open to
criticism on that point.
QUESTION: No. The point I was thinking of Sir, one of the Mt.
Isa company's conditions is partly that they have to
bear most , f the guarantees for the lineo In fact,
a part of the line will not be c .: 1y devoted, or even
a majority devoted, to their use.
PRIME MINISTER: I understand that. I understand their case on that.
But from the point of view of the International Bank,
what it says is that where some work is to be done
primarily at the request of the major user not the
sole user, but a major user then the major user ought
to be prepared to make a contract with . he State
Government or whatever the authority may be, in order to
look after the amortization of the cost. Well, that is
the Bank's rule; it is not my rule; that is the Bank's
rule. That is one of the facts of life.
QUESTION: It is quite clear frot wbhat you say, Mr. Menzies, that
the idea of approaching the Bank for thi. s loan has not
been abandoned?
PRIME MINISTER: Not by me no; nor, I hope, by anyoe else.
Well, then going back to these other perhaps
larger international matters, I was very interested
indeed to have talks i erica and in England and on
the Continent. , lthough I gather there are one or two
people still surviving in Australia who thilik that the
problems of Europe and th3, We.,; tern world are irrelevant
to Australia most of us will recall t _ at oir own wars
have come out of Europe in the past and Europe still
remains a point of danger for us. Aid these are,
therefore, very gra.-e matters f'or Australian con. siderati½. t
Well, I am not a spokesman for the President of the
United States he can do that himself. ] u4 I must say
that I found him in good health and vigour. I thought
he looked better and sounded better than T have found
him f-r perhaps three cr four years. He vras quite
vigorous. But, as you know, he has been reluctant to
have a Summit Conference unless there is some earnest
of success some progress made by the Foreign Ministers
at Geneva. They are, Ielieve, resuming on the 13th
four days? time. Or some guarantee of some
kind that there will be a result. That is his view.
He does not as I understand it reject the idea of a
Summit Conference in principle. Indeed, the interesting
thing to me is that there is no rejection of a Summit
Conference in principle in either Washington or Bonn
or Paris or London none. But in Washington and in
Bonn and in Paris, they attach conditions to it and say.
" Well what is going to be discussed, I want to see
what he agenda will be. I want to know what it is that
is to be discussed." And in the case of the President.
I think he goes further than that and says, " And I want
some guarantee of good faith. so to speak. i want to
see a prospect of a result."
I think, that in the United States, m, impression
was that the feeling is growing that there will be a
Summit Conference. I am not saying that that is the
President's view; but that is my feeling and I had a
number of discussions,
I was at great pains to emphasise one thing in my
conversations all of them and that was that the
Geneva Conference, even if nothing came out of it in
form, could not be regarded as a failure, Because the
proposals that were being put were honest proposals;
they were not selfish proposals. They did not involve
some material gain for the powers putting tnem forward.
But they were designed to ease the tension; produce
peace and a settlement. And I thought that when the
world had the spectacle of proposals of that kind being
put up day after day and explained carefully day after
day, then the effect of that in the world was not
inconsiderable. I took the opportunity in each of these places
of pointing out that while nobody may need to be
persuaded about those matters in the United States or in
Great Britain or in France, let's say, there are hundreds
of millions of people in the world who are not in any of
those places we are pretty close to a fair number of
them who are not committed either to the Communists or
to the West. They are, in effect uncommitted countries.
And the effect upon their judgment of proposals of an
honest kind honestly advocated was, I thought, very
considerable, and that we in Australia were greatly
influenced by that consideration. And I think that
that point registered itself.
I elaborated that particularly to Mr. Herter
whom I have never met before. I knew Foster Dulles, of
course, very well. Mr. Herter himself is a man of great
personal attraction. He is a tall man; he is a man
with a rather winning personality if I might use that
expression; he is obviously intelligenc and I think
that Herter will personally make a good seal of ground
with the people that he negotiates with.
I was chiefly concerned to tell him that in the
opinion of one not very important onlooker I thought
that he was doing a good piece of work, ana that the
effect of this on the minds of people would be very great
always remembering that this ideological battle or
whatever we care to call it is a contest for minds.
Therefore whatever influences people's minds can never
be regarded as a failure.
I do not know what is going to happen in this
renewed conference, but I would not, myself, despair of
something. They are not going to settle the problem of
the re-unification of Germany; I do not think that
anybody believes that that is a proble'm w~ hich can be
solved this year or next year or the year after. Nor
will anybody decide that fascinating and attractive
legal arguments that are taking place about the
foundation the legal foundation of the occupation of
Berlin these are arguments that do not seem to me to
be very material because there is no judge, no jury
just have your fun and adjourn.
I told Chancellor Adenauer tha~ t it was I asked
him whether he had seen the reports of Liberace in the
" Mirror" in London and hie said he had, and I said, " Well,
there you are, you see suppose there were no judge and
no jury, how long coull they go on having the most
marvellous fun with no decision." And I think that in.
reality what the prac-tical point of Geneva will be and
I hope they will do something about it a working
arrangement about Berlin for the next five years or ten
years, or something of that kind that will take the
tension out of the atmosphere and will allow these other
matters to be looked at in a quiet way.
I had long discussions in London, of course, with
Mr. MacMillan. I attended a Cabinet meeting. I did
gather from somebody that I had been promoted to be an
emissary from the British Government, but; I am sorry I
cannot claim that dignity, because I had already arranged
to go to Bonn and to go to Paris, and both heads of
Government had ': een extraordinarily accommodating in
giving me a date and plenty of time for discussion;
just in the same way I always desired to come back via
the Eastern route and, if possible, look in at Karachi,
New Delhi and S--ngapore.
But, at any rate, of course I did have a pretty
clear picture in my mind of how Lhe United Kingdom
Government was looking at these matters; that was
helpful to me.
I did not go to Bonn to persuade the Chancellor of
something. I was rather fortunate in that I had been
there three years before and had established very good
personal relations with Chancellor Adenauer, so that he
greeted me as a friend. I think perhaps I was able to
do a little good there, because I found that he was as
I thought seriously misinformed about British public
opinion. A lot of these statements of his that you read
are founded upon a belief that he has that there is an
acute anti-German feeling in Great Britain and in the
British Government; and I do not believe that is true.
I had some amusing discussions with him in the
course of demonstrating, as I hoped, that it was not
true. I had about five hours with him altogether. I
thought it was pretty handsome, considering that he had
a few local disturbances on his hands. But it was a
very good discussion. We discussed the European
Common Market and the little free trade area, for
example. I felt anxious lest the little free trade areathat
is the seven, the division of Europe into the seven
and the six might become inveterate and produce an
economically divided Europe which as I said quite freely
on the Continent, was no good to Lhem. No good to the
six they do an awful lot of business with the seven.
I am satisfied that so far as Chancell., r Adenauer
is concerned, heowould like to see a composition between
the seven and the six. He does not contemplate with any
satisfaction any permanent division.
I discussed that with General De Gaulle who, I think,
agrees with that in principle, but is inclined t6 think
that a longer period of time must elapse before effective
negotiations between the two can be carried on.
It is a very interesting thing to an r4bserver
two years ago, France was the weak * spot in the Common
Market. France was, economically, the problem child.
There is no doubt that today France is becoming one of
the most powerful factors in the European Common Mar'ket
due to the immense prestige of General De Gaulle, And
he has restored French pride and the recovery of France
economically in the la st 18 months is really quite
remarkable, and it goes on.
QUESTION: Sir, on the sixes and the sevens, what is Great Britain's
view at the moment? Is she likely to be interested?
She has been more or less responsible for six being-. oreated.
PRIME MINISTER: Well, it is an ill business to speak on behalf of
any Government other than your own, and it is not always
possible to speak on behalf of your own. But I think
it can be taken definitely that Great Britain is not
regarding the formation of the seven as a definitive act,
but as something from which you can advance to
discussions with the six. That, I am sure, is the
received view in Great Britain, And it is a view which
I myself took every opportunity of advocating.
8.
It is quite true that in the event of such
discussions, countries like Australia have important
reasons to be heard consulted to be in on the formalation
of any proposals. I discussed that matter also
in Great Britain, and there is no doubt about it that
that is fully recognised that in the event of any
such discussions we will be in on the grass roots. They
will, first of all discuss with us our mutual in respect
to any of these mazters, and indeed we have established
some machinery for doing that on the official level in
the first instance.
But the interesting thing, rally, is not that
Germany which was tremendously powerful still is, of
course but outstandingly powerful economically two or
three years ago-it is not that Germany does not want to
have these discusions, because I am sure it does, but
that France is gaining in strength. And I think that
President De Gaulle feels that he needs some time yet
to consolidate that position before committing his
country to discussions of a further kind.
It is an active problem it is not a dead problem.
It is quite active and I think that minds, though they
may be travelling at different paces, are really
travelling in the same direction on it; but I am rather
optimistic there. Of course, it would be a very good
thing to have this settled, because there are always
some little mutual suspicions, fears, apprehensions
between one country and another, and it is a good thing
to have them cleared up.
QUESTION: Sir, there has been some mention of the fact that West
Germany might like to export more private capital. There
113as been a suggestion that they would like to have a
double taxation agreement with Australia to make -Uhat
possible.
PRIME MINISTER: I had no discussions about that. You have to
remember that I was not there on specific matters of
that kind. I was really there to get so far as I could
inside the minds of the Chancellor in Germany and the
President in France, and I had ample opportunity of
doing that, because they were extrao-rdina. rily forthcoming
and put their cards on the table.
I must say that Adenauer, though he is 83, is
remarkably active. I did not see any sign of any.
failing. He~ is a very shrewd man but, I -think, a little
adversely affected by his conceptions, gainaed from the
" Daily Mirror" and the " Sunday Express" no doubt,
of what British public opinion is that is the British
" Daily Mirror". And they do not represent British
public opinion and certainly do not represent British
Government opinion on that matter.
MacMillan himself stands very well with Adenauer
who has a great respect for him, as has Do Gaulle. I
had not seen De Gaulle since the war, and I saw big
changes in him. He is a man today of a mellow kind.
Nobody could have called him mellow during the war. We
exchanged jokes that was something and he was very
frank and forthcoming and relaxed. He feels justly
proud of what he has been able to do for his country,
and no longer frustrated, There he is and I think that
his country has a great confidence in him.
QUESTION: QDUoE SIyOoNu: think he is right in his stand on the atom bombs?
PRIME MINISTER: Don't ask me to off~ er an opinion of' his views on
that matter. There is a good deal going on about atom
bombs, and somebody is rnow going to have a non-nuclear
club no, I would sooner say nothing about. I have
a few ideas but I would sooner say nothing about it.
QUESTION: Do you think that Mr. MacMillan's trip to Moscow has
given him a greater faith in the Russians than li had?
PRIME MINISTER: Oh no, I would not say that. I thought it was a
very good visit to pay and I think that hie has learnt
something about them at first hand. But you must not
suppose that MacMillan is easily beguiled by people.
He is not; he is a very shrewd man. Bu," I think he
learnt a great deal, and after all the whole advantage
of a suromit talk-provided it is not too formal;
provided people d~ on't get it surrounded by brass bands
and myriads of officials; the great advantage of a
summit talk is that a few men sit dowm together
don't hurry themselves, get to know each other, to
know what it is all about because nothing will
persuade me that either Moscow or any capital in the Western
World wants a war or contemplates one. So there is
a good deal of this sort of thing going on, you see,
and there is nothing like a personal meeting.
I have had some very interesting side lights on
Kruschev from various of these people that I have met
ar'ound the world who know him, and it turns out he is
like the rest of us sometimes he is in a good mood and
sometimes he is not; sometimes he is expansive and
sometimes he is not. Well if people would only sit
down and have quiet, friendly talks and get to know each
other, we would get somewhere.
QUESTION: Sir, on your return to London, did you have fresh
discussions with Mr. MacMillan and his colleagues on the
outcome of your talks in Bonn and Paris?
PRIME MINISTER: I did not see the Cabinet again, but I spoke to
Mr. MacMillan on the phone and then I sent him a fairly
full report of my observations in both Bonn and Paris
particularly on what I thought to be their points of
misapprehension of' British attitudes and his own, and
he was good enough to say he found this extremely
helpful. I had a talk with him an hour the day
before I left London; but that was of a more general
kind. But he is-* in possession of the relevant matters
that I felt were worth recording as a result of' each
journey.
QUESTION: Do you think the NATO Alliance has been affected at all,
Sir, by this quibbling over who should have nuclear bombs
and who should not?
PRIME MINISTER: Oh, I don't think so. There is always a little
bit of propaganda floating around, you know. I think
that, basically, NATO is quite firm and good. President
De Gaulle may, occasionally, laave some wry remark to make
about nuclear weapons and France; but he is a realist.
Ile knows that NATO is important.
QUESTION: Sir, which would be the major obstacle in the amalgamation
of six and seven the exclusion of agricultural
surpluses or French fear of British industrial
competition?
PRIME MINISTER: It is very hard to tell, because they have not
got down to bralss tacks on that. I think that
agricultural self-sufficiency in the Common Market Area
is a very consi -derable factor very considerable. You
see, Germany buys wheat from France at about twice the
price that she would have to pay us for wheat. There is
a good deal of this agricultural self-sufficiency. As
against that, you have to bear in mind that the countries
of the Comimon Market conduct the bulk of their export
trade with other European countries, and therefore they
cannot be indifferent to what happens in those countries
or what affects the competitive capacity of those
countries or the industria. strength and purchasing power
of those countries.
I think I had better push on a bit, because otherwise
we might be here until I am you know. i
I went over to Hclland to have a look at the new
Prime Minister there who is comparatively new to politics
De Quay. He is a very nice man; indeed, I got on very
we] ll with him. He was a Professor of Psychology.
QUESTION: What is wrong with that, Sir?
PRIME MIINISTER: Very good. I told him there were two of us,( Eaughter'
He was the Queen's Commissioner for Brabant for
about ten or eleven years the big province of Brabant
But he is very good. He had quite practical considerations
of concern. You may remember that we were
speculating a little when hts Tredecessor went out of
office as Prime Minister, as to whether there might. be
a change of policy in the Netherlands with respect to
West New Guinea. There will not be. He said, " We will
carry on completely the policy of our predecessor ." 1
I notice that there has been a little flutter on
the water about my talks with Luns, which I had for some
hours in Zurich. Well, there is no foundation for that.
What had happened was when this matter was debated in our
own Parliament after Subandrio's visit, I made a speech
with some care and at some leng-th, and they had had a
copy of that. And, in substance, having found. that they
had read this and considered it with some care, I said,
" Well, that stands as a statement; there is no change
from that speech." And I think they were content with
that. Certainly, we had no disputes or no wrangles,
and certainly there has been no change in our policy
since I enunciated the policy with some care in the
Parliament here no change of any kind.
I wanted to see the new President of Pakistan,
Pakistan has had a lot of fluctuations with Government,
as you know, ever since the Aga Aly Khan who was a very
distinguished man. And ncw they have a President and
Government containing a certain percentage of military
people, and therefore some have been disposed to believe
that it is some sort of a military Gover.= ent, I don't
think that is true, President Ayub himself is a very
impressive man and a very civilised perscn very good.
And his idea is that when they get things straightened
up they will go he hopes in two years' time to
elections and establish a parliamentary system of
government, and let the generals go back to their
soldiering; and I think he means that.~ I met two or
three of his ministers who Ithought, were pretty good,
I am not saying that the o~ hers were not, but I met two
or three who were very impressive.
11.
One of the great things there, of course, is the
projected agreement about the Indus Waters to which we
are contributing an agreement negotiate. d by Black of
the Internaticnal Bank tremendously important. With
it, West Pakistan has some proper chance of being
economically liable, and without it, it lives precariously
from year to year. I think it is the big gest material
matter of dispute between Pakistan and India. I am not
omitting Kashmir. Kashmir is not purely a material
matter of dispute. It involves all sorts of other
considerations and passions. But in an economic sense,
this has been the big thing and it looks as if it is
going to be cleared up and a number of us will contribute
to the cost nf it. And I am hoping that it will modify
feeling of hostility, shall we say, or suspicion on both
sides of the frontier. I hope it does, because at the
present time, of course, as you know, both India and
Pakistan are spending the bulk more than 50 per cent.,
up to 60 per cent. of their total budget on defence,
and the effect of this in low standard of living
countries with an awful lot of development work to be
done can be imagined. So that this will not only have
an immediate economic benefit for Pakistan, but it will
have an indirect economic benefit for both Pakistan and
India if it reduces the tension and enables them to
devote a somewhat bigger portion of their revenues to
economic affairs.
QUESTION: Did you get any impression, Sir, of better relations
between the two?
PRIME MINISTER: Oh, I would not care to say that, found 7.
both sides a feeling of satisfaction about this waters
agreement, and I am sure that will lead to better
relations. But, of course, these are two fascinating countries
because in Karachi you can go and ask a senior officiala
very influential man in Karachi about some
corresponding fellow in New Delhi, and he says " Oh, he's
a great friend of mine; we were in the ' uld Indian Civil
Service together." And-the same way in New Delhi an
awful lot of crossed lines here which are lines of a
friendly kind.
QUESTION: ( Question inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER: Oh ncw, that is a very speculative question. That
is so hypothetical, I think you ought to withdraw it,
It is a very dangerous thing answering hypothetical
questions. I saw Mr. Nehru. I was in New Delhi for about
three days and I saw him each day for some hours. We
had long discussions. He, of course, has had a good
deal of preoccupation first about Tibet and then about
Kerrawa. But I must say I found him extraordinarily
forthcoming and he is friendly. We had the most
interesting, frank, comfortable disuuss~ ons on all sorts
of things, in the course of which he was able, of course,
to throw a good deal of light on dark places for me
because he was able to give me a pretty good account of
the Tibet problems and the departure of the Dalai Lama,
and also, of course, some sort of picture of what goes
on inside Communist China because he has representation
there. I think he has haA a few exchanges with
Communist China about some of the Tibet inMcidents,
But everything he said to me or. those matters, of
course, I amr not able to repeat, but I found it
tremendously illuminating.
QUE~ STION: Did he expreass a desire to visit Australia?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, we had a little discussion about that. He
knows that when he can come we would be delighted. But
he is a victim of the time-table too, because it is not
very easy for him to get away except at some particular
time of the year which may not be the best here. But I
told him anyhow to chew it over and if he saw.. a chance
whatever time of year it was we would be very glad to
have him. It would be something of a break for him too,
because hie carries a most enormous responsibility
enormous.
QUESTION: Does that discussion suggest, Sir, that it might be
worthwhile if we had representation in Communist China,
like England.
PRIME MINISTER: I have no comment on that. There is nothing freshi
to be said on that.
Well, finally, there was Singapore where I met
Mr. Lee, the new Prime Minister, and well I think most
of his ministers. I had a long talk with him and then
I talked with him and some of his mini. sters, and then
I had dinner with all of them at night. They are a very
young government; their average age is 37 He himself
is 36. He is a man of high educational qualifications.
He was a double first at Cambridge and achieved a
very high reputation in the law in Singapore and
thereabouts before judges who were competent to exnress
an opinion. He is a man of ability, He has some
tremendous problems.
I am perfectly certain he is not a man who will
lean towards the Communists. I think, on the other hand,
on the contrary, he regards them as one of his p~ rob" Lems.
But the island has a population of 1 500,000. Its
population is rising at the rate of O, 0O a year. It has
got 25,000 people added to what they call -the force
every year and a small island with, I suppose, no real
possibilities of agricultural developmenz. or something of
that kind, and therefore it must develop industries, and
to develop industries it must attract capital. Well,
he is a socialist, but when I was there, I read the whole
of his election pamphlets, for example, -to inform my ovdm
mind, and also the speeches he has been making lately,
And I think he is doing his best to establish that if
anybody does invest money there, it will be all right;
private enterprise will be recognised, I do not know;
I am not preaching his case for him. But he is a
seriously minded man and he knows his responsibility;
he knows that he has got a great problem~ i. employing
his people. He has 6 per cent. of iuiemployed now and on
figures that I have just mentioned, that figure is
likely to rise.
He is, of course,, very keen on secu:? ing the joining
up with the Federation with Malaya. What his prospects
are of that, well; your guess is as good as mine. I
think that he feels that if that could be achieved, the
population could then become more flexible. It could
move into the rest of the Malayan Peninsula, and he would
be free of this concentrated problem in one very small
area,
13.
But I liked him. I found him very intelligent and
I liked the ministers with whom I talked his Health
Minister and his Minister of Finance, and really it is
very illuminating to find that you can have very much
the same kind of conversatizn with that type of minister
as you would in your own country with your own people
similar problems.
But I think it ought to'be assumed that this
Government in Singapore is honest and is going to do its
best to produce good government,, Certainly, everybo
who is in a position to judge assured me that they were
personally incorruptible; that they were completely
honest people who were going to do a job. Lid so I
said to them, " Good luck, we regard your getting selfgovernment
as * an achievement which is in the line ;-f
modern British colonial policy, and the people have
chosen you, and good luck to you. If we can ever be
co-operative, let us know."
QUESTION: SirI because he hMs this big unemployment problem, I
take it there is no desire on their part t. o kick the
naval base out?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, I do not know. The naval base provides,
directly or indirectly, sustenance for 70,000 people.
So it is a big factor that is men, women and children,
70,000 people. But I did not ask him w~ l. t his
prognosis was about the base., Naturall. y, in these
meetings you are primarily concerned to establish some
friendly relations so that in future he can xwrr-Lte to me
or I can write to him about probl~ ems a. s they arise.
QUESTION: Sir, do you intend to say anything about the Governor-.
0 General today?
PRIME MINISTER: No. I had two discussions with the Queen. We
passed in review a variety of names. There are always
two things about names: One, whether tbe-qre
0 satisfactory and the other is whether they are available,
which is a very different matter. And I said finally,
" Well, Ma'am as this matter can be solved in September
when you get back from Canada, there is no hurry about
it. I will write to you." But we are familiar with
each other's minds on that matter. That is all,
QUESTION: Did you discuss future Royal Visits, Sir, particularly
one for the Empire Games in Perth?
PRIME MINISTER: I had some discussions, but there is nothing that
can be said about it at present,
With the compliments of-
Hugh Dash,
Press Secretary to the Prime Minister,
CANBERRA.