In light of subsequent happenings am at loss to understand why
British authorities your end insisted on drastic restriction terms
of official announcement arrival A.I.F. Absence of highly relevant
facts in statement, but since revealed, have caused me great
embarrassment.

Although first told this end desirable state troops disembarking
Middle East, and then Egypt, never agreed that Suez should be
mentioned, yet Suez specifically mentioned from London few hours
after my statement issued.

My statement made no reference Eden's visit, accordance your
telegram [1], but think should point out your telegram of February
12th [2] stating announcement to be made 13th arrived here some
hours after fact disclosed from London as part of arrival story.

Take strongest exception refusal to allow reference to fact that
battleship formed part of escort, as publication presence of
battleship these waters of considerable value in assuring public,
conveying sense of security, and stimulating recruiting. Also this
fact broadcast from New Zealand. Unable appreciate reason for
reticence weeks afterwards.

Further, why was it not possible to state troops going Egypt
further training. Cannot believe Germans unaware A.I.F. not
completely trained, and publication of fact of value in preventing
relatives unnecessarily anticipating early casualty lists.

Recently some important messages, particularly one affecting
censorship, sent from Admiralty to Australian Navy Board.

Essential to make clear that messages from Admiralty to Navy Board
not to be employed as channel for inter-Governmental
communications to Australian Government.

Appreciate your strongest representations these points, which live
issue here and inference being drawn some quarters Government
submitting external dictation on matters pre-eminently Australian
concern. [3]

MENZIES