Agendum 437 13 August 1940

CONSULTATION WITH NEW ZEALAND

The interests of Australia and New Zealand are identical in many
matters at present affecting the external relations of the two
countries, especially the questions of the Far East and of
relations with the French Territories in the Pacific. It is
obvious that it would be greatly to the advantage of both
countries not only to be fully and regularly informed of each
other's views, but also to have an opportunity of consultation
before the formulation of policy.

There has hitherto been no machinery or regular arrangements of
any kind for this purpose. From time to time the Commonwealth
Government has repeated to New Zealand, and vice versa, telegrams
of special importance on matters of common interest addressed to
the United Kingdom Government. In recent months this practice has
been somewhat increased, but clearly its principal value is in the
exchange of information only; it does not provide for
consultation. Even as a means of exchanging information as to the
views of the respective Governments, after the views have been
decided, the arrangement is imperfect, as it operates irregularly
and necessarily omits the whole of the background to important
decisions.

Other Dominions have also felt the necessity of having closer
inter-Dominion contacts and consultation, to which end they have
in some cases appointed High Commissioners to the more important
Dominions.

The Commonwealth of Australia has followed this growing practice
so far as Canada is concerned. In the case of New Zealand, it is
not considered necessary at the moment that the Commonwealth
Government should go to the expense of establishing a High
Commissioner's office, but it is believed a satisfactory
alternative to achieve the main object in view would be the
appointment of a liaison officer between the two Governments,
permanent for at least the duration of the war. The most
convenient method for this, it is submitted, would be an exchange
of officers between the respective Departments of External
Affairs. The attachment of an officer of the Australian Department
of External Affairs at the Foreign Office as liaison for similar
purposes has proved to be of great value, and there is every
reason to believe that a corresponding arrangement between New
Zealand and Australia would be equally justified by its results.

This proposal would have the added advantage that it need not
involve any loss of personnel, as the liaison officer in each
case, if the New Zealand Government were agreeable, could be
treated pro tem as one of the staff of the Department to which he
was attached. He would have the duty of reporting back to his own
Department and receiving communications from it, but for many
routine Departmental functions he could be made subject to
instructions locally. Little expense would be involved, including
only cost of transport of the officer concerned and possibly a
small allowance additional to normal salary.

If Cabinet agrees to this suggestion, I would propose to have it
communicated immediately to the New Zealand Government for
approval in order that the arrangement might be put into operation
with the least possible delay.

J. MCEWEN