- Home
- About us
- Visas and migration
- Travelling to Australia
- Services for Australians
- Doing business with Australia
- Passports
- Study in Australia
- Media
- About Australia
- Events
- Australia-United States of America relationship
Question and Answer session from Ambassador Richardson's Address to the American Australian Association in New York on 25 May 2006 on:
"AUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED STATES – PERSONAL LIVES AND SHARED VALUES"
Question: ….Americans by and large unless they’re really close to the situation, very often don’t detect a whole lot of difference as to which Government is in power in Australia…Australians are widely welcomed here and the Governments have been for many years perceived as friendly. But this Government has developed a special relationship with the White House and I’m interested in your thoughts that inevitably there will be change here and there will be change in Australia. Do you see any real change in Australian attitudes towards the US going forward whenever these changes occur?
Ambassador Richardson: Well I would note that I was in Washington for the last state visit of an Australian Prime Minister to the US, and that was with Bob Hawke in 1989 and he belonged to the Labor Party. And interestingly Australian Prime Minister Howard was staying in Blair House and Blair House opened in about 1941 – 42 and before he left he was looking through the guest list at Blair House, they went down into the basement and brought out some early guest books and the first Australian Prime Minister to stay in Blair House was Prime Minister Curtin in 1944, so that’s a way of saying that successive Australian Governments have, I think, attached central importance to the relationship with the United States. I don’t see that changing. Indeed I think the Prime Minister was very careful while he was here – while some people took a cynical view of what he said - he meant it when he said that the relationship was not about he and President Bush, it was something bigger than that and the welcome he received was from one country to another.
There are clearly, when you look at attitudes of Australia towards the United States, I’m no better placed to talk about that than anyone else, but I do think that you do need to distinguish between attitudes by Australians or indeed for that matter Americans in respect to specific policies and attitudes towards countries generally. And I think attitudes towards the United States, generally as a country, is I think as positive as what it has always been, even if there are differences of view in Australia about the Iraq war and other matters. But I think too many people extrapolate from differences about policies and they then talk about something called anti-Americanism, and certainly in Australia I think that is a difficult concept to talk about because the evidence would not appear to support it. And if you look at what Australians do themselves and where they decide to go to, where they decide to live and work, where they decide to travel to, as I said in my speech, it’s clear that they don’t think about Administration policies or think about Hollywood or other things that are popularly beaten to death in some quarters. They think about opportunities and they think about other things which at its base level can occur because, one, of the welcoming nature of this country and secondly because of our shared values.
Question: David Nason Ambassador. I’m interested in what you said about the plans to recognise the Australian women who married US soldiers in the ‘40s because there’s a famous expression in Australia about American servicemen in Australia: over here, over-paid and over-sexed or something like that. I’m just interested in what this initiative is about and what has given rise to it?
Ambassador Richardson: And to add to that…during the 1940’s at some point even a fight broke out over it between Australian and American soldiers in Brisbane during the war - the battle of Brisbane which attracted a lot of publicity at the time. But tell me, why wouldn’t one celebrate it? 10,000 to 15,000 Australian women came to United States and made home here. They constitute part of the historic Australian presence in this country. They’ve never been recognised as a group in terms of something being done for them – why wouldn’t we do it. And I should say this year in the United States is the year of the war bride. (inaudible) I think it is part of the historic celebration of the connection between the two countries.
Question: What are we going to do precisely?
Ambassador Richardson: As I said, we are in the early stages of working that through and I said we would do it in either 2007 or 2008, so I’m not in a position consistent with what I said of being able to articulate precisely what we will do but it will revolve around ANZAC day and it will revolve around those Australian war brides who remain fit and able and it will also revolve around their offspring.
Question: About the American Studies program announced last week, the AAA had been promoting that I think in part because of (inaudible) concerns that maybe Australians themselves didn’t have a good enough understanding of America (inaudible). I’m wondering what the Government’s position, what it sees getting out of the American Studies program?
Ambassador Richardson: Well I think it is part that, it is part the fact that given the significance of the relationship a view that a dedicated centre in Australia studying matters relating to the US is something that we can benefit from as a country and will add another layer to the relationship.
Question: Tony Walker, the Australian Financial Review. Ambassador, from your unique perspective, what observations would you make about the relationship that Mr Hawke had with George Bush Senior – you said that he made a state visit in 1989 – and the sort of relationship that Mr Howard has with George W Bush.
Ambassador Richardson: Tony, I don’t want to be elusive if I delve too much into all of that, but let me say that I think certainly Prime Minister Hawke and President Bush (Snr) had a very close relationship. That was evident when President Bush addressed a joint meeting of the Australian Parliament in January of 1992 which was the only day on which Bob Hawke sat in the Australian Parliament as a backbencher. He entered Parliament and went straight onto the front bench etc.
My own personal view, I think the relationship between Prime Minister Howard and President George W Bush, personally, I doubt whether we have seen as close a relationship between an American President and an Australian Prime Minister ever. That includes Prime Minister Hawke and President Bush (Snr), it also includes Prime Minister Holt and President Johnson. You might recall that President Johnson was the first American President to visit Australia in 1966 and that Australia was a close ally of the US during the Vietnam war and that President Johnson attended the memorial service for Prime Minister Holt in January of 1968, if I’m right. And clearly we were at arms together during the Second World War, but transportation and a range of other things I think did not lead to the same relationships at the top that we have now. And I think people are familiar with the circumstances of that. I think there is no question that Prime Minister Howard and President Bush have shared certain experiences which I think, sitting at the top of Government, they alone can understand. We can observe and we can comment about, but I think there is a depth of understanding, shared views and affection there that I think is quite genuine. And I don’t think we’ve had the same between any two leaders in the past.
Question: … (inaudible)
Ambassador Richardson: No there isn’t discussion going on of that kind and I do think that we need to be sensitive about anything we do in terms of the E3 visas and publicising them or whatever at this point in the context of the domestic debate here about immigration.
Question: Mr Richardson, my name’s Adam Harvey, I’m with the News Ltd. You mentioned in your speech, you talked in very positive terms about Australian and American traditions of welcoming both the poor and the dispossessed. I was wondering given current events in both countries, down on the Mexican border and in Australia, whether you thought that both nations were less tolerant about immigrants and welcoming in poorer people.
Ambassador Richardson: I wouldn’t have thought so given that we are one of the few countries in the world that has a genuine refugee policy. I mean Australia continues to have a refugee policy for people who meet the definition of the 1951 Convention which covers 12,000 to 13,000 people a year from the most desperate parts of the globe. There are only about another half a dozen countries that have such a program. And I think the United States continues to be a country that is extraordinarily welcoming. It’s not for me to get involved in the immigration debate but I think it’s inevitable with 11 or so million people in the US illegally that that precipitates some sort of public discussion and debate. But I don’t think one should confuse that debate with an intolerance, I think it relates to broader policy issues – my own personal view.
Ends