Why have we got a High Commissioner

in London? It seems we no longer need one there. 

Well of course we do but the present High Commissioner seems to think that his role is political rather than diplomatic. He tried to cancel any celebration of Downunder's national day because of "sensitivities" of a miniscule portion of the population. He isn't really using the posh residence, just ten minutes walk from Kensington Palace and the Albert Hall. I presume he takes a brisk walk to the office in Downunder House instead.

I know something about the diplomatic service. One of the late Senior Cat's cousins wrote what became the "bible" for diplomats. It is still used to provide guidelines about what is expected, how to behave, what to do...and all the other protocols involved in representing your country abroad. Yes, you are representing your country abroad. You are not representing the government of the day but your country. It is hard work...or it should be.

The cousin who wrote the guidelines, now also deceased, went on working long after he had officially retired. He did what was expected of him. His wife did too - wife, not partner back then. They knew it was a role which involved both of them. She  was as much the hostess as he was the host at all the events they had to plan and manage. I know I was a useful "lone" female at times but B... and P... also knew that I could be relied on to turn up looking neat and tidy and that I would not get drunk or say anything controversial. I could, they hoped, be relied on to listen to boring people and look as if I was enjoying it. I did meet some interesting people, very interesting people in the process but there were also some we could all have done without. 

B...explained all this before the first occasion they invited me. It was all part of the job they went on doing even after official "retirement".  It is one of those roles you can never quite relinquish however hard you try...if you are doing the job properly.

I suspect our present High Commissioner in London does not understand this, or does not want to understand this. He is not there to be the Prime Minister's man in London. He is there to be Downunder's man in London. 

I have never met the present High Commissioner. I am never likely to meet him and I have no wish to do so. He simply does not have that diplomatic aura about him. There was a previous High Commissioner I did meet one night at an event to which I had been invited. He asked me how I came to be there in the sort of "I need to ask this question" sort of way but when I told him he called his partner over and told her, "This is Cat and she is..." Much later they invited me to an event they were having - so I could meet someone else. It's all about the networking of course. I was not important in myself. I was potentially useful.

The present High Commissioner apparently does not understand this. He has held a mere thirty events over the course of the year. The previous High Commissioner held one hundred and fifty. He saw to it that people mixed and met one another. Yes, it costs money to do that but it can also bring money in. It builds relationships. If things go wrong then there might be someone with whom direct contact can be made. 

We all know this...except it seems the present High Commissioner.