The Solomons

The Farce Of The “Council” In

From a Special Correspondent

This article was in type at the end of January.

But when we learned that Sir Murchi son Fletcher would visit Sydney, and would here deal personally with B.S.I. affairs, we decided to postpone pub lication, so that those taking part in the pending conferences might be free from any embarrassment. The confer ences are over and, we believe, much has been achieved.

In the meantime, while we are await ing an announcement of reforms, no harm will be done by the publication now of this very frank statement of the planters’ viewpoint.

FOR purposes of comparison, readers who live in tropical parts may be in terested in the legislative practice which is applied in the Solomon Islands Pro tectorate, and as it is noted by an on looker.

The opening of the annual proceedings of the Advisory Council is impressive enough to warrant the expectation or hope of some gripping debates and notable legislation, but the hope is dispelled with in a very few minutes after the opening.

The guard of honour and the ceremonious opening would appear to be somewhat in appropriate, as they do not herald any legislative authority. It is merely the annual meeting of the Advisory Council, which consists of Government officials and of residents nominated by the Government.

The duties of the Council are to advise the Government on matters of internal administration only. How the perform ance is viewed by the Councillors them selves is not known, but to others it is not regarded very seriously.

The chairman’s speech was pithy. He welcomed the Councillors and would ap preciate their advice. He sympathised with the planter in his troubles and—just let it go at that, and the proceedings were adjourned until next day. Disappoint ment was reflected in the faces of those who had expected to hear something of a

policy designed to relieve the distress or indeed, of any policy at all.

Native Wages and Tax The “private members” held the floor on the following day, and the old subject of a reduction in native wages was brought out again for an airing. They recounted the occasions on which they had already appealed for this relief for the planter—on every possible oppor tunity since 1929. They pointed out that the wage was fixed by Regulation when they were prosperous, and did not mind paying the highest price in the world for the type of labour they employ. Pathetic instances were given of planters who had worked for years and lost all their sav ings during the past few years—some having left the Protectorate and others remaining destitute in it. Natives were looking for work, but those employers who are still able to make a struggle are not able to pay them at the present scale.

One after the other did the members tell their tales of distress, one with re markable eloquence and the others, more rugged, but with equal honesty and sin cerity.

When the last of the private members resumed his seat the reply was given— stern and uncompromising—that the mat ter was confidential and could not be dis cussed in Council. (It was whispered to this scribe that exactly the same answer had been given for years past.) One member, possibly with more valour than discretion, then asked for the amendment of the law which compels an employer to pay the head-tax of his labourers. His colleagues supported him royally, and demanded the reason why an unemployed native is obliged to pay his own tax, while a native in receipt of steady wages has his tax paid for him.

The pertinent question was why should any person be compelled to pay another man’s personal tax. Why should it, in deed! We speculated as to whether such a law applies in any other part of the world.

Attention was drawn to another anomaly in the Act. Natives in different districts are taxed on different scales— some four times as much as others—and employers, quite naturally, favour the labourers taxed on the lower scale, to the permanent exclusion of the other unfortu nates. It is quite reasonable to suppose that an employer will refuse to pay a tax of £1 in respect of a labourer if he can get another one for 5/-.

All the arguments were wasted, how ever, as the “hush-hush” policy extends to this subject, also; and the only reply was to the effect that the subject, being connected with labour, was strictly con fidential.

Inadequate Punishment for Natives Nothing daunted, the private members then raised another subject—that of in adequate sentences imposed on persons convicted of offences against females.

They clamoured for more severe sen tences, and that flogging be included. It was shown that imprisonment is regarded by natives as a very light punishment and that it carries with it no sense of shame or disgrace.

The speakers were calm and moderate in their claims but was a gravity underlying their remarks which could not

escape notice. One speaker called on Heaven to preserve the country from adopting such measures as they employ in certain parts of America. Some terrible cases of assault against females had oc curred recently in the Protectorate and it was incumbent upon the Government to suppress this form of crime with no light hand, or it might be embarrassed by the action of frenzied men who would take the law into their own hands.

The chairman replied that the views expressed by the private members would be forwarded on to somebody or other.

There was no other comment.

As an interesting sidelight to this ques tion, it may be recalled that the British Government recently appointed a com mission to enquire into a matter of flog ging in South Africa. It is understood that the commission’s report was in favour of it, and regarded it as “humane.”

The natives themselves were in favour of It, as the only suitable corrective and deterrent.

The “Permit Farce”

It was worth the discomfort of sitting on the end of a hard form to wait for the next attack by the diehard minority. Its persistence in the face of phlegmatic offi cialdom was admirable.

This time its guns were brought to bear on a law which prohibits natives from travelling outside their own district with out having first paid 1/- and obtained an official pass from their District Officer.

As member after member explained the working of the Act, nothing but the sternest control could repress laughter at the ignorance displayed by those respon sible for framing such a ridiculous law.

Numerous instances were given of natives who lived close to the boundary of another district, being obliged to travel over 100 miles to obtain a pass to enable them to visit relatives and friends less than 10 miles away. But the inconveni ence does not end at that. The District Officer may be away from his station when the applicant calls for his pass and the latter may have to wait two or three weeks for his return. In the meantime, he has to maintain himself.

It was mentioned that a native had been prosecuted for bringing to Tulagi Hospital a friend who had met with a very serious accident. It was presumed the patient would also be dealt with in the event of his recovery.

With gentle irony, one member asked if the Government expected any native dis turbances which would make restricted movements desirable, and, if so, would it not be better to restrict the grants of licences to bear firearms.

The Regulation was described as an in tolerable interference with the liberty of the subject. It had never been referred to the Council for discussion, and was an example of many other regulations which became law only to be amended or re pealed because they were framed hastily and without any reference to men with knowledge of local conditions.

The Government bench remained silent, and the private members had to content themselves with a promise from the chairman that their views would be for warded on but —sternly—in the meantime it must be understood that the law will be carried out.

By this time the private members had evidently spent their force and, beyond one or two questions and a half-hearted passing of the Estimates, nothing more was done and the Council adjourned until next year. The business of a whole year was disposed of in about two hours!

“Submarining” the Council One came away impressed with the futility of the whole thing. Instead of an Advisory Council deliberating and func tioning for the public welfare, it rather resembled a few culprits appealing to a stern bench for some small mercies.

It is evident that advice is never soli cited or even wanted; in fact, we gather that it is resented. We have it on good authority that only on very rare occa sions have proposed laws been submitted to the Council for discussion and advice, and that at the last meeting, on which we have just commented, not a single item was placed on the agenda paper by the Government.

It is time that the whole matter was reviewed by a competent authority and the value of the Council investigated. The private members are nominated by the

Government and, if useless, they should be removed from office and replaced by others. Nothing can be more dispiriting than for a man to have to speak on a subject without the remotest prospect of a reply or even hearing the views of the opposite side. The men are unpaid, and come long distances at considerable in convenience to attend the meetings. Is there any encouragement to do this, in the circumstances?

The onlooker can see that the Govern ment does not want a Council, and is doing its best to secure its dissolution by ignoring it to the point of insult. Whether this is resented by the private members or not is unknown; but it certainly is resented hotly by the public. That their representatives should receive such scant confidence and attention is a blow to the people.

Although the private members are nominated by the Government they are representing the people—they fight our battles to the best of their unaided ability, and it is now our duty to support them, or ask for better men, and demand for them the power and consideration given to members of small legislative bodies in other parts of the world.