Mainland Or

Bitapaka?

Australian Minister, Perturbed by Capitol Site Argument, to Fly to New Guinea

A N unexpected and somewhat extraor dinary position has developed in re lation to the question of the future site of the Administrative establishment in New Guinea.

An expert committee (consisting of Brigadier-General T. Griffiths and Mes srs. C. W. Thomas and L. Thornton) was sent to New Guinea by the Com monwealth Government in February to recommend a site to which the adminis trative centre could be transferred from Rabaul. now menaced by volcanic activ ity. The committee made a very thorough job of it—travelling all over the Territory and exhaustively examining every pos sible site —and in April it returned to Aus tralia and. submitted its report.

The Commonwealth Government flatly refused to disclose the terms of the re port. but there is good reason for believ ing that the recommendation was two fold. and somewhat as follows: (a) If it is desired to make a change at the minimum of cost to the Adminis tration. and to the various commercial interests affected, it would be possible to place the administrative establishment out in the hills of the Gazelle Peninsula, about 20 miles from Rabaul, at a point between Bitapaka and the new aerodrome.

This place would be clear of immediate danger of eruption, and could be connect ed with Rabaul by a good motor road.

Then the non-official population could re main at Rabaul or move inland, as it wished. (b) If it is desired to use the present opportunity to encourage the settlement and development of New Guinea, and es tablish industries on the large and fer tile plateaus, which lie round the head waters of the Markham. Ramu and Pu rari Rivers, then it would be advisable to place the new capital on the high lands near the junction of the Markham and Watut Rivers, or alternatively, on the plateau at the back of Lae. In such circumstances, it would be practicable to connect the new capital by good roads with the shipping port of Salamaua, the air-port of Lae. the mining towns of Wau and Bulolo and the undeveloped plateaus of the interior.

It should not have been a difficult choice, but the Lyons Government—with that inability to make up its mind which is so characteristic of it—refused to reach a decision and finally deferred the mat ter, while the Minister now in charge of Territories (Rt. Hon. W. M. Hughes) is making a hurried visit to New Guinea and examining the problem for himself.

It is understood that Mr. Hughes is leav ing Sydney on May 30 by aeroplane for New Guinea.

This is a very puzzling development.

Mr. Hughes is a brilliant statesman, but it really is difficult to imagine what he will learn in a rushed visit to New Guinea—a very tiring procedure for a man 73—which he could not learn in Aus tralia, with the various reports of the experts in front of him.

The decision which Mr. Hughes is to make has nothing to do with local con ditions. The real question is whether Australia is to regard its two main Paci

fie territories of New Guinea and Papua as an essential part of an Australian scheme, and proceed to develop them ac cordingly. If there is to be a continu ance of the purposeless footling, which has been a characteristic of Australian policy in New Guinea in recent years, then there is only one thing to do — namely, leave the administrative officials alone in their pleasant little bungalow offices in Rabaul or neighbourhood.

But if Australia is to justify her con trol over this huge and rich territory so coveted by Asiatic nations, then she must initiate a different policy in New Guinea

—and the necessity of placing the admin istrative centre in a new position pro vides an opportunity of stepping out with the right foot, and really achieving some thing worthy of Australian enterprise and initiative.

However, nothing more can be expect ed until Mr. Hughes returns from New Guinea.

Meanwhile, the sensational newspaper accounts of “alarm and devastation” caus ed by the Salamaua earthquake (reported elsewhere) is believed to have greatly as sisted the advocates of the Bitapaka site, as against the mainlanders.