How Best To Govern Fiji

That Embarrassing Demand for Representative Government

rE time is opportune, in view of the change in the Governorship of Fiji, to make some reference to the administration of Fiji. There is no pos sibility of a change while the war goes on; but, after the war, when all the South Pacific administrations will be more or less in the melting pot, some change in Fiji’s government probably will be sought. Now is the time to think about it.

Because of close connections with Australia and New Zealand, the non official Europeans in Fiji regard their political problems from an Australian- New Zealand angle. That is wrong.

Because of the peculiar problems created by Fiji’s three watertight communities, Fiji cannot have representative govern ment after the Australian pattern.

There are in Fiji 5,000 Europeans, 100,000 Fijians and 90,000 Indians. It is a headache for the British Colonial Office, especially in relation to the recur ring demand by the Indians for a share in the Government. It is a headache for the selected Governor, who can get out of his embarrassing situation between the three communities only by blandly ignoring the principles of representative government, and assuming the authority and methods of a benevolent dictator.

In fact, it is a headache for everyone concerned. But it is none-the-less true that Fiji, under its benevolent dictators, has become one of the happiest and most prosperous territories in the Paci fic, and a shining jewel in the diadem of British Crown Colonies.

But many Europeans in Fiji insist that the present system cannot continue.

Apparently, they want to see, embodied somewhere in their constitution, their right to say Aye or Nay to the Governor.

But not one of them seems to be capable of producing a practicable plan, to show how it is to be done.

PRIOR to 1937, the Europeans had a certain measure of self-government, through the election of members to the Legislative Council. But that con stitution gave the Colony’s 5,000 Euro peans a panel in the Council out of all proportion to the panel there repre senting the Indians, of whom there were some 90,000; and so we had the Indians’ seemingly endless agitation for a “com mon roll”.

A common roll meant that European authority would have been swamped by the Indians; and the British, while genuinely anxious to accord even-handed justice to the Indians, could not permit that. Discussion, argument, and agita tion went on for years, to the great embarrassment of Whitehall.

INDIANS are citizens of the Empire, and entitled to the full rights of citizenship; but the communities do not mix. Their social conditions and ways of life are far apart. “East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.”

The British found Fiji; they accepted the rich territory in trust from the Fijian chiefs; they developed it as a British colony; the welfare of the Fiji ans is their first responsibility; they could not be expected to hand it over to the descendants of the Indian peasants who came swarming in in the eighties and nineties to work the sugar-lands.

Yet (as.the Fiji Indians with increasing clamour reminded us) the Indians are citizens of the Empire, and entitled to the rights of citizenship.

At intervals of many years, two or three genuine attempts were made to give Fiji a government which would pro vide residents with some form of legis lative authority—allowing adequate repre sentation to the Indian and Fijian com munities without depriving the small

European community of the dominating power. The attempts were genuine—but it just could not be done. Indian jealousy and agitation rendered them all abortive.

SO, in 1936, Whitehall gave it up, removed the semblance of represen tative government which the Col ony enjoyed (suffered is a better word!), and introduced the 1937 constitution.

There are some 31 members of the Legis lative Council, and of these only six are elected —three by Europeans and three by Indians. Ail the rest, selected to fairly represent the three communities, are nominated by the Governor.

Actually, the system has worked quite well since 1937, and it certainly has put an end to the hitherto endless agitation

of the Indians. But it seems not to have pleased the Europeans—they want a larger and more authoritative voice in the Colony’s administration.

In the final analysis, the whole thing depends upon the kind of Governor sent by Whitehall to Fiji. If he has wisdom, strength and tact, the present system of government could hardly be improved upon. If he is a slothful man, or lacks austerity, or is influenced by official pimps and babblers, or forgets that in Suva there surely is “the fierce light that beats unon a throne” (in other words he has' little private life, and his every little act is watched and analysed) —then the present governmental system surely will break down.

Conflict of Interests

ONE reform which will be strongly demanded, and which should be granted, is the separation of the offices of Fiji Governor and High Com missioner of the Western Pacific. No one man can adequately fill the two jobs —especially since the introduction in Fiji of the 1937 Constitution.

There may be several alternatives pre

sented as a solution of this problem.

Here are three; — Carry on as at present, except that the two offices described shall be held by two men, instead of one.

Rearrange the whole of the South Pacific Administrations, to form a sort of South Pacific Federation, each ter ritory (including Fiji) to have its own Governor, responsible to a Governor- General.

Break up the present High Commis sion for the Western Pacific by handing over Solomons and New Hebrides to Australian administratoin, and making New Zealand responsible for Tonga and Fiji responsible for Gilbert and Ellice Colony.