Papua-N. Guinea Bill Puts Territorial

On The Spot

But Debate Provides Parliamentarians With An Opportunity for Slander

By Judy Tudor

fill IK Papua-New Guinea Provisional JL Administration Bill was passed by the Australian House of Represen tatives on July 19. and by the Senate on July 27. It remains in force for the duration of the Pacific war and six months afterwards, when something a little more permanent will be wished upon the long-suffering residents of Australia’s New Guinea Territories.

The implications of the Bill, especially as it applies to native labour, and there fore to the whole economic set-up in the Territories, was discussed at length in the July issue of the “PIM.” Such is the overwhelming majority of the Govern ment in both Houses it was. of course, a foregone conclusion that it would be passed—a Bill, once it is introduced, almost automatically becomes law these days.

The debate on the New Guinea Bill, for any practical purpose, availed Terri torians nothing, nor ameliorated their lot one jot. It did, however, afford members of the House an opportunity of airing their ignorance on New Guinea affairs, and thus making it clear to residents just where they stand in relation to the present Government. Such Is Parlia mentary privilege in this democracy of ours, that members are allowed to slander freely, or accuse unjustly, any person or section of the community who happens to displease them.

The whole business of proving to Aus tralia’s Parliament, and to Australians, that Territorians are simply ordinary citizens, who happened to choose to earn a living in somewhat extraordinary manner has become tedious, boring and unprofitable in the extreme. That it should be necessary to harp on this theme until it is threadbare is one of the phenomena of Australian life.

NOW, consider the ordinary Territorian how he grows. He is no saint; he has his full share of human faults; the isolated, king-of-all-I-survey manner in which he has lived has given inelasticity to some of his ideas; the conditions of war have administered a lesson in toler ance that was badly needed in some in stances. But taking him by and large, the present-day Territorian of the out ports is much the same type of individual who a century or more ago left Europe for the wider fields of Africa, North America, Australia and New Zealand. We call our emigrating forefathers pioneers —and honour them. Australians call Territorians “exploiters” and give them as many kicks in the pants as possible.

It is this ordinary Territorian, the small man of the outports —the planter, the trader, the miner, but the planter most of all —who stands to be ruined by Mr.

Ward’s new legislation, because contrary to popular fancy the ordinary run-of-the mill Territorian was far from wealthy.

The big firms with their many interests scattered over not one, but several, Territories, the big mining concerns, elc. —these can weather the Canberra storms.

But the small man sank his all in one stretch of coconuts or rubber —along with anything up to 30 years of his life.

It is beyond the comprehension of the average Australian to understand why any man should seek a life away from the suburban rut. The ambition of all Australians who live in the country is to

go live in Sydney or Melbourne; and of all those already in those cities, to stay there. To seek fresh fields, and in ,so doing live in a kunai shack, suffer incon veniences, illness, isolation and a dozen more difficulties peculiar to carving a living from the jungle, is to Mr. Average Australian plain, damned silly—if there is not a pot of gold at the end of it or some other dark deep fishy reason for so doing. If he can think of no other reason why Territorians do these things,

then he sits back and bellows “exploi tation,” a parrot-cry that needs, appar ently, no explanation.

Mr. Average Australian, although he is a good trade unionist, cares nothing for the betterment of man; all he cares about is his own personal welfare, and, being lacking in initiative himself, wants regu lations passed to prevent any other person doing what he himself has not the guts to do.

It is this spirit, passing from a large section of the Australian public to-day to the members they have elected to Parlia ment, that manifests itself in the kind of ill-considered outbursts we heard dur ing the recent debate on the Provisional Bill.

Nothing that has been said or written about Papua and New Guinea in the past three years has registered with these men who presume to control the destinies of others.

If for no other reason than that New Guinea was news, it might have been supposed that they, of all people, would have taken some time off to learn some thing of its history and background. They have learned nothing. After three years, the best they can do is still to sit on their behinds on the Government benches of both Houses and yell “Exploitation” at regular intervals, as do the mobs upon whom they rely for support.

The performance put up by the Opposi tion during the debate, except in a few cases, was feeble to the point of dis interest. The Opposition has an election to win next year—or else. And Terri torial have no votes.

Nothing uttered by Opposition members indicated any great knowledge of the Territories or conditions there. Their side of the debate seemed to be inspired by no loftier motives than that it is the function of the Opposition to be “agin the Government.”

It is, however, through the good graces

of Parliamentary morons, and the Aus tralians who put them there, that Terri torians are graciously permitted to return to their homes and their work. And this being so, it is necessary for Territorians to defend themselves against the innuen does, accusations and straight-out slanders that are heaped upon them. fIIHERE is, for instance, the matter of a J. certain Mr. Bryson, a Victorian Labour member.

Mr. Bryson is of the opinion that there was no fighting done in New Guinea except by mainland soldiers; that the planters and miners, who had been in terested only in making money, left in a body for Australia when the invasion occurred.

It should be unnecessary to have to point out to Mr. Bryson that the New Guinea and Papuan residents have a war record that is second to none. In the years 1939-40, every young, able-bodied man who could, joined one of the Services; many of them did not wait for New Guinea contingents to be formed, but paid their own fares to Australia, where they joined the AIF, RAAF or Navy. They served in every theatre of war, and many of them lost their lives, were wounded, or became prisoners of war in so doing.

While these younger men were away, the older men back home, almost to a man, joined the New Guinea Volunteer Rifles. The NGVR’s defence of Rabaul when the Japanese invaded New Britain was a little Anzac. That story has been told over the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s network and printed in Australia’s leading newspapers. Yet Mr.

Bryson had never heard of it; or, if he had, chose to disregard it.

On the mainland, the men of the NGVR were the spearhead of the Allied advance.

For months, in outposts as far afield as Aitape and the Sepik, in the mountains of Morobe and everywhere a listening post was necessary, these men kept tag on the Japs at the hourly risk of their own necks.

They led the early patrols; they made contact with the natives —because these men, and these alone, had the peculiar knowledge necessary for the job. These were the men who, before the war, while Australians pushed pens in Sydney offices, or worked in pickle-joints in Redfern and Footscray, or attended “the dogs” on Saturday, walked New Guinea’s moun tains and her swamps, sailed her treacherous seas, suffered her fevers, carved pieces from her jungle, and dug gold from her streams —doing all these things, not because they were snowy headed heroes, but because they were real men who darned well wanted to live that way. , These were the “exploiters,” the des poilers of native life and culture, the cruel masters of reluctant slave workers —these men, who in 1942, and 1943, and again in 1944, went out and contacted their former victims, and by some strange

power, probably sorcery, harnessed them to the Allied war effort.

A larger proportion of the male popu lation is in uniform in Papua and New Guinea than in any other British Terri tory—the over-age as well as the young men.

In New Guinea there were no reserved occupations; everyone, irrespective of class or position, who was under 45 and out of the Army was automatically in, in February, 1942.

Many over-age men, compulsorily evacuated, took one look at Australia, under wartime conditions, and began at once to move heaven and earth to get back to the Territories —if not with the Australian, then with American, forces.

Some of the finest work in the South west Pacific area has been done by men whose soldiering should havp been over in 1918.

It is impossible to list here the decora tions that have been awarded to New Guinea and Papuan members of the various forces. In this issue of “PIM” alone there are at least half a dozen new awards for gallantry. This is not an exceptional month; 'this has been going on for the past three years.

AN D again—in Australia at this moment there are several hundred women who have heard no word from husbands or sons for 31 years.

Through sheer Government muddling, those men were left behind in Rabaul to be swallowed up in the Japanese invasion (Continued overleaf)

of New Britain. These moral gentlemen of Canberra would do well to dwell a little on the plight of these women, who have had to assume the role of bread , winners to young families, and who know not whether their men are alive or dead, rather than add to their mental anguish by making ill-considered and ill-founded attacks on the courage and integrity of New Guinea manhood.

They might, too, in the comfort of their Canberra hotels, spare a thought to the men who, if they are not already dead, have existed in Japanese prison camps for nearly four years. • In any other country but Australia, the exploits of the New Guinea pioneers, in peace as well as in war, would have been regarded as a proud achievement; theirs would have been an honoured place in the history of the nation.

In Australia these achievements are ridiculed, cheapened, and, worst of all, degraded into catch-calls for politicians who have never seen a coconut or one of the Fuzzy-Wuzzies whom they are go ing to pluck, willy-nilly, from the burn ing of capitalism and slavery.

There is not one decent Territorian who does not want to see the lot of the native improved; they, more than Aus tralian politicians, appreciate the role the natives have played in war and in peace.

There have been no outcries against the

clauses in the new legislation which are designed purely for the welfare of the natives. The complaints are against those clauses, which were designed with out practical knowledge of the Territories, simply confusion and undoing of European enterprise. fIIHE Papua-New Guinea Provisional X Government Bill is now very much fait accompli. A comprehensive report on the debate appears on page 8, this issue. Readers may study it at their leisure —and probably come to the same conclusion as this writer did —that is, that it is rather like butting one’s head against a brick wall to attempt at this late date to teach our leaders anything about the Territories.

One part of the debate, however, is not reported on page 8, and as this clears up a mystery that has intrigued Territorians for 18 months, it might be worth record ing here.

Mr. Ward, on his visit to Papua in early 1944, refused to be carried off the surf boat, but preferred instead to take off his boots and sox and paddle ashore.

It was concluded, at that time, that he did this because of a feeling of brotherly love for the natives. But now, in the course of the debate, Mr. Ward breaks down and confesses that he refused to be carried ashore simply because he had heard that the natives were suffer ing from malnutrition.