Production Control Board Has No Statutory

Authority

Auditor-General’s Report Criticises Lax Methods in Papua-New Guinea

A NUMBER of items in the Auditor- General’s Report for 1949-50, which was tabled in the House in Can berra in mid-March, shortly before the double dissolution, are of interest to resi dents of Papua-New Guinea.

The report got little publicity in Australia: it probably escaped the notice of Territorians altogether.

Production Control Board: The report states that the Australian-New Guinea Production Control Board has operated in Papua-New Guinea since December 31, 1949. without statutory authority.

The PCB was established under National Security Regulations in July. 1943; and, some time after the war, by another Act, its powers were extended to December 31, 1949. No extension has been made since that date and the Board, whose main function is the purchase and sale of all copra produced in the Terri tory, apparently has carried on without possessing the necessary authority to do so.

The Auditor-General advises that “early action should be taken to validate the Board’s operations.”

PCB Profit: The Board’s profit on copra trading during the year under review (1949-50) was £110,842, compared with £129,522 for the yeer 1948-49.

Rubber: Due to a price depression in Australia in early 1949, the Common wealth Government, following represen tations by Papuan rubber planters, from August, 1949, purchased through the PCB all Papuan rubber at a rate equivalent to that ruling in Singapore for Straits rubber. This arrangement was carried on for little more than six months, however, as the rubber market in Australia began almost at once to improve. The PCB ceased rubber purchase on March 31, 1950.

Payments to Native Labourers: Since the end of the war the Administration has paid over £97,000 to native labourers whose pre-war periods of indenture were interrupted by the Japanese invasion and subsequent fighting in the Territory.

During the period of chaos in 1942, numerous natives were unable to be paid off in the normal way by their employers; and, although all records were lost, the Administration has nevertheless made payments to the natives where they have given details of their employer, time of contract and circumstances of its being broken, etc.

A considerable part of the £97,000 repre sents wages which were owing to native police and other native employees of the former Administration. The rest is re garded by the Auditor-General as ‘‘re coverable from private employers”—al though at June 1950, very little of it had been recovered.

Payment for services: Payment for Ad ministration services provided to the pub lic on a credit basis has been unsatis factory and the total amount involved has ‘‘assumed unreasonable proportions.” (Presumably, these services include such things as water supply, electricity, health and educational services, etc.). The exact amount owing the Administration for such services could not be ascertained by the Auditor-General, but it is stated in the Report that in one centre (name not mentioned) £25,000 was outstanding.

Power-houses: Running costs and maintenance of power-houses in the main

towns in the Territory were £116,802. Re venue for 1949-50 was £30,837. It was hoped that the position would improve in the following year as more towns began to charge consumers for electricity used.

Lax Accounting Methods: There had been some improvement over previous years in methods of keeping records of bulk stores in the Territory but many “unsatisfactory features” remained in the records kept at other stores and ration

mg centres. Some of the features that the Auditor-General felt were particularly unsatisfactory were arrears in postings, absence of stock ledgers, inaccurate post ings, unacquited issue-vouchers and the adjustment of discrepancies without com petent authority.

Administration Messes: Cost of accom modation to residents of Administration messes remained at 35 - per week during 1949-50. Detailed accounting records on the cost of individual messes were not kept but net expenditure for all messes, after allowing for mess fees paid, was £37,284.

Shipping Agreements: Burns Philp & Cos., W. R. Carpenter & Cos., and Steam ships Trading Cos. agreed in April, 1946, to operate in Papua-New Guinea waters vessels provided by the Commonwealth.

The agreement was for one year and it later was extended to October 14. 1947.

Since then no formal extension has been

made although the companies concerned continued to work the ships.

In 1949-50 running expenses, agency

and commission fees amounted to £196,111. Earnings totalled £135,347 leav ing a deficit of £60,762.

Editorial

Power to Make Stabilisation Fund Deductions Questioned

THE Report of the Auditor-General (which is the only Departmental manifesto which does not try to bamboozle the reader with bureaucratic wool-pulling and officialese but levies criticism where it is due) gives some slight indication of the muddle since the end of the war.

Nor, apparently, does the muddle end in Port Moresby: it extends back to head quarters in the Department of External Territories in Canberra.

The Commonwealth Government can, of course, pass an act to validate the functions of the Production Control Board, which has been without statutory authority since December 31, 1949, but in theory there appears to be nothing to prevent the P-NG copra producers dis posing of their copra where and how they wish; nor any reason why indepen dent copra buyers should not operate.

In practice it may be quite a different story. The position is particularly inter esting at the present time because of the double dissolution of the Federal Par liament. Even after the general erections at the end of April it will probably be two months before the new parliament settles down to business.

The Production Control Board was a Wardist war-time creation which has continued into peace-time, and takes the place of the pre-war Big Firms in buying copra from planters and exporting it. In other words, it compulsorily acquires all export copra produced in Papua-New Guinea and disposes of it to Australian crushers or to the UK Ministry of Food.

Through it, the export tax on copra is collected and handling and insurance charges made; and also through it are the Stabilisation Fund deductions made.

The fact that these Stabilisation monies may or may not eventually be paid over

to some other offshoot of the Depart ment of External Territories does not alter the fact that if, as appears, the PCB has no statutory right to function at all, it has no statutory right to collect the Stabilisation Fund deduction of £5.

NO one seems to know under just what Regulation or Act the Stabilisation Fund came into being: it seems to be another of those top-secret affairs into which planters are not permitted to in quire too deeply.

The MOF Copra Agreement is another case in point. Representatives of the NG copra planters say that they actually have seen the famous agreement—held firmly in the hand of the Secretary of the Department of External Territories.

But they were not permitted to read it.

These things are a fair indication of how far our so-called Democracy has progressed towards the police state. How ever, so far as the Stabilisation Fund is concerned, as the Government is so de termined to maintain it, it is certain that even if the PCB were no longer per mitted to make the deduction, it would be in quick time deducted by some other authority through powers vested in the Minister.

Planters may be divided in their opin ions as to whether a Government-con trolled Copra Board or private enterprise is the best medium through which to market their produce; but they are united in condemning the compulsory “stabili sation” fund which robs them of a large percentage of the MOF price—which in itself is less than half world parity. The planters’ argument all along has been that if they have a nine-years’ guarantee of purchase from the UK Ministry of Food, a stabilisation fund is unnecessary.

AFTER Mr. Spender’s visit to P-NG a year ago, it was announced that the future of the PCB and the method of implementing the copra-purchase agreement as between the UK and the Australian Territories, and the best method of dealing with the Copra Stabilisation Fund, were under c’ose investigation. We do not know whether or not the close investigation was concluded or what those conclusions were; but the fact is that nothing has been done about either the PCB or the Fund since that time.

It is interesting to note, in another portion of the Auditor-General’s Report that the Stabilisation Fund deductions levied by the Australian Dairying Indus- SS ?n a r r el7tto C to

P butted fsTe PCbToIs

hav?noTta^torf?utho P rto~to l °

nave no statutory aurnonty to do so.

It is apparent that the Commonwealth Governmsnt, in the aftermath of the maze of regulations and acts of war years,

is carrying on many of its functions with out any legal right. Unless they are pre pared to give a lifetime of study to these things, few citizens are in a position to know their rights although many of the acts of bureaucracy, if challenged, would obviously be found to be quite invalid, The Auditor-General’s criticism of the P-NG’s accounting systems, etc., does not reveal anything startlingly new, as far as residents of the Territory are con cerned.

Money has been poured into P-NG

iSTSTS^out

with like DrSStealitv atthe Ttoitorv e^d The w hole set-un has L/run on the Drincinle thatthere was nb£tv U mnrP

wlfere' the fait*clmVC Sffi

*w°as £*& "el?

Tlo tnd Papua al nearly® so a's possible and Australian Parliaments felt responsible to Australian taxpayers for anything suggesting extravagances in the Territories.