Nauru Phosphate

India is Unhappy About Nauru Phosphate

THE price paid by Australia for

Nauru phosphate was questioned

by India at the meeting of the UN Trusteeship Council in New York on June 16. Australia’s ad ministration of the island was be ing discussed. —See also page 86 this issue.

India’s delegate asked why Nauru received only 5/8i per ton, when 24/6 per ton was paid Angaur, in the Carolines, where Japanese were allowed to work the phosphate by the USA. the administering authority.

Australia’s special representative,

Mr. J. H. Jones, said there was no explanation for the difference, but funds made available by the Phos phate Commission were adequate for the Administering Authority to carry out its responsibility.

Asked who received the benefit from selling the phosphates at cost price, Mr. Jones said the Nauruans’ income was not affected, no matter what payment was received for the

phosphate.

The Indian delegate said the an swers were unsatisfactory and he would again raise the question in the general debate.

Nauru is a Trusteeship territory held Jointly by Australia, New Zealand and the UK. It is administered by Australia on behalf of all three. The British Phos phate Commission, on which are repre sentatives of UK, Australia and NZ. works the phosphate. The Commission is quite independent of the Nauru Administration, although under the agreement, all ex penses of the Administration and royalties which are paid in respect of the Nauruans, must be defrayed by the sale of the phosphate.

The phosphate all goes to these three member countries (in practice, to Aus tralia and New Zealand). The Nauru set up is, therefore, in quite a different category to that of Angaur, one of the Caroline Islands, held by the US under Trusteeship. If the US charges Japan 24/6 per ton for phosphate, then that is something between the US and Japan.

Similarly, if the BPC supplies phosphate at cost to its members, for the good of Empire agriculture, and at the same time takes care of the legitimate requirements of the Nauruans, then that is the business of Australia, NZ and the UK.

The impertinence of the questions put to Australia by a country like India, where a large proportion of the popu lation is at starvation level, shows the system fUtility ° f the Wh ° le Trusteeshi P JM a jor T. H Cude retired at the end of May after 30 years in Nauru.

He had been three years with the ® r^ l sh Phosphate Commissioners and 27 with Nauru Administration as Director of Police and a Magis- Victoria 116 18 n ° W liVlng in Kallista >