Commentary
pp. 27-28 · Read in the full issue
A Fijian Committee
In Blinkers
HARD work, and some interesting conclusions were achieved by the Fiscal Review Committee set up by the Governor of Fiji last March. The report, circulated in July, supplies the Government with valuable data, handily arranged.
But, as a means of showing the Government a way through its increasing problems, created by over-population plus under-pro duction, the report is of little value.
The respected Committeemen—as, of course, was to be expected—are more concerned with patching up the present obsolescent system, than with the creation of something new, suitable for meeting new circum stances and a new situation.
Fiji’s debt to Britain is in calculable. Britain, in 1872, took over a primitive but delightful archipelago, filled with jealous and unco-operative tribes; and within 70 years produced a vigorous new Islands nation. The Colonial Office must get full credit for the fact that peace, order and good govern ment were maintained during those years of critical change, when the sugar industry’s Indians became the Colony's largest community.
But now everything affecting Fiji —world conditions, the political outlook of Fiji-born people, the country’s economic and political structure demands far-reaching reforms; and the proof of it is seen in the country’s inability to provide for its reasonable financial needs.
The condition of the growing Fiji communities, as shaped and con trolled by the present Admini stration, is strangling Fiji’s econo mic development.
Assuming that no constitutional change is contemplated, the Gov ernor’s instructions to the Fiscal Review Committee (any one may read them in the report), and the way m which the Committee carried them out, are quite reasonable. As a plan for carrying out patchwork it probably is as good as could be devised, by a Committee in blinkers.
Here are the main heads of the committee’s recommendations: Make economies in general administration, so as to restore reserves.
Increase export taxes and indirect taxa tion, and impose a port and customs service tax if additional revenue is needed.
No increase in income tax.
N °.J nCl ?. ase in expenditure on health and education.
En o f f° r^m ayment . f ° r a ,ar S er Proportion of public services.
Civil servants should work longer hours.
No expansion in social or welfare services.
Increase the import duty on petrol.
Some minor alterations in existing laws, with a view to making more land avail able, and encouraging more investment from overseas.
Reduce the scale of capital expenditure.
About the only forward-thinking paragraph in the whole report is No. 69, wherein it is pointed out that in 1961-65 Fiji will require £9J millions for capital works, and (in our words, not the language of the Committee) God alone knows where it is coming from.
The Committee must not be blamed for the fact that its report, while thorough, is dull, unimagina tive and uninspiring. It has carried out the terms of its reference.
If the population of Fiji had re mained static as in, say, 1946 (250,000), the present system of administering the Colony, and financing its developmental needs, might have served.
But the Colonial Office and the senior Government officials appear to have lost sight completely of the fact that since 1946 the population has increased by 100,000, that the economic structure cannot now support nearly 370,000 under present conditions, and that a great change in political thinking has taken place in all colonies since World War 11.
It is not a Fiscal Review that is wanted, but a complete revision of the Fiji Constitution, based not on the academic generalisations of Colonial Office officials, but on some solid, constructive thinking by the leading men of the established Fijian communities.
Whitehall helps those who help themselves—and we have the post war events in many of Britain’s’
Colonies to prove it. ☆
NG Tax-Resisters Shot.
What Now?
r’E shooting of New Britain village natives by a tax gathering police-party repre sents a tragic accident piled on top of Administration blundering.
The heads of some Top Brass may roll in the gutter. Already, one car hear the screeching of the
Trusteeship Council.
What bright genius was respon sible for introducing an annual head-tax of £2 on all males over 18? Was it Minister Hasluck.
Secretary Lambert, Treasurer Reeve or lonely Brigadier Cleland? Who ever it was, he must take the full blame for Navuneram. Such a
system was bound, sooner or later, to bring conflict between tax gatherer and tax-payer.
Despite all the assurances of academic and political idealists, and all the complacent phrasing of Administration reports, these P-NG natives still are a long, long way from the stage where they can be expected to understand and accept taxation. They are mostly illiterate —a fact that now is an increasing reproach upon the Australian Administration—and it is utterly impossible to draw an arbitrary line between those who are sufficiently under Administration control to be regarded as taxable, and those who are not.
When the foolish law was intro duced, last year, the Administration was asked, How will you decide what sections of natives are to pay this £2 head-tax, and what sections are not to pay? High officialdom, as far as we know, never gave a clear answer.
Apparently, the decision has been left to individual District officials.
If that is so, then the administra tion of the male head-tax law has been as indefensibly stupid as its introduction.
Apparently, some official in the New Britain District decided that the villagers of Navuneram were taxable. Other persons—including the village leaders themselves — claimed that they were not. Who was to decide? And who had the authority to say that the collection of taxation should be supported by armed police?
If the Territory had been short of funds, there might have been some excuse for this stem chase after so-called tax-defaulters. But, by grace of Australia’s annual gift of £lO millions, this is by far the richest Territory in the Pacific.
From the Treasury viewpoint, there was no need to tax these natives — the innovation easily could have waited for another couple of generations, and for the introduc tion of a higher standard of literacy.
What now? The answer lies in Canberra, or with whatever genius thought up the head-tax.
While the tax system remains, the administrative officials must collect it, defiance or no defiance.
If the system is withdrawn, the “big-heads” of the more sophis ticated native communities—and there are plenty among the Tolais —will be encouraged to defy the Administration. The “Raluana In cident” has not been forgotten. The cumulative effect of Navuneram plus Raluana could be exceedingly embarrassing.
Watch Canberra! “Minister Has luck has called for a full report”, says the newspapers. “Admini strator Cleland has departed for Rabaul”. The stage probably is being set so that Top Brass can escape censure by blaming some petty official, or sacking some native
policeman whose rifle was pointed in the wrong direction.
The shooting clearly was ac cidental. But there was no accident about the introduction of a system that led inevitably to trouble, and to this very ugly blot upon the Australian record in New Guinea.
“Australia shot down natives who refused to pay taxes”—that taunt will echo along UNO’s endless corridors for a very long time. ☆
Watch Your Step,
Fiji Employers!
rLE employers of Fiji should resist, with all the energy at their command, the insidious suggestion that the “Pay-as-you- Earn” system of income tax collec tion should be introduced in Fiji.
From the viewpoint of the wage earner (who gets rid of his tax obligation by degrees, and almost painlessly) and of the Government (which receives this very sub stantial revenue, without effort, from six to twelve months sooner than under the present method) it is a most excellent system.
Bat it throws an intolerable burden upon Australian employers —already harassed by the obligation to collect and remit the iniquitous pay-roll and sales taxes.
Pay-day already has it worries and embarrassments, especially when there is overtime to be calculated a nd paid out. When, on top of that, there has to be deducted from the individual wage-earner a sum representing his weekly due or income taxation, and a certifi- £ a Pf if a f* to be maintained on his behalf (for production at the end ?nv th f c tax :y ea D to say that his Paid, and all the tax rn™2fi° ns have to be kept together correctly and remitted every month £ a f lum P sum to the Taxation Sghtm“ e e nt ’ thmg becomes a is a , costl y nightmare— a^ e re ?ords of this kind demand much clerical service. .^ Australia and New Zealand, dntv G ?S ment i Puts this ex P e nsive 2n ty aiw employers, and makes no allowance for it. Employers ~or* else! eCt and remit the mo^e y • i/ this undesirable system is to be introduced for the comfort a J?2 eenveniencce of wage-earners a £ d Government, the employers SS? ld atand together in a solid bod y ’ and refuse to do the work of tax-collecting unless they are paid some way. A y deduction L r Q ° v m n the amount remitted to the Tax Department of 5 per cent., as P?oper othl 0 thln e g.' W ° UW be a and
What The July “Crisis”
Showed The World
SINCE PIM last appeared—four weeks ago—the nations went close enough to the edge of World War 111 to smell the sulphur: and retired. In the process, we learned some valuable lessons: • If United States and British Commonwealth will only stand four square together, no nation or com bination of nations will dare attack us—we could be completely secure.
But our dithering and uncertain diplomacy makes this unlikely. • The Kremlin does not want a full-scale war—certainly not while America’s huge Strategic Air Force rings the Red block, an A-bomb on every plane, and every plane ready to take off in a matter of minutes. • Krushchev is completely con fident that Communism can conquer the world by infiltration, without war—that idealists and visionaries, who increasingly influence all our public institutions, will do the job for him. He probably is right. • Britain, America and France are not concerned with preserving the series of petty little Arab king ships set up by Britain and France after World War I broke up the Turkish Empire. They certainly are not worth fighting about. As soon as Iraq, having murdered its royal family and established a republic, gave guarantees that it would carry out its oil-supply and other con tracts with the West, the West recognised” Iraq in its new form.
Not a pretty picture—but realistic. • The West, moving rapidly into Lebanon and Jordan, had two objectives— protection of the West’s vital Middle East oil-supply, and prevention of Communist domina tion in the Middle East—but not necessarily the preservation of king ships. The Kremlin—after putting on a show for two hectic weeks — accepted the first; and leaves the second on the knees of the Nasser and the other high gods of Arab nationalism. • Thus, the danger of World War 111 by early August, had receded further than at any time in the last ten years. • Nasser’s plottings will seek to undermine the Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Persian monarchies. The West will not care, so long as the oil con tinues to flow Westwards, and Arab nationalism does not turn Red The Kremlin is pleased with Nasser be- IS ha i es tbe West > harasses the West and weakens Western in fluence, and the kind of Arab nationalism he is spreading can be • L?^ etratecl by Communism Factors now seen more clearly A growing proportion of the on coming generations in United States Bntish Commonwealth and France p °uld rather accept increasing Communism than faceTnother 8
World War . . A new World Pow, is rising very rapidly to challem both the West and the Soviet Unit —namely, China, with over 6 million people. China’s strengi grows, as China’s industrialisati' grows. She will be completely ii dustrialised within two decades. • The July crisis disclosed t uselessness and incompetence UNO. The only thing which no could give the world steadiness ai security would be a solid, well-arm; Anglo-American Alliance. But whe are the statesmen capable of crea ing and maintaining such a thim ☆
Why Is There No
Malaria In Fiji?
UNDER the heading, “Keeping F Free From Malarial Mosquitoes; a recent writer in anothr publication said: “The exacting dut (of the Mosquito Control Divisioi in keeping the anopheles mosqui out of Fiji is an achievement tl; significance of which few people n cognise”.
Which presents a common fallao The anopheles (or, at any rate, ti: malaria bug) is not being kept oc by human agency.
There is malaria in New Guine and Solomons, and the New Hebridd Some types, found in the nortd east section of New Guinea mail land, are among the world’s wors;?
But immediately eastward, in Fi and southwards, in Queenslam there is no malaria. Why?
A quarter-century ago, and at i;r tervals since, the PIM pointed oc that there is no discernible reas»c why the anopheles mosquito, ai. his unpleasant cargo of germ should not have crossed the sho sea-distance between Hebrides ai Fiji, and Papua and Queenslarr any time during the past 150 yeas —the period in which ships have been making these coc tacts. Malaria has crossed longs distances than this (in South aii Central America, for instance) wit.'J in i ecorded history. or A TTNO ye S r ! 1 ag0 ’ an Australia! ?n b 27 bad a scientific teas in£ th W l i e , brides ar ea, investigas l n A tbe , Problems of why malan. had not crossed into Fiji- but w heard the the ill , is some special factor : p? i_ Australia and Southwea v^- C 1 ? C (above and beyond the d<b \oted work of bodies like the FU Mosquito Control Division) whioi naits the anopheles and his buu malaria would have ni Brisbane and Suva and Apia hundred years ago. If that factof can be found, we may have tkii answer to malaria.