At Last! Hasluck
pp. 25-26 · Read in the full issue
Cpmmentary
Produces a NG Policy
FOR the first time, Australia has given us a blue-print for the de velopment of Papua and New guinea. It is contained in a state ment made to the press by Terri tories Minister Paul Hasluck, in Port Moresby, on December 15.
It is more than a coincidence that his outline of policy was made im mediately after (a) the return to jffice of the Menzies Government; ;b» the reappointment of Mr. lasluck to the Territories Ministry [with higher Cabinet rank); and |c) wide publication and criticism if examples of Ministerial fumbling n Territories administration. [Summarised, this is what the Min ster said: • For the past eight years, in ?-NG, the Government had given Irst priority to “foundation work”— lamely, extended administration, rigger and better public services, public works which would open the iray to the establishment of new and profitable industries. • High priority still would be riven to these things—but, hence forth, increasing year by year, more must be done to encourage and stimulate economic development, so ;hat the Dual Territory may eventu ally become self-supporting. • P-NG still could not take care )f the cost of capital works and ■ social development, so that funds still must be provided by Australia.
Some years still must elapse before :he Territory would become self supporting; but eventually it must lease to rely on Australia for Jconomic aid. • It was part of the plan that economic development should give lew opportunities to native people is well as to Europeans. • “We must look around for stronger economic development—if ve do not get it, opportunities for Jmployment of the natives, and means of providing the natives with ligher standards of living, just will aot exist,” said the Minister. • It was obvious that increased Konomic development could not tofce place without the direction and '■eadership of European enterprise. • Increased economic develop ment and production provided the lerritory with the long-term problem of finding markets for Territory products.
The Territory, he said, rightfully looked to Australia as its natural and logical market—but it must be ready, by keeping down its produc tion costs, to meet the challenge
from other tropical countries which wished to sell their products to Aus tralia.
The Minister—no doubt anticipat ing the kind of comment his state ment would arouse—said this was not in any way a fundamental change in the Government’s plans, nor a reversal of policy. “It simply means we are now entering a new stage in the progress of the Terri tory, in which greater attention will be paid to economic development.”
It is to be regretted that Min ister Hasluck did not describe his policy and plans (which he says are unchanged) five years ago, when he virtually “dumped” one of his brightest and most energetic Dis trict Commissioners because, in his view, the DC was too active in en couraging the kind of economic de velopment that now is advocated by the Minister.
It would have removed misunder standing and bitter feeling if Mr.
Hasluck had explained his policy on the various occasions when he was broadcasting his opinion that Europeans should not have land be cause it was all needed by the natives; or when his statements and actions gave the impression of anti- European-enterprise thinking, of a strongly Eddie Ward character.
However, there can be real re joicing over the sinner that re penteth. It does not matter much whether Mr. Hasluck is disclosing a long-term, secretly-cherished plan, or is reversing policy. The important thing is that at last we have a long term governmental plan for the Dual Territory which seems reason ably practical, realistic, and free from the absurdities of UNO ideal ism, which hitherto have bedevilled P-NG Administration. ☆ ☆ ☆
Psychological War at
NG Coffee Conference
ALTHOUGH five Australian coffee merchants and five Australian purchasing agents have been in vited to attend the Papua-New Guinea Coffee Conference at Goroka, January 19-22 (see p. 18), by January 8 only three of those in vited had signified their intention of going.
It is obvious that it ' would be a very good thing to get merchants and consumers up to New Guinea to meet the growers, discuss market ing problems, and best of all, to show them NG coffee growing on the spot. It is equally obvious that
the conference is going to be useless unless the 10 people invited from Australia —where all New Guinea coffee is sold —attend.
Some Australian coffee merchants don’t like NG coffee, and some don’t like NG planters—for reasons that were set out at length in an article in PIM in June, 1958. But what they don’t like most of all, is the fact that they have to pay their own expenses to New Guinea at a conservative cost of about £2OO per head.
They don’t see why they should do this; and for the matter of that, neither do we.
As Australia is already spending between £10,000,000 and £12,000,000 in the Territory each year, it might have been a good idea to invest another £l,OOO in paying the fares of Australian delegates to Goroka, and treating them while there as the Government’s guests.
By attacking them with such kind ness, think what a psychological ad vantage the New Guinea side would immediately establish over the visit ing team from Australia.
This is the era of the happy public-relations handout. Unfortun ately, neither the Department of Territories or the P-NG Administra tion seems to have heard of it. ☆ ☆ ☆
Too Much Haste in
Western Samoa
THE situation in West Samoa is discussed elsewhere in this issue by Mr. A. M. Gurau, who has been for 30 years a commentator on Samoan affairs.
Mr. Gurau discusses, temperately, a number of opinions expressed re cently in New Zealand by Mr. Terry Dunleavy, who was for some years editor of the Samoan weekly news paper, and who now is the Welling ton (NZ) manager of Messrs.
Wimble & Co. Ltd.
Mr. Dunleavy thinks that a com bination of New Zealand en thusiasts, UNO idealists. and Samoan nationalists is rushing Western Samoa into self-government
prematurely.
Mr. Gurau says that Western Samoa has been given a definite promise of self-government in 1960, and any departure from that under taking, at this stage, would be very Both gentlemen are right. Samoa has been hustled into self-govern ment with a haste that is politically indecent, and is not justified by any circumstances that we are aware of.
But it now is too late to do any
thing about it. . . .
The history of NZ administration in Western Samoa since 1920 is filled with examples of blundering incompetency and lack of vision; and the present situation merely
adds to the long, sad list. If the New Zealanders had shown any real knowledge of Samoan history, and any understanding of Samoan character, they would have brought Samoans along the path to self government in a much more effec tive way.
As it is, the spectacle of self government being literally dumped upon the unprepared Samoans in 1960 by the same people whose militaristic swashbuckling created the Mau tragedy of only 30 years before, is something that the true historian must view with distress.
New Zealand’s indecent haste in creating self-government is going to cause real trouble in Samoa; and the signs of it already are apparent.
Already, a large section of the younger generation of Samoans, un couth and uninstructed, is showing towards Europeans generally a very ugly temper—and, most unfortun ately, that sentiment is being directed, as well, against the large community of European-Samoans, of whom there are at least 7,000.
“We’ll chuck the part-Europeans out of Samoa, like they did with the part-Dutch in Indonesia”, was a re mark heard by this writer recently in Samoa.
New Zealand should have re mained in Samoa until the matai led Samoans and the Samoans of part-European blood had shown that they can dwell together in amity.
But now it is too late; and the blame for any cruelties and oppression that follow should rest equally upon the blundering politicians of Wellington and the myopic idealists of UNO’s Trustee ship Council. ☆ ☆ ☆
What To Do With
The Solomons
What is to be done with the British Solomon Islands? The archi pelago is the second biggest in the South Pacific —it has 14,600 square miles of land, of which a large pro portion is good and usable—and a population of only 100,000 Melanesi ans, and a few Europeans and Chinese.
The present situation cannot re main much longer. In the world’s overcrowded condition, no region so desirable as the Solomons can re main virtually unoccupied.
The matter is of growing concern to Australia (whose coastline is only 1,000 miles away), to Britain (which has the thankless and expensive task of governing the archipelago) and to the few Europeans who have in vestments in the Solomons This was said last month in a letter to the PIM from a resident of -Honiara:
“We have an Immigration Regulation which makes it more than difficult for newcomers to enter this Protectorate, especially Chinese from the over-populated Colony of Hongkong. It is my firm con viction that if Chinese rural workers and artisans were allowed to come here, in 10 years this country would be self supporting in rice and numerous other foodstuffs, instead of being a permanent financial drain upon United Kingdom taxpayers.”
There are Cor soon will be) surplus Chinese in New Guinea, next door to the Solomons. There definitely is already a surplus of Indian population in Fiji. There is (as our correspondent says) a surplus of Chinese in Hongkong.
Is there anv reason why facilities should not be provided for the transfer of these British-born Asians to the Solomons, where their enterprise and industry are needed?
It is a matter primarily for Aus tralia, the European country nearest to the Group. Such economic structure as exists in BSI is Aus tralian—the Australian £ is thr unit of currency there.
Nothing can be expected from Britain. The Colonial Office, despite its magnificent achievements all over the world, has no record of development in Britain’s South Pacific Territories (Fiji, Solomons, Gilbert and Ellice, and New Hebrides). Most of what has been done in Fiji is the work of Aus tralian enterprise and money.
Under the right conditions, what Australia has done in Fiji, and is doing in New Guinea, could be done in the Solomons. ☆ ☆ ☆
Civilisation's Getting
Dearer and Dearer
If Territorians in Papua-New Guinea need any urging to fight against the proposed income tax ation, scheduled for mid-1959, they need only take a good look at things in the neighbouring territories of Fiji and the British Solomons where recently, at a command from Lon don, a little more juice is being wrung from both sets of taxpayers.
In the Solomons since January 1,
every time someone spreads butl on his bread, eats frozen green pe; smokes a cigarette, imports a 1 of used newspaper for nath smoke-paper, he pays just a lit bit more into Government revenr In Fiji, every time a resident bu a gallon of petrol, earns an ext £, drinks a glass of beer, imp©] goods, powders her nose, takes snap-shot, just a little more of 1 or her money goes to the t gatherer.
What are the residents of the two territories getting for this ext payment? No one knows exce that they are alleged to be helpi. to “pay their way”.
None of these people are naii enough to believe any longer th there can be no taxation witha representation—but there are sig? that they are getting restive aba it.
In Fiji it took the probably qu;. irrational form of attacking Pub< Servants’ privileges. As Fiji resident for all practical purposes, are di franchised like their P-NG and BS< counterparts, they have no means telling where their tax-money go« so they attacked what was mo obvious—the leave privileges of t: public service.
The growth of the public servi in Papua-New Guinea has been matter of comment from time time—but so far there has been i concerted attack on it as there hr been in Fiji in the last couple years. There are 3,000 public sea vants in P-NG now, and in 1958their salary bill is calculated to co £4,9oo,ooo—about £300,000 less thsj the whole internal revenue of tic Territory during the same perio They don’t get leave to the UK. be they get three months leave eves 21 months, and nine months lon< leave every six years. Their fan are paid to Australia and thereafter they are on their own.
In New Guinea, before the ws there were approximately 390 pubic servants: in Papua there were 17 The increase of 600 per cent, sinr then is for the sole purpose spending the £10,000,000 to £12,000,00 that Australia gives to the Territoc —certainly no territory of the pn sent productivity of P-NG couo afford a PS of this size otherwise?
One thing is certain—the Tern' torian of the pre-war era who eie joyed a low cost of living, modes] import duties, no taxation and g§ little assistance from Australh (Papua got £40,000 per annum) wiv a much more contented person thai the average Territorian of today; j The native was less advanced socially, less educated, his healtl, services and hospitals were crude! but whether or not he is happier td day is something that will f argued in the Territories long after the up-coming tax pill is swallower and digested.