Commentary

ference's Eager

(rest:

I Then What?

C enthusiasm, vision and ractical thinking displayed by le native peoples’ representa at the Fourth South Pacific jrence, in Rabaul, present a 7 augury for the future, reasingly, the future of the i Pacific Territories v ; t be d by the indigenous races selves. Their continuing, grow nterest in these Conferences ; that they recognise that can be done by concerted i and that, accordingly, there be available to them some ;ure through which they can ought together for action, in form of union. terience suggests that the ;ure and machinery of the l Pacific Commission will not suitable for the ultimate ses of the individual South c Territories —simply because soon will insist on moving theory and consultation to ical application. But, at least, PC has shown the way. i biggest problem the SPC iad to face is the lack of co tion among the very Govern > which set it up. No or ation can work well if the 3 who command it don’t really if it works at all. Every ►er Government has laid itself to the criticism that, from to time, for reasons that ;n to suit it at the time, it lot been ready to help the fission do its job. ire have been petty jealousies bureaucratic bumblings; and is rabbits have been set run- These things have not been s the fault of the Commission, hey have affected the work 5 Commission, and gained for reputation for contrariness, do-nothing-ness, that might be laid at the doors of the ier Governments, ic of this is to say that the Itself isn’t due for some share ame. The Commission has imes been unfortunate in the of people it has had to direct :tivities —which is largely its fault—and has not always ien the problems which, by ery nature of its work, were >re for it. People who clean )ther people’s houses should their own house in order, erving the excellent organisa work done by the Com >n, and the happy relations

between Commission officials and Conference, one cannot but hope that the Commission yet may finally work its way onto the true course, and somehow provide a means by which Conference decisions, and beliefs, can be given practical shape.

But the history of the Com mission, and especially the definite, consistent failure of the six member Governments to give general ad ministrative effect to the Com mission’s findings and recommenda tions, is not encouraging.

Unless there is real reform within the Commission—in spirit as well as in machinery—the interest and enthusiasm which have been aroused among the indigenous peoples by the Conferences eventu ally will beat themselves to death against Ministerial inertia and non co-operation, in six capital cities. ☆ ☆ ☆

Something Wrong In

The State of Fiji

NO less than £1,250,000 Fijian is shown as cash on hand, and investments in Government loans and similar things, in the annual balance-sheet of Burns Philp (SS) Co. Ltd., a consistent money-maker, (See Pacific Com merce and Produce, in this issue).

This is not peculiar to the BP Company. An examination of the published balance-sheets of the other big corporations in Fiji will, in almost every case, show similarly large amounts on hand, either as cash lying idle in the banks, or virtually liquid in gilt-edged invest ments.

From Fiji’s national viewpoint, this is not a healthy condition.

These funds, generally accumulated in sound and regular trading, should be fully employed in the industrial activities of a growing and developing country. The fact that they are not indicates some thing seriously wrong in the State ° iSre is a country with a large, virile population, eager to work and produce, and rich corporations with a lot of money for investment, equally eager to work and produce.

Why are these two important factors being kept apart, while in Fiji itself there is an increasing cry

of unemployment and poverty?

We all know the answer. The available workers, and the available capital, have not been geared to the Colony’s resources, owing to unavailability of land. It is a situa tion that could strangle the

country, economically—and it vill do so unless it is taken in hand very soon by competent people.

The small traders and the in dustrial masses, who feel that their available labour and enterprise are not being sufficiently used, have been somewhat vociferous lately on the subject, when addressing the Government of Fiji.

But little or nothing has been said by the big corporations who, with all these idle funds, are as deeply concerned as the workers and the traders. What are they doing to bring pressure to bear on the Government? They stand to lose just as much as trade and industry if the constitutional dead lock in Fiji is not broken reasonably soon. vr ☆ ☆

P-NG Caught Up In

Tax-Man's Revenge

Every picture tells a story. The same may be true of typo graphy. Take a careful look at the Papua and New Guinea Taxa tion Bill’s 182 pages (360 sections).

Much may be learned from the huge document’s bulk and character.

This Bill was printed in sections during 1958. It was drafted many months before that. Yet was it not the smooth-spoken Mr. Hasluck who assured Press, and Parliament, and infuriated Territorians, in March, that it was not his intention to ram the Bill down the throat of the official-dominated Legisla tive Council? That all they said would be carefully considered before the final step was taken?

That Bill was drafted with meticulous purpose: and it now is clear, on the face of it, that it is directed primarily against the big Australian corporations which trade in Papua and New Guinea.

Certain Australian organisations, guided by clever and experienced experts in finance, law’ and taxa tion, used company registrations in tax-free New Guinea to avoid a great deal of taxation which, other wise they would have had to pay to the Australian Government A certain amount of that kind of thing may be reasonable enough, and legitimate. But it was carried, in New Guinea, to a point where it was nothing more or less than a vicious twisting of the tail of the Australian tax collector. This is his kick-back. He can claim he was driven to it. , , There is blundering purposeful ness all through the Bill. Some may escane and some may be cruelly hurt? but the draftsman, in defining private companies, and taxing in surance revenues and interest pay ments and the earnings of «yerseas ships, has made a great effort to get the Australian corporations, in

all their shapes and forms, into his widespread net.

The pity of it is that, in making this mighty swipe at what he re garded as his natural enemies, the Minister (or Treasurer, or Tax Collector, or whoever directed this campaign) should have hurt so very many people who should have been protected, and should have laid the foundations of so much trouble. r[IS Bill may represent the vengeance of outraged bureau cracy. But—because of the harm it is going to do New Guinea, giving the country its worst blow since the Jap invasion—it is sheer, blundering stupidity.

It is unjust, because of the way it punishes the small men who have pioneered this country, and hun dreds of public servants on fixed salaries. It is silly, because this complex Australian system (with its provisional tax, its double grab and its undistributed profits tax) is completely unsuitable for applica tion in a country like New Guinea.

It is uneconomical, because the cost of collection manifestly will far outweigh any advantage from in creased revenue.

Why could they not have taken the tax system of Ceylon, or Fiji or Malaya?

The rates now planned are low.

But does anyone imagine they will remain low, once the planners realise the cost of collection, and calculate that the high-duty goods are gone from the storekeepers’ shelves?

In theory, the P-NG resident is to gain more from the abolition of export and import duties than he will lose in income tax. Do the Port Moresby Innocents really helieve that?

Do they imagine they can operate that system—policing Chinese tax payers, and the collection of provisional tax by employers, and checking the financial complexities of the big trading companies— without employing scores, if not hundreds, of taxation officials?

Maybe, they did hate to see the big Australian corporations getting away, untaxed, with a luscious pro portion of Australia’s gift to P-NG of £l4 millions per annum. Maybe, something had to be done about it.

But this was not the thing to do.

This is going to do incalculable harm to private enterprise, and add endless trouble, confusion and cost to the job of administration. ☆ ☆ ☆

London Suggests "United

States of Melanesia"

FOR once, a London “study group” has produced something worthy of study, and of future atten tion.

The Commonwealth Council of

the British Conservative Pary sug gests the establishment, as a political and administrative unit of the British Commonwealth, of “the United States of Melanesia”, com prising— Former German New Guinea and Bismarck Archipelago, now ad ministered by Australia as a Trusteeship under the United Nations.

The old Australian Territory of Papua, now administered by Aus tralia jointly with New Guinea.

Western New Guinea, now gov erned by The Netherlands as a Territory.

The British Solomon Islands, now administered as a Protectorate by the British Colonial Office.

The New Hebrides, now admin istered jointly by Britain and France as a Condominium.

This, of course, is merely a sug gestion, made by a group of in terested people, and as yet it has no official significance.

It is a similar plan to that sub mitted to the Political Science School at Canberra early in 1958 by Mr. J. R. Kerr, a Sydney Barrister, and former Director of the School of Pacific Administration.

In our opinion, it is a perfectly feasible plan and, if it were put into operation, it would not only remove a mess of administrative untidiness

from the South Pacific, but woe also give some national shape s purpose to the 21 million MelanesE people who now inhabit thr archipelagoes in the Southw?

Pacific.

These Territories and archip© 'j oes of Melanesia lie closely arou Northeastern Australia like a scr© It will be remembered that, 1942-45, it was a screen that ♦ enemies, the Japanese, could i penetrate.

Australia is deeply concerned W/ the condition and future of i islands groups that make up 1 screen.

Of the Territories named, t only one now administered w; strength and purpose is Papua as New Guinea: and that is only 1 cause Australia —out of the goo* ness of its heart, and with one ♦ on overcrowded Asia—digs into Exchequer each year for a gift; about £l4 millions Australian. St< that torrent of easy money and t Territory would have a conditi: and a future just as uncertain those of the others. * * * Something really worth wb could be made of a United States?

Melanesia. Papua and New Guin could supply an administrative a? economic backbone. If the nr country were properly constitutl and made a safe place for inves ment, its economic advanceme could be rapid and sound.

An economic survey of th«j Territories, today, would show ill pressive possibilities possibility that are negligible under the pit sent patchwork of administrate systems.

The 21 million Melanesian peoi< concerned are of the same rax although embracing many type Most of the visionary commentate of the present day insist that itd our responsibility to “raise thi standard of living”. Probably it is but it necessarily is a long, sli job. Fundamentally, they are a ve good class of human being and, on higher living standards were estas lished, they probably would mas rapid social progress.

Under present conditions, tlw advancement must be painfur slow. Under the proposed set-up- United States of Melanesia —th should have a definite place in tt world, as one people.

The Gilbert and Ellice Islam Colony—a poor British Territox out on the end of a limb, admit istratively and should be brought into such Union. The people are not M<i anesians. But, unless they are s tached to Fiji, they have nowhe to go.

The Dutch probably would appro: the plan. But there could be dil Acuity over the French, and th«i present rights in New Hebrides.

Frenchman never gives up a squas yard of territory without a fight.;!