A Close Look

At Vital

Sugar Report

Prom R. W. Robson

LONDON, September 16 ere are very few people here are competent to discuss the

ram Eve Sugar Report, and

(from Colonial Office or

associations) to talk; but

ic comments I have heard lost favourable.

Y say that this is an exceed igly able summary of the situ of the Fiji sugar industry— is and down-to-earth; that the for the future control of the ry is realistic and practicable; lat the need for the early imple tion of the plan will really put cid test upon both the com ■Y of the present Governor and iture intentions of the CSR. e is a short summary of the sals, with London commentary Lhe Report is directed to the nor of Fiji, and the obligation :ept or reject it (and, if it is ed, to give effect to the recom itions) is, in the final analysis,

placed squarely upon the Governor.

This is not made clear in the Report.

The Governor, presumably, will take the Report to the Executive and Legislative Councils. The latter will have the right to reject or amend all or any of the recommendations. The plan is submitted by the Commission “for acceptance as a complete scheme”.

Neither Commissioners nor com mentators may forget that the equally impressive Burns Report of 1960 was submitted as a “complete scheme”, but was so emasculated by the non acceptance of the principal recom mendations as to be virtually useless; and that the valuable Shephard Re port on the sugar industry, although officially approved, was never im plemented, again as the result of Governmental weakness. 2. The Fiji Government is to ap point, at the earliest possible moment, an “independent chairman of the sugar industry” who is to live in Fiji, and devote the whole of his time to supervising the sugar industry gener ally, and co-operating with govern ment, millers, growers, millworkers and farmworkers in securing the smooth and profitable operation of the industry.

The chairman would be assisted by a part-time vice-chairman and a part-time accountant; and these three men together would be the members of an executive and statutory Fiji Sugar Board, which would be con stituted, and its authority and duties defined, by Ordinance. 3. The main machinery of super

the Fiji sugar industry? The Sugar Report, released in September and sed below, is a blueprint for the future.

aver the sugar industry would ided by a Fiji Sugar Advisory 1, consisting of— “independent” chairman, vice lirman and accountant of the ard; representatives of the millers SR); representatives of the growers; i representatives of the mill rkers; representatives of the Govern nt.

Council of 18 members would isory; but it would have, the chairman, considerable in relation to the settlement jtes within the industry. If 'isory Council fails to get a nt, the chairman will have y to invoke the aid of the and the Chief Justice there ould appoint an assessor to the dispute and make an No practising barrister or and no member of the Legis auncil, could become a mem tie Sugar Advisory Council, lures and legal machinery ned, under which any person iration defying the findings of unal or assessor ultimately with disputes would be Jy punished. reduction Controlled tal sugar production in Fiji e controlled; and the official escribed above will have the lility of deciding how many sugar will be produced each and of allowing the tonnage to be produced by each farm, port very strongly recom lat all possible steps be taken e that Fiji’s annual sale of United Kingdom be increased ►0 tons. rough the same instrumen the payments to be made to 'ers for cane delivered to the ire to be regulated; but the sion lays down a basic system 'hich this will be done, by g an elaborate form of con between millers and growers, ries of formulae under which ‘ will be regulated.

Jars that the Commission took, estimate of the total proceeds ; sale of sugar, and then de rom same the actual cost of the sugar. The remainder it as being the “basic cake”— the amount to be divided be liller and grower. The pro of the division has been, of a source of dispute between and millers for years.

Commission has decided that

it should be 82i per cent, to the growers and \l\ per cent, to the millers; and the contract and formulae referred to above are based on that, That responsibility of interpreting and policing the contract is placed upon the bodies assisting the chairman of the industry (presumably, upon the Sugar Board, and not the Advisory Council). 6. It is proposed that the contract normally shall cover a period of 10 years, so as to assure the industry of normal working; but the first contract shall extend from the adoption of this system until 1970, and will cover the prices to be paid under the agreement of March 26, 1961.

Every person interested in the future of Fiji should, as a matter of duty, read this Report from cover to cover—it shows the precariousness of the Colony’s present economic position, and how it can be much strengthened, if all parties concerned with the Colony’s major industry will recognise the facts and pull together.

Some of the important points and comments made: Blame for recent troubles and con fusion in the industry is placed un equivocally upon Government, CSR and Indian growers.

Indian community attempts to re establish a sugar mill at Nausori and a series of small co-operative mills

are sharply condemned as unrn and “stupid”.

Sugarmill workers are uu recommended to introduce a ne better system of trade union or;: tion.

The CSR is urged to abolii present system of remote < (from Australia) over the Fijii industry and, instead, place it hands of a Fiji subsidiary coi with opportunity for local capiii directorial personnel to have s in same.

Neither miller nor growers! present conditions can expeo: more net income from Fiji’s H acres of sugar-growing land; bui more efficient organisation and of the industry, along the lines mended, it is indicated that siderably larger net income parties could be provided—esj if provision could be made 1 sale abroad of 250,000 instd 200,000 tons per annum.

The vice-chairman of the < Board should be a Fijian; andl should be made to employs Fijians and Indians in resp; positions in the industry.

The Commission recommenr the sugar-growers’ representab; the Council be appointed Governor from panels of : growers prepared for him aft ings of the growers’ gang sird The growers’ claim that the ments for cane should be comr with prices paid in Queenslam carefully examined —and firm missed with the remark that tJ ditions are not comparable Queensland growers work harder and their methods arc more efficient.

But it is suggested that the pc Advisory Council should giv stant attention to the need for: the gap between Queensland s conditions, so that there mi greater rewards for the Fiji hi The cost of making this and producing the Report is es; at £F 10,000.

This year’s Christmas get-t -of members and friends of tl; Guinea Women’s Association bourne will be held on Decerrr The New Guinea Women” ciation continues to meet n and the Association welcoir Territorians at meetings anoj functions. Ihe secretary, Mrs- Hayne, Box 9, Northcote, (phone Melbourne JW 1838 supply details. President of thi ciation is Mrs. F. G. Lewis a:i presidents are Mrs. Linda Pit* Mrs. W. C. Groves.