New Guinea?

What Path For New Guinea?

• The P-NG House of Assembly Constitutional Committee, which has the task of making recommendations on the Territory's future political shape, will have talks in Canberra in mid-April. In announcing this on March 31, the Minister for Terri tories, Mr. C. E. Barnes, said the Government was prepared to make arrangements for passing over respon sibilities “of a ministerial type” to elected members as a transitional step.

In the following article Jim Davidson, Professor of Pacific History at the Australian National University, out lines the political possibilities he thinks are available to New Guinea.

He has prepared it as a summary of a public lecture he gave in Port Moresby, when Mr. John Guise, MHA, chairman of the constitutional committee, was in the chair.

By J. W. Davidson

Should the people of Papua and New Guinea look to even tual integration with Australia as a seventh state of the Common wealth? Should they seek a looser association like that of the Cook Islands with New Zea land (or of Puerto Rico with the United States)? Or should they move towards complete inde

pendence?

A GOOD deal of light can be thrown on these questions by looking at the experience of other countries. The people of the Cook Islands and Puerto Rico have chosen internal self-government, rather than independence, for very similar reasons.

They value the assurance of support in relation to economic development that a close relationship with a larger country gives them.

They value the existence of free trade with the larger country, since it provides them with a market for their exports. And they value their possession, in the one case, of New Zealand citizenship and, in the other, of American citizenship, as this allows them to visit or settle in the metro politan country at will.

On the other hand, most Puerto Ricans and Cook Islanders oppose complete integration. They believe

(Continued on p. 157)

that, since levels of income are lower than those in the country with which they are associated, this would lead to the loss of an undue proportion of their ablest and best-educated people. Under self-government, on the other hand, many challenging tasks and opportunities for holding responsible posts are open to them.

Integration would also involve some risk of their losing a great deal of their distinctive cultures. And it would make them liable to the pay ment of increased taxation.

Let us look at these facts in rela tion to Papua and New Guinea. Full statehood within the Commonwealth of Australia would obviously raise problems that could only be solved over a long period of years. Internal self-government, of the Cook Islands or Puerto Rican type, would require Australian agreement to three impor tant conditions: • The people of the Territory should possess Australian citizenship and, subject probably to some restric tions for an initial period, should enjoy the right of entry to Aus tralia, as visitors or permanent settlers; • Free trade between the Territory and Australia should be estab lished; • A massive development pro gramme should be underwritten by Australia, to raise living standards in the Territory to a point at which the latter would cease to be in danger of losing an undue proportion of its ablest and best-educated people.

Even if Australia were willing to agree to these conditions (and to do so would require great boldness on the part of the Australian Govern ment), certain further problems would remain. For one thing, Papua and New Guinea live on the margins of Asia; and their political leaders might be unwilling to surrender all freedom of action in relation to external affairs and defence. For another, the members of the emerging elite do not, and have not been en couraged to, think of themselves as actual or potential Australians.

Long-Term Objective

Independence seems the only practicable long-term objective. In the interests of both countries, however, this should be accompanied by a continuance of close and friendly relations between them. In matters of external affairs and defence each

country will remain very sensitive to the policies and decisions of the other.

In relation to technical assistance and development, Papua and New Guinea will continue to be dependent on sub stantial external aid.

There are plenty of examples of co-operation between independent countries of the kind that would be desirable in this case. Western Samoa’s relationship with New Zealand is of this character. New Zealand acts for Samoa in external matters, in accordance with agree ments made by the two governments.

New Zealand aid to Samoa—always small—has somewhat increased since independence. New Zealanders still work in the Samoan public service.

The relationship between France and her former colonies is equally relevant. In 1961 nearly 2i per cent, of the French gross national product was spent on aid to overseas countries; and of this about 80 per cent, went to former French colonies and to territories (like New Cale donia) still associated politically with her. In 1962, 25,000 French were serving overseas, as teachers, admini strative officers, and technical experts.

"Imaginative, Generous"

These examples show that if New Guinea becomes independent Aus tralia’s relations with the country can remain almost as strong and fruitful as they would be under any closer form of association.

But this requires Australia’s con tinuing recognition of a special re sponsibility towards New Guinea, and it also requires recognition of the fact that the kind of relationship that will be possible in future is dependent on the terms on which Australians work with the people of the Territory from this moment onwards.

In recent years Australian policy has been generous and—at least since the publication of the Foot Report— fairly imaginative. But there have been some dangerous failures.

Policies that were good in themselves have been poorly implemented. The failure to bring the Administrator’s Council fully enough into the work of policy formulation or to associate the Under-Secretaries closely enough with the work of the departments, for example, has greatly reduced the value of these developments. In large part, these failures are a result of the detailed control of the Territory from Canberra, The Australian Government must recognise that its role is that of deter

mining broad policy objectives. The detailed working out of policy is a task for those, both Australian and indigenous, who hold positions of political or administrative respon sibility in the Territory.

The acceptance of this division of authority is essential to the main tenance of good relations between indigenous leaders and Australians.

It provides the only means by which the policy of government can be kept in touch with the opinion of the governed. Above all, it forms the only possible basis for a close future association between Australia and New Guinea.