Up Front

with the Editor

Just before Mr. David Hay took up the post of Administrator of Papua-New Guinea in January, 1967, the late Eric Feldt, of Coastwatchers fame, wrote what you might like to describe as an ode about the sort of things the new man was likely to encounter.

After it was published in PIM (Dec., 1966) I set up a special copy of it on card and sent it up to the Administrator as a keepsake. He was delighted with it, and when occasion ally I saw him at his office in Port Moresby he would comment that Eric Feldt was making more sense every day.

David Hay has now completed his term in the hot seat, and much of what Eric Feldt had to say in 1966 still applies in 1970 to Mr. Les Johnson. I won’t repeat the “ode” here, but I’ll give you my favourite passages: “WE CAN WISH him only years of onerous toil in a climate which makes hard work harder, facing problems which cannot be solved to the satisfaction of everybody.

“AS HE LEADS the native people towards prosperity in the modern world, may he be able to overcome some _of the inertia of the great majority, at the same time mollifying the vehemence of the educated few, and when what he has said has been twisted to mean the exact opposite, may he hear of it early and so be able to correct it.

“AS HE MOVES from one imperfect solution to the next in soluble problem, with the results falling short of his hopes, may his strength hold and his nerves remain calm.

“And When He Steers A

commonsense course between those who clamour to sacrifice the present to some ideal, unworkable future and those who would neglect all for present gain, we would like to wish him their gratitude, but we cannot, for those who are too thick in the head to see what they have been saved from will give him no thanks.”

I’ve said that many things that Eric wrote about the New Guinea Administrator’s job in 1966 still apply today. But not all of them do, and even the far-sighted Eric might have been surprised to see the pace at which New Guinea developments are moving in Mr. Johnson’s day. More importantly, he might have been surprised to see how little control of events an Administrator now has in New Guinea.

The visits to New Guinea of Aus tralia’s Labour Opposition Leader, Mr. Whitlam, and Prime Minister, Mr. Gorton, have both underlined this, in my view.

No revolt

New Guinea is not on the point of revolt—nor are its two million people bitter at the ineptitude and lack of sympathetic treatment of the Australian Administration, as the publicity surrounding Mr. Whitlam’s tour might have had us believe. But nor will a policy of controlled uni form development, and appeals for unity and commonsense, solve the problems that New Guinea now faces, as Mr. Gorton’s words might have led us to think.

Neither Labour nor Liberal will influence the game now being played in New Guinea by shouting at each other from the sidelines, because of the vital fact that it is the New Guineans who are carrying the ball.

New Guinea politics have finally achieved their own momentum and I personally believe that the Aus tralian Administration can from now on only follow events, shaping and appealing where and when it can, seeing fair play wherever possible.

It’s my personal opinion certainly,

but it’s a strong personal view which has forced itself upon me in the last 12 months.

The Mataungan organisation of the Tolais is not an isolated movement.

John Kaputin is not an isolated spokesman. There are men and or ganisations like them right throughout the territory, with varying degrees of influence and various methods of approach.

And why not?

It’s embarrassing to those of us who like to see orderly development, yet it’s a situation we can only expect in an emerging country of two million people with minds of their own.

To get the whole picture into focus, one has only to take a look at the remarkable, recent political developments in other areas of the Pacific Islands.

Only three years ago the exponents of orderly development were sorely strained by the tactics of Head Chief Deßoburt, who wanted far too much for the tiny island of Nauru; but today Deßoburt is President of the republic, which has everything they told him he couldn’t get.

Not long before, a Maori called Albert Henry was in great disfavour with the New Zealand Government because of his radical views on the future of the Cook Islands—today Henry is Premier of the self-govern ing Cook Group.

In Fiji, Ratu Mara —a radical product of the London School of Economics—was being treated with suspicion by some of the forces of orderly development, but in October he leads Fiji’s half-million people into Dominion status, and now has a British knighthood from the Establishment.

I could go on, but the point they help me make is that political events are moving swiftly in the Pacific, and today you just can’t guarantee that the timetable you’re following will connect with the bus .

ONE learns some surprising things.

I was talking the other day to Victor Carrell and Beth Dean about the Cook Islands National Arts Theatre, which they brought to Aus tralia at Easter for a most successful tour in support of the Commonwealth bi-centenary celebrations for Cook.

My wife and I saw the performance in Sydney at Her Majesty’s Theatre (since, unfortunately, razed to the ground by a disastrous fire) and never had we seen Islands dancing like it.

This was the real thing, yet carefully selected and sharpened up for the theatre in such a way that the Islands flavour was enhanced, not cheapened.

No chance

The Carrells (they have been married 25 years) gave the same skilled and sympathetic staging to the display of Australian Aboriginal dancing which shared the same pro gramme.

What I didn’t know is that the Carrells were never in a position where they could have made any money from the tour. Victor Carrell gave himself a contract under which profits were to be shared 50-50 by the Cook Islands Theatre and the Aboriginal dancers of Australia.

Any losses were his.

The pair put 12 months of their own time into arrangements—speak ing to at least 200 groups to drum up publicity—and took no expenses.

Their tour with the group was at their own expense.

Notwithstanding, their losses on the staging amounted to $11,500.

You’d think the Australian bi centenary people or the Common wealth-supported Australian Council for the Arts would make up the difference in view of the purpose for which the Cook Islanders were brought to Australia.

Stuart Inden[?]