Australia and the Islands: a blueprint

for total involvement

The Islands can expect increased involvement in the region by Australia, especially in plans to strengthen the Islands’ economic structures. This is clearly outlined in the report on Australia and the South Pacific by the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and De fence, which, based as it is on bipartisan lines, can expect full support in the Australian Parliament for its views. A commentary by Senator John Knight, a member of the committee, is below.

The immediate significance of the report on Australia and the South Pacific by the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence is that it is the first such report

completed by a committee

representing the Australian Parliament. It is important to note that the committee is bi partisan with three government and three opposition senators and that the report is a unani mous report of the committee chaired by Senator Sim (Lib, WA).

The committee deliberately

places considerable emphasis

on the processes of change which are now occurring throughout the South Pacific region and elsewhere. It is indicated at the outset that these include “complex pro posals for a new international economic order, adjustments in the network of relationships within the South Pacific and between the South Pacific, Australia and neighbouring re gions, the changing role and interests of the great powers and other nations in the region and the significance of the independent status of most South Pacific nations.”

The report then goes on to point out, “it is to this process of change that the committee has particularly addressed itself. The committee believes that this process is inescapable and that there are several as pects of it which deserve to be

encouraged and supported by

Australia. In many cases this is

already happening and con

firms evidence of changing attitudes in Australia and the region. The committee has

sought to give emphasis to the

consolidation of such construc tive change and has suggested some areas where Australia might give further attention, so

as to ensure that its changing role in the region will mean firm and effective relationships with the nations and peoples of the South Pacific region.”

This approach is consistent with the recognition of the accelerated pace of change in the international situation which was typified by the Whitlam government and has since been continued and con solidated if at a less hectic pace by the Fraser govern

ment, particularly by Foreign

Minister Andrew Peacock.

In his recent statement to the Australian Parliament on

foreign policy Mr Peacock

pointed out that this is a time

of “change and challenge”,

that “the world is in the midst of a period of change that could prove to be as significant as any in modem history .. .

There are no simple remedies or ready-made solutions for the

problems we face today.”

He also referred to the Sen ate Committee’s report as re

flecting, “the growing aware

ness in Australia of the coun tries and peoples of the South Pacific”. He might have added that it reflects this awareness on the part of the Australian Parliament.

The Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence has tried to produce a report which takes these changes into account in the relationship be tween Australia and its neigh bours in the South Pacific. Its aim is to suggest how this pro cess might be consolidated in the interests of regional development. It also assumes a commonality of purpose and a basis of mutual interest in issues that in fact affect the whole region and each member of it. It is an approach that has not been altogether prevalent in the past.

It is generally recognised

and the committee’s report indicates the bipartisan nature of this recognition - that Australia must continue to broaden its perspective on the world and keep up with rapidlychanging attitudes and approaches in international relations. At the same time, the senate committee has accepted and taken as a fundamental assumption that the island nations of the South Pacific have themselves in recent years broadened their horizons, par-

ticularly following self-

government and independence in so many of the countries, They have extended their international relationships, trade contacts, investment sources and have diversified their general political and cultural ties, This is probably a more difficult process for Australia in the South Pacific than in any other area of Australia’s external relationships. It is a truism that Australia has tended to dominate the South Pacific re-

gion economically and not

always in a benign fashion. But as the nations of the South Pacific have moved towards

independence they have

increasingly asserted their rights to determine their own destinies and Australia has now to behave as an equal

partner, This process was accelerated in the late 1960 s and has con tinued since. There has been

growing recognition of Aus

tralia’s obligations to the coun tries of the South Pacific. It has been reflected in rapidly

increasing development assist

ance commitments and in the extension of Australian diplo matic relations through the re gion. The South Pacific is now perhaps the region in which Australia’s diplomatic rep resentation is most intensive, There have also been continu ing efforts to find new areas for co-operation cultural, sport ing, environmental issues, fisheries, Law of the Sea, ship

ping.

The committee also places some emphasis on the role of

regional organisations and the

elements of regional identity

through, for example, the

South Pacific Forum and the changing South Pacific Com mission. But it is significant that the Australian Parliament can now produce a report in which all of these factors are taken as given and in which a bipartisan senate committee can look to the future with what only a few years ago were rather novel views but which are now rapidly gaining the status of basic assumptions.

The committee, from the left, Sen D.B.Scott, Sen C.G.Primmer, Mr T.C.Magi (secretary to the chairman). Sen J.P.Sim (chairman), Mrs M.L. Willheim (research officer), Sen G. D. Mclntosh, Sen J.W.

Knight and Sen K.W.Sibraa.

The senate committee’s re port could do a good deal to consolidate these basic views.

That in itself would be import ant. Whatever contribution it

might make towards assuring

the continuing reality, of an

equal partnership between all

nations of the region will be the measure of its additional sig nificance. It will, of course, de pend to a great extent on the response of the Australian

Government. But only recently

Prime Minister Fraser an nounced that ministers are to

respond directly to parliamen

tary committee reports within six months of their presen tation to Parliament.

In its report, the committee has sought to put into perspec tive the relative roles of politi cal and economic relationships.

Economic matters have tra ditionally tended to dominate relationships and the percep tion of them. The report

deliberately begins by looking

at the region in its historical context and its relevance to Australia in that perspective, then at political and diplomatic relations.

It goes on to examine the many issues involved in econ omic relationships between Australia and the countries of the South Pacific, then to

examine regionalism and Aus tralia’s participation in it, and

finally development assist

ance.

The committee has not sought to suggest that econ omic relations are not still the most pervasive element in the links between Australia and the countries of the South Pa cific. In fact the bulk of the re port still deals with economic matters and development as sistance. What it has done, however, is to suggest that these can only be built on

effective political and diplo

matic links and stronger re

gional relationships.

It is this emphasis which has been emerging in Australian policy since about 1970 and which the committee has stressed.

The growth of Australia’s extensive diplomatic and rep resentative network in the South Pacific since about 1968 has been dramatic and in the last few years posts have been set up in Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, the New Hebrides, Western Samoa and posts in Fiji and elsewhere have been expanded.

The committee, however, places some emphasis on the importance to Australia of having more representatives of

island countries in Australia and suggests that Australia should actively encourage this and give it support where ap propriate and if island govern ments seek it. At present Fiji and Papua New Guinea are represented in Canberra, Nauru in Melbourne and Tonga has an “honourary” rep resentative in Sydney.

The need for adequate staff within Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs is also stressed. In fact, the report suggests that staffing in the Foreign Affairs section which deals with the South Pacific and in the Development Assist ance Bureau might now have become inadequate to handle the extensive network of rep resentatives and the growing

complexity of relationships

within the region. It is recom mended that this whole ques tion be reviewed both in the

department and the Develop

ment Assistance Bureau to assess staffing needs and priorities.

These points are all made in the context of the need to con tinue to strengthen Australia’s identity with the region and it is this emphasis on recent trends towards a more mature

relationship within the region

which pervades the report. It

reflects the importance which members of the committee attach to this process.

The concept of regionalism and a growing sense of regional identity are important in this process.

The report begins with a chapter giving some brief his torical background on the South Pacific region. The

fourth chapter refers specifi

cally to “regionalism and co operation”. This gives, in the Australian context, unusual prominence to regionalism and that an Australian parliamen tary committee should do so is significant in itself.

The report, by outlining the extent of existing and develop

ing regional arrangements, em

phasises the need for improved communications and consul tations at a multitude of levels.

The committee endorses the

development of regionalism

and suggests that transport and communications in the region

“must be improved through

closer co-operation within the

region”.

In this section the committee refers to the potential future role of fisheries and problems related to the 200 miles “exclusive economic zones”.

No specific recommendations are made as action is already

being taken in an effort to ensure practical co-operation.

By its comments, the com mittee makes it clear that it be lieves this should be Australia’s objective in these two very im portant issues.

Perhaps inevitably, the re port gives a lot of attention to development assistance. This programme is a manifestation of Australia’s changing atti tudes and acceptance of cer tain obligations towards its South Pacific neighbours. Be cause of the scale of the pro gramme it is likely to have an

increasing impact on many

facets of life in South Pacific countries and it was to this, in particular, that the committee gave attention. Its emphasis is on ensuring that assistance is provided in accordance with the priorities of South Pacific countries and that it is extended into new areas where it is relevant to the people’s needs.

The committee itself suggests some issues to which attention might be directed.

These include environmental matters, urbanisation and South Pacific cultures and tra ditions. At the same time there is in the report (as there is

among members of the com mittee) a clear recognition that when it comes to economic growth, development assist ance is not necessarily the panacea.

It is in this context, in par ticular, that the committee sought to suggest ways in which trade between Australia and the countries of the region might be extended. A number of recommendations are made, aimed at improving accessi bility to the Australian market for South Pacific products. For example, it is suggested that quarantine restrictions should be re-examined; that the Aus tralian system of Tariff Prefer ences be emphasised; that the services of the Market Advis ory Section of the Department of Trade and Resources be encouraged to ensure that South Pacific countries make use of its services; and that co operation be extended to South Pacific countries to improve their trade representation where Australia is able to pro vide such assistance.

On the question of tariffs the committee notes that close to 100% of exports from South Pacific countries to Australia

already enter duty-free. Thus,

measures to improve accessi

bility through revised

quarantine regulations, for

example - are of special relevance.

Consideration was given to the . activities of Australian business in the region. The committee (while commenting on Carpenter’s failure to pro vide a submission or give evi dence to the committee) expressed the view that the reputation of Australia’s business enterprises in the re gion seems much better than in the recent past. It was concluded that they are gener ally “working within the re quirements of host governments and are trans forming their operations in a manner which shows an increasing awareness of the need to localise if they are to remain viable and welcome in these countries”.

During the committee’s preparation of this report three of its members were able to visit several countries of the re gion. However, because funds are not available for overseas

visits by parliamentary com

mittees, the committee as a whole was not able to obtain first-hand evidence, though considerable efforts were made to involve people from the

South Pacific countries. Diplo matic representatives in Aus tralia were consulted and a Tongan post-graduate scholar at the Australian National University acted as committee consultant.

There are gaps and inadequacies in the report.

That is inevitable. Perhaps the most fundamental and sig nificant points are that the Aus tralian Parliament has finally got around to addressing itself to the South Pacific as a region of great importance to Aus tralia (and a parliamentary

delegation though not the

committee visited 11 coun tries and territories in the re gion in June and July last year); the committee has assumed a period of change and has sought to suggest con structive directions for Aus

tralian policy including that

of private and commerical groups to consolidate recent developments; and the com mittee has assumed a relation

ship of equality, looking for

ways for Australia, not just to protect its interests in the re

gion though that is a legit

imate purpose which all governments must pursue but to meet its obligations to its near-neighbours in the South Pacific.