Canberra, 21 December 1967
Secret
You will recall that at the Ministerial discussion on 18 October last, about the development of the Pacific Islands Regiment,1 it was agreed that Army in consultation with Territories and subsequently with Defence, would prepare a draft submission to Cabinet which would give authority for a variation in directives regarding the target strength and expansion programme of the P.I.R.
At the meeting also, I suggested that due to various circumstances, the difference in approach to the development of the P.I.R. between Army and Territories might not be as great as might have been thought.
I am somewhat surprised therefore to learn that the Secretary of your Department has written to my Permanent Head2 suggesting that ‘it would be in keeping with the tenor of the Ministerial discussion if, apart from officer trainees, recruitment were to be restricted to replacements until a definite decision as to strength has been made by Cabinet’.
The arguments which Mr. Warwick Smith puts forward in support of this suggestion relate in the main to the Defence Committee’s warning about the possible effects of too rapid a dilution of trained personnel with new recruits, and Cabinet’s later decision that the expansion should not be at the expense of training discipline and equipment. All these points were of course taken into account when, in March 1967, I sought the approval of our colleague, the Minister for Defence, to an extension of the expansion period from December 1968 to December 1970,3 and indeed the expansion rate has been slowed down since that date. The Pacific Islander strength at the end of October was, as you are aware, 2,194, and although there was only a net increase of one by the end of November, I cannot accept the proposition that the strength should remain static until a Cabinet decision is reached. Not only is it important to maintain a reasonable flow of recruits but, as I emphasized at our meeting, we must ensure that Army accommodation in the Territory is occupied at a reasonable level. To do this and to maintain a two battalion structure, as opposed to three agreed by Cabinet, I consider it essential that recruiting should proceed, but with a ceiling strength of about 2,800 up to 1970.
Mr. Warwick Smith also drew attention to the fact that a three battalion force, numbering all told some 4,300 men, would be in the ratio of 1/510 of the population and that this was very much higher than that in respect of 27 countries out of 35 which had achieved independence in the last decade or so.
I have not checked the figures but, whilst I am sure they are accurate, I believe this to be an odd way to establish the size of Army required. From an Army point of view whatever force is established, and I don’t think this is affected by whether the country is underdeveloped or not, the unit or units involved must be viable entities and of sufficient size to meet the prescribed role.
A further point made by Mr. Warwick Smith is that it might be desirable to have the force largely officered by indigenous officers when the time of self determination arrives. That this would be desirable I believe goes without saying. However, he suggests that this should perhaps be a limiting factor in determining the size of the force we should now be maintaining. Again, I think this is true but it must be weighed against other conflicting factors such as occupation of accommodation, the need for a force of sufficient size to fulfil its role and the availability of suitable Pacific Islanders.
A draft Cabinet Submission which I envisage will canvass all these factors will be prepared as early as practicable and discussed with your Department. It would also need to cover the question of the availability and training of indigenous officers on which matter I will write to you separately in connection with your letter of 4 December.4
In the meantime, I would appreciate your concurrence to my suggestion that recruiting should continue until the Pacific Islanders strength reaches 2,800.
[NAA: A452, 1966/4989]
1 Document 145.
2 Attachment, Document 151.
3 See attachment A, Document 111.
4 Not found.