Canberra, 25 September 1968
In your letter of 22nd August you drew my attention to Senator Laught’s 2 suggestion that a small number of Papuans and New Guineans be recruited into the Department of External Affairs for training at the tertiary level and later for appointment in the Australian Diplomatic Service and in any diplomatic service of the future for Papua and New Guinea. 3
Senator Laught’s suggestion is an interesting one but at this stage in the Territory’s development may be premature.
One point that leads me to this conclusion is the present acute shortage of suitable young educated Papuans and New Guineans for all essential services in the Territory. The demands for tertiary training and employment of those people will exceed the supply for some time ahead and consistent with the Government’s policy of localisation of the Public Service will be the necessity to use these officers to the best advantage of the Territory.
I also consider that the setting up of a scheme of training for diplomatic work presupposes that a self governing Papua and New Guinea would wish to conduct its own foreign relations. That decision is one of the many that must be decided by the people of the Territory when they consider they are ready to determine their future constitutional status. Similarly, it presupposes a Government decision that it would not wish to conduct the Territory’s foreign relations if so requested. No such decisions have been made and are quite properly ones to be dealt with at the time by the future Territory Government and the then Australian Government.
In reaching its decision at that time it is possible that future Territory leaders may consider that the costs of conducting their own international relations are beyond them. Alternatively, they may find, and many newly independent countries have found, it to be impracticable financially to establish a full diplomatic service, and rather may meet their limited requirements by drawing on their public service or political figures. With such possibilities ahead, it would seem unwise to raise the aspirations of those who might be drawn to diplomatic training, but might never realise themselves in the practice of their profession.4
It is necessary, of course, to provide Territory people, both public servant and politician, with experience in international affairs and exposure to peoples from other parts of the world. This is presently being done. An increasing number of indigenes are attending international conferences and meetings as members of Australian delegations. Many are receiving fellowships and grants to study overseas. I am hopeful that the number of these opportunities will increase considerably.
I am sending a copy of our correspondence on this matter to the Minister for External Affairs.5
[NAA: A1838, 936/6110 part I]
1 R.C. Wright, Senator for Tasmania, Minister for Works and Barnes’ representative in the Senate.
2 K.A. Laught, Liberal Party Senator for South Australia and member, Joint Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs.
3 Wright had noted that in his parliamentary reply to Laught he had invited Barnes to discuss the suggestion with Hasluck. Wright requested Barnes’ comments (see NAA: A452, 1966/3850).
4 Reacting to Laught’s proposal in a note of 22 August to Warwick Smith, Barnes had written: ‘I am unable to contemplate the Territory bearing the cost of a diplomatic service for years to come’. He had added, however, that subject to considerations of manpower shortages, ‘experience in world affairs could be an advantage’ (ibid.).
5 In a minute to Booker and Doig of 4 September, McDonald of DEA had written that he had spoken to Hay in April, who had said he ‘would oppose proposals for Papuans and New Guineans to be trained for the foreign service for some years yet … [because] of the scarcity of qualified indigenes in the Territory, and [the] need to absorb all those now at universities into local administration positions’ (NAA: A1838, 936/6/10 part I).