Port Moresby, 28 September 1968
Confidential
Report on the Second Meeting of the House of Assembly 26 August–12 September 1968
I attach copies of a report which has been prepared by officers of the Administration and edited by myself. I would be glad if it could be brought to the Minister’s notice.1
Attachment
1. The purpose of this report is to draw attention to the main issues before the House and to significant trends and attitudes which became evident during the meeting. The report is supplementary to the daily reports on the details of legislation and voting which have been sent by teleprinter.
_The Chatterton bill2 _
2. The most significant single time,3 in the eyes of the majority of the elected members, was the private members bill moved by Mr. Percy Chatterton for a commission of enquiry on Local Officers’ salaries. The debate on this overshadowed the more lengthy budget debate which, because of the generally good reception of the budget, tended to be non-controversial.
3. The bill was defeated by 54 votes to 23. But these figures, while satisfactory from the Administration’s point of view, should not be regarded as signifying lack of sympathy for the Local Officers in their claims for higher salaries. The P.S.A. and the Local Officers have achieved some success from their lobbying, which is a new factor to most members. The higher salary levels are thought to be adequate; but there is a feeling among many MHA’s that the base grade levels are too low, and that at least in some urban areas there should be a readjustment of the family needs allowance. Some members believe the Administration should take the initiative on these matters. The Government argument that the Chatterton bill was a threat to the arbitration system was effective but was hampered, insofar as most indigenous Members were concerned, by the general ignorance of the system. The main causes of the satisfactory voting figures were effective presentation by both Government and European elected members, and the attention given to Mr. Lussick’s proposed bill to amend the Arbitration Ordinance itself. This bill was considered as a reasonable compromise which would prevent Chatterton’s supporters being shamed and which would give those who voted against his bill an explanation to Local Officers who had been threatening opposition at the next election. Additionally, the fact that Pangu strongly supported the bill perhaps did Chatterton more harm than good. Pangu’s coercive tactics directed against MM’s and AMM’s caused the latter to dig their heels in, and served to discredit Pangu in the eyes of the majority of the House.
The budget
4. The budget was, as stated above, well accepted. What criticism there was came from some European elected members who considered that the budget was weighted too heavily in favour of education, and that insufficient attention was being accorded to rural development. On another aspect of education policy, some elected European members sought to have full educational subsidies for children of overseas officers at school in Australia extended to the children of expatriate parents in the private sector.
5. Most members spoke on the budget. Ministerial and Assistant Ministerial Members read prepared statements on the work of their Departments. Some private members, notably from Pangu but including non-Pangu men like Paulus Arek and most of the European members, spoke on policy issues. The majority of speakers used the debate to promote the interests of their electorates. The time taken in the Second Reading debate on the budget meant that there was little time left for detailed discussion in the committee stages. There was no debate on the bills embodying the new tax measures proposed in the budget speech.4
Amendments to the Land Titles Commission Ordinance
6. There was some initial doubt as to the acceptability of the amendments proposed by the Administration to enlarge the tribunal for important cases and also to re-define the grounds of appeal against decisions of the Commission.5 This arose from criticism that the amendments were designed to strengthen the Administration’s position in respect of appeals already lodged but not heard. In the event, opposition proved to be centred mainly in areas concerned with the appeals (Port Moresby and the Gazelle). General opinion strongly favoured the amendments and they were passed by a comfortable margin.
Salaries of mission teachers
7. There was consistent pressure on the Administration for higher salaries for Mission teachers. The indigenous elected members do not see the importance, or the need, for the Administration to exercise additional control in the event of an increase in Mission teachers’ salaries. They saw this as a clear cut case of the Government against the Missions. Their sympathies were with the latter. This was in part due to the Roman Catholic Mission’s propaganda and tactics, which proved effective. The possibility of a motion or private member’s bill on the matter was avoided by a general statement on education policy by the Ministerial Member for Education in the closing stages of the meeting.
Other issues
8. A number of European elected members tended to show some concern with regard to what they considered to be a lack of emphasis upon involving the Papuans and the New Guineans in the economy. Indications of this were to be seen in Meanggarum’s (Pangu) motion on indigenous shareholders in Territory companies;6 in Leahy’s budget speech call for a land-based indigenous middle-class; and in the proposed Cecil Abel (Pangu) bill on Incentives to Employers to provide training and advancement for Territory workers. Additionally, there were several mentions during Adjournment debates of the need for the Administration to give more support to indigenous people in business, in both rural and industrial situations.
9. It is likely that the forthcoming 1969 ‘act of ascertainment’ in West Irian will arouse increased interest among elected members at future meetings. There were some references and questions concerning West Irian’s future, and refugees, at the last meeting. Chatterton and McKinnon are likely to take an active lead in bringing pressure to bear.
10. Mr. S. Uroe7 appeared to have a lot of support concerning his criticisms of land settlement schemes throughout the Territory.8 The Government Leader in the House suggested that some members might like to acquaint themselves with the Hoskins Oil Palm Settlement scheme. It might be a good idea to make some firm arrangements in this regard, so that as many members as possible could witness the progress being achieved in that area. But we can still anticipate pressure from people like Uroe and Arek, to improve existing and earlier land settlement projects.
11. There was also strong support, both in the House and in the lobbies, for Fielding’s9 and Voutas’ demands that MHA’s be members of District Co-Ordinating Committees.10 This issue will surely come up again at later meetings.
12. It is difficult to predict accurately what attitude indigenous elected members will adopt in the event of Mr. Lapun or Mr. Lue tabling a firm motion calling for a referendum to determine the future constitutional status of Bougainville.11 But the strong and reiterated support in the House for national unity suggests that such a motion would be defeated by a large majority. The question asked by Mr. Middleton12 on the matter was fielded well by Mr. Lapun. And the question asked of the Government Leader by Mr. Casey13 seemed to cause little reaction.14
13. The Pangu Pati pressed for a separate Local Government Department. A bill to give effect to this was prepared but presentation was deferred until the November meeting, no doubt because Pangu wanted more time to marshall support. A number of indigenous MHA’s, including several MM’s and AMM’s, are in sympathy with this proposal, partly because they believe it would result in more assistance to Councils. Pangu speakers also used the argument that officers trained as kiaps could not be expected to undertake advisory duties as well. Most Highland elected members would probably oppose the bill, especially if they could be shown that D.D.A. will be in a position to lend more support by way of staff resources, so long as Local Government remains a part of the Department.
14. There was no formal move for the setting up of a further committee of the House on constitutional development, but the matter is much in members’ minds and it can be expected to come before an early meeting.15
The Pangu Pati
15. In terms of membership, Pangu’s numbers were reduced during the meeting and it now probably can count on not more than eight genuine members, and then not all of those will stand firm on all issues (Paliau, e.g., did not vote on the Chatterton bill). Party members made effective contributions on a number of policy issues, notably the budget. Their tactics in giving several members the opportunity to introduce positive, non-controversial private members’ bills were also effective. Clearly they had access to aid from outside sources to enable them to do this, but they also had a small and useful secretariat. On the other hand, the party’s leader, Mr. Somare, antagonised a number of members by his interjections and occasional personal attacks. The use of pressure tactics by him and Mr. Youtas in the debate on the Chatterton bill did much to stiffen the resolution of some members whose support for the Administration position was doubtful.Pangu continued to get press and radio publicity out of proportion to its membership.
The independent group
16. This group was more active and better organised than in the first meeting. No definite leader has emerged. Rivals for this position were thought to be Mr. Neville and Mr. Watts. However, much of the organisation and policy formulation appears to have been in the hands of Mr. Lussick, who worked with a small committee of European regional members. This committee in turn worked to the non-committed indigenous members. It is too early to judge the potential of this group. But clearly more attention will be given to its organisation. Those promoting it claim to have access to funds, aim to ensure full participation by indigenous members in decisions, and will try to follow prepared policies in an organised and non-provocative manner. The latter point is important. The habit of some members in baiting Pangu could cause a pro-Pangu reaction. Also, Mr. Arek on one occasion was critical of ‘some Europeans’ (presumably the group’s committee) for bringing pressure to bear on indigenous members who needed more time to think things over. Progress of the group towards a full-scale political party may lead to some conflict of obligations on the part of MM’s and AMM’s who belong to it, but Mr. Lussick sees no difficulty in their obligations under the ‘Arrangements’16 being overriding.
The Speaker
17. Mr. Guise showed growing confidence in his handling of the House. But his methods were on occasions thought to be dictatorial and members were critical of a tendency to order the business of the House to suit his convenience, rather than to adhere to normal hours and put in a deputy when he had to be absent.
The Ministerial and Assistant Ministerial Members
18. The MM’s and AMM’s showed increasing confidence during the meeting. Questions and statements were quite well handled, and will be better handled in the future. MM’s and AMM’s are still reluctant to identify themselves with the Government. When pressed they deny that they are ‘Government men’. And while agreeing not to ask questions, they have taken advantage of the Administration ruling that they can make adjournment speeches on affairs in their electorate so that they can show their electors that they have not forgotten them. On the other hand, attempts by, for example, Mr. Voutas to label them as stooges have not succeeded. The fact that some five MM’s and AMM’s did not vote on the Chatterton bill and two did not vote on the Land Titles Ordinance amendments caused some criticism of the ministerial system as such. But in all cases the decisions not to vote were due to commitments, which were virtually inescapable, to electors. In the absence of any political or party organisations in electorates, this kind of attitude is inevitable, because the MM’s and AMM’s have no-one to turn to in order to protect their electoral interests.
The operation of the House of Assembly
19. In general the Official Members have been able to lobby with reasonable effectiveness, but the nature of the House is still such as to render it impossible for the Official Leader to control the business of the House in every detail. The business of the House moves quickly and unpredictably. The tendency of individual members to bring in private bills rather than move motions is growing. The House is essentially a place where the Melanesian spirit of compromise prevails. This means that the Administration cannot expect to have its own way in every detail and has to be prepared to give ground on the less important matters in order to be sure to get its way on major matters. These factors point up the need to have our legislative programme planned and prepared well before each meeting of the House.17
[NAA: A452, 1968/5271]
1 The letter and report was later attached to a submission from Ballard to Barnes, which summarised the contents of the report (16 October, NAA: A452, 1968/5271).
2 See editorial note ‘Tensions in the House: the Chatterton and Lussick bills’.
3 Presumably, this should read ‘item’.
4 Newman announced that an additional $1 million of internal revenue would be ‘raised by increases in rates of individual income tax ranging from 1.1 per cent to 12.5 per cent’ (House of Assembly debates, 27 August 1968, NLA: Nq 328.952 PAP, p. 217).
5 It was proposed that the Land Titles Commission would consist of ‘the Chief Commissioner and two senior Commissioners when it deals with any question as to whether land is native land or not, and with any matter under the New Guinea Land Titles Restoration Ordinance’. Regarding appeals, it was suggested, inter alia, that in cases where each Commissioner’s view differed the decision of the senior member would be regarded as definitive and that where an appeal was made to the Supreme Court without sufficient evidence, the matter was to be handed back to the Commission (9 September 1968, ibid., pp. 416-7).
6 Meanggarum moved that a select committee be appointed to ‘consider and report to this House on methods of increasing participation by indigenes in economic development through increased shareholdings in Territory companies and [on] the problems involved, including the provision of stock exchange or share marketing facilities and any statutory or other machinery requirements’. Meanggarum contended that ‘we cannot achieve unity unless we co-operate to create a feeling of nationhood’ (3 September 1968, ibid., p. 315).
7 N.I. Uroe, MHA, Rigo-Abau open electorate.
8 Uroe argued that the ‘present system of land settlement as exemplified in my electorate is an indictment of shocking lack of planning, lack of co-ordination between departments concerned, lack of guidance and very little supervision, if any, and therefore a waste of valuable human resources’. He urged that the House press the Administration to ‘consider the creation of a national land settlement policy with a high degree of priority and urgency in planning and execution’ (10 September 1968, ibid., p. 446-7).
9 W.J. Fielding, MHA, Northern regional electorate.
10 See footnote 4, Document 72.
11 See footnote 1, Document 223.
12 J.M. Middleton, MHA, Sumkar open electorate.
13 N.M. Casey, MHA, Kainantu open electorate.
14 Henderson was asked whether he had heard the ABC report of the previous evening ‘concerning the independence movement in Bougainville’ (House of Assembly debates, 10 September 1968, NLA: Nq 328.952 PAP, p. 432).
15 The Administration and Canberra had been wary of possible moves on constitutional development. Responding to a comment by Hay that Port Moresby would ‘prefer to avoid’ a new committee (telex 6904, Hay to Warwick Smith, 13 August 1968, NAA: A452, 1968/4411), Warwick Smith instructed: ‘If any proposal is put forward for the establishment of a further constitutional committee to consider changes in executive government the Minister would wish Official Members to speak and vote against this proposal on the grounds that the present system should be given the opportunity to work in practice for a little while to provide a basis for assessment. It should be stressed that … the previous select committee report adopted by the previous House and accepted by the Government specified a minimum period of two years before the powers and duties of Ministerial Members should be reviewed’. Warwick Smith had advised that the Administration could protect against an examination of executive government by countering with ‘a proposal for a select committee to examine electoral matters including systems of voting’ (telex 270/5978, Warwick Smith to Hay, 16 August 1968, ibid.)
16 See Document 197.
17 See Document 204. The Government was concerned at the manner in which motions were being put. Warwick Smith wrote to Hay of the ‘need to ensure that practices do not develop of rushing motions through the House … without sufficient time being allowed for discussion … During the recent sittings of the House there was a tendency for private members to move the suspension of standing orders, introduce motions without prior notice and have the vote taken all on the same day’. Warwick Smith underlined the ‘Minister’s concern that ways consistent with progress towards eventual responsible government be found to help towards a better understanding by members of proposed legislation’ (memorandum, DOET (Warwick Smith) to Administration, 6 November 1968, NAA: A452, 1968/4412).