Canberra, 15 October 1968
T.P.N.G. Administrator’s visit2
1. The Administrator leaves Canberra late this afternoon.
2. In discussion between him and me we have traversed some of the ground of relationships between the Department and the Administration … The Administrator has so far declined my suggestion we discuss delegations, which he had at the top of his business list.
3. The formalities and social courtesies of the visit apparently have limited the time available for discussion.
4. My impression is that the Administrator is developing a wrong and possibly serious view of his position vis-a-vis the Minister and the Department.
He appears to think your letter to him of July 1966 no longer applies, and that the devolution of authority to the Territory is to officials there, particularly the Administrator, whereas in our view it is to elected members only.
For example:
(a) He seems to consider he should have the power of decision, the Department should only advise or suggest: and the Minister should restrict himself to very broad policy.
(b) He thinks he should be free to appoint consultants except where he thinks the matter so important the Minister should do so. He has already done this … without approval or even advice.
In the Department’s experience the appointment of a consultant is the first step to commitment.
(c) He has concerned himself with the departmental heads salaries—which formally are exclusively a matter for the Public Service Commissioner and the Minister—the 3 the extent of putting great pressure for a semi-committal advice by you to him. (Your letter about it ‘in no sense meets the situation’).
5. I consider the Administrator needs to be reminded that he accepted your letter of July 1966 before appointment (the Minister’s instructions are conveyed orally or in writing personally or through the Secretary of the Department) and that A.G.’s Department have confirmed that under the Act ‘instructions’ can if necessary be given by the Governor-General(not inconsistently with the Act or Ordinances).
6. Unless the Administrator sees his duty as being to carry out the Government’s wishes, I foresee a serious danger that it will no longer be possible for the Minister to exercise policy control and decisions will be made in the Territory, on the authority of officials, which are repugnant to Government policies.
7. I consider this a matter of overriding importance to you as Minister. I also suggest you ask the Administrator what steps he is taking to increase the role and responsibilities of Ministerial Members in practice e.g. delegations, voice in formulating policy proposals; Toliman’s visit to Madang High School was good but not of a policy kind. 4
[NAA: NA 1983/239, 48/2]
1 The note is an unsigned carbon copy.
2 For background, see Document 229.
3 This should probably read ‘to’.
4 Hay met with Barnes at Parliament House and later recounted his discussion: ‘[Barnes] said that the object … was for us both to talk over the matters raised by me with him over the past few weeks and months. He said he felt it was his firm opinion that the Administration officers, including the Administrator himself, were the servants of the Government and had to do exactly what the Government said. He said he was responsible to Parliament for everything that went on in the Terriiory, and that this accounted for the need for him to be in a position to give directions. He said he thought I had taken positions on the Administrator’s authority which had not been taken by my predecessor, and he was somewhat concerned about it. I assured the Minister that I wasn’t in any way intending to act otherwise than in accordance with the policy of the Government, but there were certain actual things in the legislation in Papua New Guinea which allocated duties or powers to the Administrator or the Administrator in Council, and I was surprised to hear that the Minister believed that such acts or things should be directed by him. I went into some detail on the proviso that in all cases the Administrator would be acting in accordance with the policy of the Government. Barnes was, as usual, very courteous and decent about these things, but I could see that he really accepted the advice that obviously he’d been given in this matter by the Department, and I didn’t really feel that my own point of view had made much impression on him’ (Hay interview, 1973-4, TRC 121/65, 4:2/19-20).