Canberra, 20 October 1969
Secret
I refer to your further letter of the 14th July regarding your proposal to increase the strength of the PIR.2 As I see it, the significant aspects of the background to Cabinet’s decision of 18th September, 19683 are as follows:
• The original decision to expand the PlR to three battalions was taken at the time of confrontation and had regard to the possibility of a threat from Indonesia after it had taken over the administration of West New Guinea;4
• following the lessening of tension between Australia and Indonesia, I wrote to the Minister for Defence in March 1967 raising a number of questions regarding the optimum size of the defence force, the indigenous strength of which at that time stood at about 2,000;5
• it was agreed between the Minister for Defence, the former Minister for the Army and myself in October 1967 (by which time the indigenous strength had risen to 2,200) that authority should be sought from Cabinet for a variation in existing directives regarding the target strength and expansion programme of the PIR;6
• it was not until September 1968, however, (when the strength had increased still further to 2,450) that, following the Defence Committee’s consideration of a Joint Planning Committee study of the future of the PIR,7 I decided to bring the matter before Cabinet;8
• although Cabinet, as you suggest in your letter, may not have had before it the Defence Committee’s minute, it was certainly made aware (by the references in my submission) of the Committee’s views on the two main points of substance—
- that a review of the PNG defence forces should be undertaken not later than 1970.
- that meanwhile Army should work to a PIR strength of 2,850 Pacific Islanders plus 650 ARA by June 1969, i.e., two battalions plus supporting units.
In the event Cabinet agreed to my submission that it would be reasonable to hold the strength of the PIR at approximately the present level, subject to such marginal increases as might be agreed upon between the Ministers concerned, until the proposed review could be carried out.9
The first paragraph of page 3 of your letter of the 14th July10 indicates that you were unaware of objections to completing the organization of the second battalion of the PIR. I am a little puzzled by this since it was in opposition to the Defence Committee’s view that Army should work to the completion of the two battalion strength pending the carrying out of the review that I explicitly recommended to Cabinet that the strength be held at its existing level. To my mind, therefore, it would be against the spirit of the Cabinet decision to go ahead at this stage with the recruitment of the 119 members needed to complete the second battalion.
As regards the other increases proposed, having regard to the information given in the Department of Army’s memorandum attached to your letter,11 I would accept the need for the following in the interests of operational efficiency:
Transportation Squadron—15
Goldie River Dart Range—6
Ordnance Depot Detachment—8
With reference to the requirement for 29 staff for the medical centre at Taurama Barracks, I understand that 22 soldiers have already been transferred to the medical corps to staff this facility and I would have no objection to the recruitment of the remaining seven.
I also accept the need for the staffing of learner positions to enable indigenous soldiers to take over from ARA personnel in due course,12 and I would have no objection to recruitment for these positions proceeding on the understanding that suitable personnel could not be obtained from within the existing strengths of the first and second battalions.
I am sending a copy of this letter to the Minister for Defence.13
[NAA: A452, 1968/4163]
1 P.R. Lynch.
2 Document 294.
3 Document 222.
4 See Document 12.
5 See attachment B, Document 111.
6 See Document 145.
7 Document 190.
8 See Documents 216 and 222.
9 For Defence–DOET discussions in early 1969 on the long-terms status of forces in PNG, see footnotes 1 and 2, Document 262. Preparations for a Joint Planning Committee paper continued throughout 1969 (see NAA: A452, 1969/911 ).
10 That is, the paragraph in Document 294 beginning ‘From the foregoing’.
11 See footnote 4, Document 287.
12 White had written to Defence: ‘As you are already aware, as the Territory advances towards independence, we intend to replace all ARA positions in PNG units. To do this, it will be necessary to raise gradually the Pacific Islander ceiling so that selected members can be made available for special training without unduly impairing unit efficiency. Furthermore, in the case of many officer, NCO and specialist appointments the Pacific Islander requires a period of assessment and supervision in the appointment alongside his ARA counterpart before the actual replacement can be made and the ARA member released’ (memorandum, Army (White) to Defence, 14 July 1969, NAA: A452, 1968/4163).
13 Further correspondence of October has not been found, but later documents indicate that Defence and Army understood Barnes and Lynch to have agreed during that month to an increase of 99 men (see, for example, memorandum, Defence (Poyser) to DOET, 9 June 1970, ibid.).