Canberra, 24 November 1969
• Mr. Evatt brought out to me the series of messages from Hay yesterday ending with his 614.1
- I do not agree with his assessment in paragraphs 6A and 6B.
• In particular it seems to me that the type of action which is envisaged in 6A in order to support the Council would (on all experience from overseas) be much more likely to lead to premature self government than the action in B.
• Nor do I see the alternatives between A and Bas being so stark. There would, for example, be some room for a middle course which envisages—
- the appointment of Commissioners or a Manager and
- legislation controlling the Mataungan Association
• If the Minister still feels that he has to support 6A then I feel that the Administration should be asked to comment on now a Restricted Residents Ordinance and a Societies Ordinance (precedents which have already been sent2 up) would meet their needs.
- Even if detention legislation would be acceptable in Papua and New Guinea I doubt if it would be so in Australia.
• Also if we are to get involved in legislation of this kind it seems necessary to be clear that Whitrod is involved in giving instructions on what the police will need in order to maintain law and order, and not D.D.A.
• In general as I see it the Administration summary has all the usual ingredients of relating to the immediate objective without adequate regard to long term repercussions.3
[NAA: A452, 1970/1690]
1 Document 333.
2 Presumably, this should read ‘set’.
3 An unsigned carbon copy of a note to Barnes by Warwick Smith reads: ‘(I) the Administration does not face up to two facts—(a) the Council was elected at elections in which only 20% voted— a very small electoral base (b) there was a motion for revoking the proclamation—adopted by the Council. (2) There are middle courses apart from the Administrator’s 6A and 68—which are a little bit too black and white’ (24 November 1969, NAA: NA1983/239, 49/6). More generally, an undated and anonymous DOET paper commented: ‘The Department feels that a temperate and patient approach is necessary in order to resolve the difference arising between the Association and the Council. In the event of police action being necessary we must be sure that the Administration has done all that it possibly can have done in order to prevent this use of force. The Department is presently looking at the question of powers under emergency legislation to fix curfews, prevent the movement of people to and from areas, {and to} ban marches, meetings and the distribution of subversive literature as a means to control the activities of the Mataungan Association. Legislation to control societies generally is also being looked at by the Department’ (c. 24 November 1969, NAA: A452, 1969/5256).