Port Moresby, 23 December 1969
Meetings of the Constitutional Committee December 15th to 19th
Please find attached a report of the meetings of the Constitutional Committee held during the week beginning December 15th.1 You will note that not a great deal was done at the meetings due to lack of initiative on the Chairman’s part and on the part of the members of the Committee. If any worthwhile results are to be achieved, initiatives may need to be taken by the Official Members. I would be glad of your views on this matter.
Attachment
[ matter omitted ]2
questions for him to ask witnesses.
6. The witnesses favoured a reduction in the number of Official Members in the House but were adamant that those remaining retain the right to vote. Mr Roy Ashton favoured having 10 Official Members but these were to include indigenous public servants.
7. The witnesses believed that the office of Assistant Ministerial Member should be abolished and that the number of Ministerial Members should be increased. All believed that they were given every opportunity to carry out their functions and that their advice was sought on policy matters. In the A.E.C., they stated that they did initiate some discussions and that their views did influence policy. All thought that some type of qualification in literacy was necessary but disagreed with a formal educational qualification.
8. Witnesses were divided as to whether all Ministers should be in the A.E.C. (cabinet) or not. Mr. Ashton believed that the A.E.C. was an excellent training ground for Ministers and all should be members of it for this reason alone.
9. The witnesses expressed grave fears that they would not be re-elected and as a result, much valuable political training would be lost to this young developing country.
They claim their duties prevent them from touring their electorates and visiting their constituents. They asked that the Committee take note of this and the Committee moved a motion that ways and means be sought to present the Assistant and Ministerial Members to their electorates.
10. The witnesses believed that an executive officer/secretary would assist them greatly in their duties especially in the explanation of documents and the answering of correspondence.
11. The Committee expressed the wish to meet a number of people during their visit to Canberra in February. Besides the Minister, they wish to see the Prime Minister, Attorney-General, the Minister for External Affairs, the leaders of the Country Party, Australian Labor Party and the Democratic Labor Party, Professor Davidson, Sir John Crawford3 and Mr. Justice Kerr.
12. The Committee did not discuss subjects to be covered when in Canberra and it is thought that the discussions will be of a very general nature.
13. It is thought that the Chairman, Mr. Paulus Arek, may be in contact with a group of academics in Australia who will wish to arrange a seminar or meeting with the Committee when it visits Canberra.
14. The meeting came to a close before the Official Members could express the Government’s view on the Assistant and Ministerial Member system.
15. The Committee decided to tour the Territory in March/April to meet the people. It appointed a Sub-Committee to prepare an itinerary. The Sub-Committee [is] to consult with District Commissioners and Elected Members.
16. The Committee did not complete its programme for the meeting and as yet its members do not realise that much greater personal effort must be made if the Committee is to cover its programme.
17. It is too early to give a true assessment of the Committee but at present it is conservative in outlook and appears to be adopting a ‘go slow’ policy in regard to initiating any changes.4
[NAA: A452, 1969/5484]
1 The report was written by Littler and dated 22 December.
2 Page one of the attachment has not been found.
3 Vice-Chancellor, ANU.
4 Territories objected to the Committee’s request to meet senior Ministers. Warwick Smith telexed Johnson: ‘It is not usual in Australian Government practice for a group of Ministers to be brought into discussions with some other group such as the Select Committee … unless and until clear cut issues have been defined and the Government has had an opportunity to consider its attitude towards those issues … the discussions in Canberra … [in] February would enable the Committee to sound out the Minister … on a variety of issues and would enable him to understand the line of thought on the part of the members of the Committee. This would be a suitable preparatory step before the Committee took its soundings of the people of Papua and New Guinea which will be a pretty extended operation and indeed it might be necessary for the Committee to formulate some fairly clear approaches to different issues before it could take those soundings’ (31 December 1969, NAA: A452, 1969/5484).