Canberra, 29 August 1966
Confidential
Rates of pay and conditions of service— Pacific Island Members of the A.R.A.
The Department of Territories oppose the recommendations of the Department of the Army designed to retain a special position for the Pacific Island Regiment in respect of pay and rations. Some background : Prior to 1964 Civil Service, Constabulary and the P.I.R. paid in cash and kind. From 1964 Civil Service paid in cash under special arrangement which required an over-payment in cases where the total cash wage was lower than the equivalent cash and kind—non-reduction allowance. System calls for any increases in pay to be retained to offset and finally extinguish the allowance. In July, 1966, decision was taken to extend this principle to the Constabulary and the P.I.R. The Army says that when promotions are announced and there is no cash benefit there will be trouble. They, therefore, seek variation to enable portion of the pay increase to be paid in cash, and they also want to retain a system of food ration for families of soldiers in the Barracks.
Is the Army estimate of trouble realistic or is it special pleading? What is the Minister for Territories view for prospects of trouble in the Army? The Army has done a very good job with the P.I.R. It is an elite force. To do this the Army gave P.I.R. conditions better than the Administration gave Civil Service or Constabulary. Policy issue : Should P.I.R. preference continue or should it be brought into line with Civil Service and Constabulary? Feeling between Constabulary and Army runs high. In recent years the Constabulary has been allowed to drift. Army have had a clear advantage. Quality of the Army is well regarded in the Territory. The Government will get no thanks if that quality deteriorates but clearly greater comparability between the two services is desirable. Hence, balance of view is to support Territories’ Submission as against Army Submission, given that Minister for Territories is able to advise that Army will not cause trouble.2
[NAA: A5841,419]
1 Document 63.
2 Cabinet decision no. 501 of 19 September reads: ‘Having regard to the fact that certain principles had been adopted and were already operating in Papua and New Guinea in respect of the basis of pay scales for local members of the Public Service and had more recently been adopted for the Royal Papua and New Guinea Constabulary, the Cabinet felt that the admission of different principles in the case of the Pacific Island members of A.R.A. (and the Papua and New Guinea Division of the R.A.N.) could undennine the position which was being held for the more numerous body of local public servants and police. The Cabinet therefore agreed that the issues outstanding on rates of pay and conditions of service for members of the P.I.R. (and Navy) should be settled generally along the lines proposed by the Minister for Territories’. Cabinet approved Barnes’ recommendations of paragraph 11(a), (d) and (e). The suggestion in 11(b) was broadened to include the rations of all PNG Service personnel, while the committee was charged with examining (c) and the issue of deductions as they applied to the context raised in (f) (NAA: A5841, 419). Meanwhile, the situation in Port Moresby was judged by the LIC as unstable, though problems in the army were seen to have diminished: ‘Students, police and Local Officers are becoming increasingly impatient for a decision from the Public Service Arbitrator on Local Officers’ salaries. Some students are looking for a means of expressing their dissatisfaction but lack the leadership and organisation to do so at this stage. They appear to be determined to have some form of organisation and an acceptable leader before taking any positive action. Organised demonstrations in the immediate future are unlikely but the possibility of spontaneous incidents cannot be ignored … Some indigenous soldiers have expressed dissatisfaction with the wage conversion scheme introduced on the 1st July, 1966. The tension that existed prior to its introduction appears to have lessened’ (MIS no. 8/66, 2 September 1966, NAA: A452, 1966/842).