Canberra, 2 February 1966
Confidential
Papua/New Guinea constitutional development
[matter omitted]5
It seems important not to allow the impression to be given that Cabinet is adopting any rigid attitudes in advance of the report of the Select Committee. Our view is that the Select Committee should be given every encouragement to put in a comprehensive and effective report.
The subject is complicated and the Submission, no doubt in an endeavour to be brief, does not discuss the pros and cons of some important aspects. The Minister might be invited to give Cabinet some further idea of the thinking behind recommendations on the following points:—
Cabinet government
The recommendations head in the direction of an Australian form of cabinet government—but at this stage with quasi-ministers having only a limited responsibility within a limited field. This appears to be the first deliberate overt step towards cabinet government and ministerial responsibility. While this may be the best system for Papua and New Guinea it is possible to think of variations of it—for instance, selecting ministers from outside the legislature—which deserve consideration. There are many instances around the world where the British system of government is not working because of the absence of major political parties of equal strength giving an effective Government and effective Opposition. Is it too early in the political development of the Territories to say whether an Australian type cabinet will work? Do the proposals in the Submission commit the Government to an Australian type parliamentary institution? Should any views of the Government on the subject at this stage be expressed in tentative terms indicating a willingness to adapt the system to fall in with the political and social development of the Territories?
The Submission does not say whether these quasi-ministers are to be appointed by the Administrator or elected by the Assembly. However, they are to form the Administrator’s Council and the idea is that conventions will arise whereby the Administrator will consult the Council on all matters except some excluded topics—security, external affairs, defence, constitutional advancement, law and information. Once elected members get the feeling of ministerial responsibility there will be increasing pressure to extend their area of responsibility. Is there any way in which they can be given responsibility for some part of these excluded topics leaving the major decisions of principle in the hands of the Governor General? For instance would the ‘Nauru pattern’ allowing a measure of joint responsibility on, for example, internal security and maintenance of peace and order, be one possible way of leaving with the Assembly the largest practicable area of authority?
Composition of the Assembly
The Minister proposes that the Government need not seek to persevere with the present requirements for special electorates (which provide that a number of white men must be included among the elected representatives). The Minister also proposes not to give any encouragement to the idea that there should be further expansion of the Assembly at this stage. However, his view is that the Government should continue to insist on some official members remaining in the House so that the subjects excluded from the purview of elected quasi-ministers can be adequately presented. With none of these views would we disagree. The Minister, or the Minister for External Affairs might be able to say what the reaction from the Trusteeship Council is expected to be, in view of the U.N. Mission report covering these aspects.6
The Select Committee
We have said that the Select Committee ought to be given every opportunity to present its recommendations in the best light and for this reason Cabinet should not appear to be adopting any rigid positions in advance. Equally, if any of the Minister’s proposals are totally unacceptable to Cabinet it would be important that this be made clear now so that the Minister and his departmental officials can have some appropriate guide lines for their administration and their pronouncements.
[NAA: A4940, C 1724 part 2]
1 Notes on Cabinet submissions were customarily prepared in the Prime Minister’s Department (PMD) for use by the Prime Minister in anticipation of Cabinet discussions.
2 D.J. Munro, First Assistant Secretary, Economic Division, PMD.
3 G.J. Yeend, First Assistant Secretary, Cabinet and External Relations Division, PMD.
4 Document 5.
5 Matter omitted summarises Document 5.
6 That is, the report of the UN visiting mission which toured New Guinea in 1965 and later reported to the Trusteeship Council. For the Council’s comments following the report of the mission, see footnote 12 to editorial note entitled ‘Papua and New Guinea’s constitution and ultimate status: debate in Port Moresby and Canberra’.