Besides the CPC, other political groups were distrustful of the
1 0/
local Executive. The distrust of the Executive was in a substantial way related to some of the issues in which the Executive view or policy was in conflict with those of the other political groups in PNG at the time. For the purpose of this work it is convenient to isolate these issues into general and specific issues.
1.5.1 The General Issues of Conflict
Generally there were perhaps five main issue over which the demands of the other political groups conflicted quite distinctly with those of the Executive. These were, firstly, PANGU's call for early Self-Government and Independence; secondly, secession desired by some of the well-off districts; thirdly, decentralisation; fourthly, opposition by the Coalition Government to proposed reforms; and fifthly, the opposition, particularly by the CPC, to transfer of certain powers from Canberra to the local Executive in Port Moresby. These general issues provided a backdrop to the conflict between the CPC and the Government.
121. Griffin, Nelson and Firth, 1979:221; and Lynch:personal communication.
122. CPC, 1974.
123. Hegarty, 1975:91.
124. See Woolford, 1973:51-63. The local Executive shall be referred henceforth as the Executive.
1.5.1.1 Opposition to PANGU's Call for Early Self-Government and Independence
The major issue during the 1972-75 period was the timing of
between the PANGU Pati and the United Party. The PANGU Pati had been well known throughout PNG as a strong advocate of early Self-Government and Independence. This had been one of the platforms
PANGU had support for its cause in the Australian Labor Party (ALP). Realising that the question of early Self-Government and
elections in Australia, Whitlam, the then leader of the ALP, sought to publicise the issue during his 1970 visit to PNG. Whitlam pursued the same policy of early Self-Government and Independence vigorously after he became the Prime Minister following the 1972 federal elections in Australia. In his first visit to PNG as Prime Minister early in 1973, Whitlam stated his Government's policy, thus:
I cannot stress too often that the decision for Independence is not only a decision about Papua New Guinea. It is about Australia, and Australia's view of her own proper role in the world. Australia is no longer willing to be the ruler of a colony. And my Government is determined to divest itself of that role in the time of the present Australian parliament.
The Leader of the Opposition, Matthias Toliman, responded by expressing the United Party's fear:
Australia cleared the way for the establishment of this Parliament in 1964 with the promise - and the Australian Labor Party publicly endorsed that promise - that our own House of Assembly should make all the important decisions on the way of life and future of our people ... We trust that the good sense and good will of the Australian Government will not prematurely force us into independence. While this could resolve pressures on Australia's Government and meet its short term interests, in the long run there could be a very real
the friendship and trust which now exists
When Whitlam arrived in Goroka, he was presented with a
125. Somare, 1970:490.
126. Official Speech, February 1973, quoted by Johnson, 1983:214. 127. Speech at the Official Dinner, quoted by Johnson, Ibid.
Self-Government and Independence. On this there was a conflict
on which PANGU won the 1972 General Elections.
1 O O
petition. Highlanders feared early Self-Government because it meant the educationally well-off leaders from the coast would dominate the government and the economy to the disadvantage of the Highlanders who had few educated men among them. Thus, the Highlanders saw the rush towards early Self-Government and Independence by both the Australian Labor Government and the Somare Government as amounting to a kind of collusion which would ensure a domination by the coastal people over the Highlanders in an independent PNG.
The fear that the coastal people might dominate the government was not held by the Highlanders alone. Others had a similar fear, and did not want to be governed by other regional groups. The demand for separate independent statehood thus began to emerge.
1.5.1.2 Separatism
Two regional groups that organised themselves to show that they did not want to be governed by an Executive dominated by people from
128. The key message was:
Do not forget, Sir, that education was not started in the Highlands until 1953, and the few of our members who are educated are our first, not necessarily our best, and their views are not necessarily our views. We are not educated, and our members are naive in government, but we do not lack common sense and we understand that progress to Independence must be based on a sound economy. We are afraid that our present economy is in jeopardy, and our Ministers do nothing to rectify the situation. In fact they seem bent on destroying it ... We do not fear the approach of independence as a natural follow-through of successful self-government but we do object to settling a date for Independence as we do not know if our government of the day will be capable of fulfilling the responsibilities of Independence by that time.
The freedom of operation the Australian Government has allowed our Coalition Government has enabled us to see that our Government is not responsible or mature enough to handle a happy and beneficial Independence.
We oppose your Government setting a date for Independence for the above mentioned reasons. We are vigorously opposed to our present Government setting dates for Independence because it is their decision, not ours, and we have no confidence in their ability to handle Independence (quoted by Johnson, ibid., at 212-213).
other regions, were the Bougainvilleans and the Papuans. Bougainvilleans had a traditional dislike of the "redskins", the term they used to refer to the people from the other parts of PNG. Encouraged by a rich copper mine which had been opened up in the late 1960s. on ther island, Bougainvilleans sought to secede from the rest
129
of PNG and form a separate independent state. According to Johnson, the Administrator at the time, the case of Bougainville was the most important problem that the National Coalition Government faced.130
The Coalition Government endeavoured to deal with the Bougainvillean separatist problem partly by bringing two Bougainvillean Ministers, Donatus Mola and Paul Lapun, into the cabinet, and also by appointing Fr M o m i s , another Bougainvillean, as the Deputy Chairman of the CPC.
i 3 1
Papuans, too, did not want to be governed by New Guineans. Papua was in law an Australian colony. Papuans thought of either a statehood within the Australian federal system or independence. The Papua cause was boosted in 1972 by the founding of the Papua Besena by Josephine Abaijah. This was a loosely-organised political group made up of largely the people from the Central Province who agitated for an
132