Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Tuesday, 23 August 1960


Mr HASLUCK (Curtin) (Minister for Territories) . - by leave - On behalf of the Government, 1 wish to set out as clearly as possible a number of facts concerning the situation in the Territory of Papua and New Guinea, and to clear away some misunderstanding that may have arisen regarding our aims and our achievements in that Territory.

A number of honorable members have indicated their wish to take part in a discussion of this important national question, and opportunity for them to do so will be provided during this session. Apart from any debate which may arise on the motion for the printing of the statement I am now making, the Leader of the House Mr. Harold Holt) is proposing to allocate extra time for debate on Territories Estimates if members request it. A second opportunity will arise when, as soon as the Budget debate has been concluded, I will introduce a bill to amend those divisions of the Papua and New Guinea Act which relate to thi; Legislative Council and Executive Council.

We wish to present Papua and New Guinea as a national question. Although, as. the Government of the day, we accept our responsibility for what is done in the Territory, we believe that this is a subject on which the vast majority of the Australian people and all Australian parties share one. purpose, and that the only differences which may arise will be minor differences of emphasis or method. i '

I believe, too, that those Australians iri the Territory - whether in the Public Service, in private enterprise or in mission work - who give so much of their lives to the people of Papua and New Guinea are conscious that they carry a trust for Australia in their hands. That is certainly the ideal which I have personally always tried to set before my own officers. We know, too - and this is imprinted deep in the most sacred memories of thousands of Australian homes - that those men and women who, in two world wars, gave their lives in Papua and New Guinea were moved by a patriotism which transcends any of the momentary contests of politics. Let none of us forget - and, indeed do not let the world forget - that this country, so close to our shores, is also close to the hearts of the Australian people because over a period of more than 70 years we have given not only laws, not only money, not only good government, but. the blood of our children to nourish its future.

There are two preliminary observations to be made very briefly before passing to the main body of this statement. First, I repeat as plainly as I can on behalf of the Government that, contrary to an impression that has been fostered in some quarters, there has been no recent change in policy nor any change of interest on the part of the Government in Papua and New Guinea. What has been done up to date and what is to be done in the future have the approval of the whole Government and, I know will also have the support of this Parliament.

Secondly, there has been considerable distortion and some misunderstanding of what has been said on behalf of the Government in recent months. I do not propose to enter into any argument but the Government has se' down in a separate publication a plain record of recent Ministerial statements in order to keep the record straight. This publication is being distributed separately to honorable members and is commended to their attention.

The main purpose of the present statement is to discuss the responsibilities of Australia in Papua and New Guinea and the policies through which we will discharge them. Before opening that discussion, I want to mention a few simple facts in r elation to the Territory which will make it quite clear that the rest of this statement is neither defensive nor apologetic, but a description of policies that have already produced great results and will produce even greater results in the future.

What has Australia done since the war? The return to civil government took place with the establishment of a provisional administration in October, 1945. That provisional administration faced all the problems of the devastation, the disturbance of population, the disruption of civil rule and the loss of trained staff which had been caused by war. In most parts of the country it had to start again from scratch; in some parts it started from behind scratch because of the effects of war. It had on its hands an initial job of reconstruction and rehabilitation and the stabilizing of a population which had become unsettled by wartime experiences. Against that background of war let us ask again: " What has Australia done?"

Since the war, we have established law and order over more than 50,000 square miles of country which was previously in a state of savagery and belligerence. We have built up an Administration service from nothing to a total of 3,623 Australian public servants, 334 native members of the Public Service and 7,500 Administration native employees. We have provided facilities with each to enable this public service to do its work. We have equipped each of the five main ports with modern wharves, built over 5,000 miles of road, constructed over100 air fields and many alighting areas, provided housing, sanitation, water supply and electricity services. We have re-established and greatly improved thepostal and telecommunications services inside the country. In short, we have put the whole country into working order with many more modern facilities and amenities than people who have not visited the Territory can appreciate.

We have built four large and modern base hospitals, 101 subsidiary hospitals and 1,200 aid posts and medical centres, at the same time assisting the missions to build an additional 92 hospitals and 420 aid posts. To-day, we - and the missions whom we assist - have in operation 578 infant and maternal welfare clinics in various parts of the Territory. We have built from nothing medical services which, counting both officials and missionaries, now have 119 doctors, 16 dentists, 17 pharmacists, 347 trained nurses, 236 medical assistants, 307 other European medical workers and, as a result of training inaugurated since the war, 1,447 native medical assistants, 1,620 native medical orderlies, 390 native nurses and 1,158 other native medical workers. In close association with the missions, we have established an education system so that to-day there are over 400 European teachers and some 5,400 native teachers at work in 4,100 schools attended by 196,000 pupils. In agriculture, we have built up an agricultural department staffed by close on 300 officers, with a high proportion of persons with technical and professional qualifications. Notable among these is the Agricultural Extension Branch with about 75 trained European extension officers, 250 trained native extension officers and 420 native agricultural trainees, who are engaged in work directly related to the improvement of village agriculture and the encouragement and guidance of the native people in the growing of crops for market. We have established 41 agricultural and live-stock stations and extension centres, and in the course of a normal year we are now capable of conducting 200 agricultural patrols by European officers throughout the Territory to bring agricultural services within reach of the people. In forestry, we have established a major industry which has an export value approaching £1,500,000 a year and is backed by a department of forests with a staff of over 100 officers. We have built up a lands department which, although greatly hampered by a shortage of surveyors, has done notable work and is now preparing to undertake the major measures of land reform which I announced to the House in a statement last April.

We have encouraged, guided and instructed the native people in agriculture, with the aid of many private settlers who have taken more than a neighbourly interest in the native people. To-day, we have native farmers growing copra, coffee, cocoa and food crops for market of a value which, it is conservatively estimated, must be returning to them an income of £3,000,000 a year, which will increase steeply as the potential now developing is realized. Under our guidance, although mining has declined as an industry, the native people are themselves mining gold and enjoy the direct income which it provides. We have re-established trade and, compared with a pre-war annual value of trade of £5,000,000, approximately half of which was accounted for by the production and export of gold, we now have a total Territory trade of £40,000,000 a year, including over £18,000,000 export trade.

The Territory now has a banking system. Savings bank deposits by natives have risen from a negligible amount to a current total of credit balances of £1,190,000. The monthly average of deposits in the chequepaying banks has risen in comparatively few years from nothing to close on £8,000,000. Individual native people are sharing in this prosperity and furthermore the co-operative societies, formed and guided by the Administration, have to-day an annual turnover of close on £1,000,000. In the field of political advancement we have moved in less than ten years from nothing to a position where a population of 250,000 people living in more than 1,000 villages is now being served by 36 local government councils, democratically elected on an adult franchise and handling their own budgets for the management of local affairs. We have established town and district advisory councils on which natives are represented; we have set up a Legislative Council on which there are native members and have completed plans for the reform of this council and an increase in its native membership.

During this post-war period, public expenditure of all kinds has totalled not less than £179,000,000, of which £157,000,000 appeared on the budgets of the Territory Administration. That is a record of material achievement. At the same time in major questions such as land, labour and economic development we have made fundamental decisions on policy and administration. We have some reason to be proud of what has been done, particularly when we know the difficulties that have been overcome and the complexity of the factors which had to be considered. The members of this Parliament who have followed closely development in the Territory, and those officers of the Territory on whom constant and unremitting demands have been made by the Government, will be well aware of the great urgency which the Government has given to this task and the initiative it has taken in forcing the pace. We defend the wisdom of building a broad base for future progress. We repudiate the ill-founded criticism that we have gone too slowly. Such limits as may appear are not set by policy but exist in the nature of the situation itself. Every bit of this achievement is solid and there are no shams about it. On this foundation we will see even greater progress in the next few years.

In the light of that record of the post-war years - a record of two governments - let us discuss the future. I propose to make some observations on three phases of the situation in Papua and New Guinea - the international aspect, the existing situation inside the Territory and the Australian domestic scene.

The Territory of Papua and New Guinea is an administrative union formed of the trust territory of New Guinea and the Australian possession of Papua. In respect of both of these territories the Australian Government has accepted obligations by its signature and ratification of the United Nations Charter. In respect to the trust territory, there is, in addition, an agreement between Australia and the General Assembly of the United Nations. I emphasize that these treaties give to Australia both rights and responsibilities. We have discharged our responsibilities with scrupulous care and we intend to continue to do so. On the other hand, we expect our rights to be respected and we will be active to maintain them.

As a result of recent developments in Asia and Africa and of changes that are taking place in the United Nations, there is increased international interest in the Australian administration of Papua and New Guinea. This interest comes to focus each year in the comments of the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations and in the debates in the General Assembly. Regularly a visiting mission of the United Nations makes a report on our administration. On the whole, the reports of the visiting missions have been highly favorable to Australia and, speaking in particular of the report by the last visiting mission, I would say that there was no comment in that report that was not acceptable to us and, in fact, where the comments drew attention to this or that problem, the observations made by the mission were very closely in accord with observations which I had personally made in discussion with the members of the mission while it was in Australia. A report such as that presented by the last visiting mission is extremely valuable and helpful to the administering authority.

When the report of the visiting mission goes for discussion to the Trusteeship Council, our hope and wish is that our work in the Territory will be judged only on its merits. If in any way we have fallen short of what we have pledged ourselves to do it will be helpful to us and of benefit to the peoples of the Territory to be told about it. As members of the United Nations and as an administering authority under the trusteeship system of the United Nations we will carry out faithfully all that we have pledged ourselves to do.

It is well for us to remember, too, that the principles of trusteeship towards the native peoples antedates by many years the birth of the League of Nations, with its mandates system, and the later creation of the trusteeship system of the United Nations. Under the influence of thinking which had taken shape in British colonial administration, and drawing on our own experience as a colony that had won its way to independence, we Australians had established for ourselves certain principles in the administration Of dependent peoples even before those principles were written into the League of Nations mandates system or copied into the United Nations trusteeship system.

It is worth recalling that Australia herself took a notable part in the discussions which led to the setting up of the trusteeship system of the United Nations, and that at the first general assembly in 1946 we were among the first nations to make a declaration indicating readiness to conclude agreements respecting the mandated territories under our control. We did not come reluctantly to the trusteeship system. We helped to promote it and we were among the first to embrace it.

Now, what have we undertaken to do? A study of the basic documents reveals clearly that we have undertaken to advance the welfare of the people of Papua and New Guinea. I quote the opening sentence of Article 73 of the Charter - the first article in the chapter which establishes the principles of administration for all nonselfgoverning territories -

Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of .the inhabitants of these territories . . .

All else in the trusteeship system serves those two ends. That being so, the yardstick by which our work is to be measured is: " Does this serve the interests and promote the well-being of the inhabitants of the Territory? " The Government stresses as the first principle that the welfare of the people is the objective. That objective should never take second place to any theory or any other purpose.

The end of the trusteeship comes with self-government and independence. One point which should be recognized internationally is that political independence on its own is of limited va'lue unless the people have the capacity to use their independence to their own advantage. On the one hand this requires some preliminary training and experience in the working of the institutions of self-government and it also requires some training and experience in the tasks of administration. Because we are conscious of both .needs we are devoting ourselves to policies which will give the people training and experience in the use of all democratic institutions and which will also bring them in large numbers into the Public Service of the Territory. This work is important, partly in order that the self-governing Territory of the future will have a reasonable level of efficiency in carrying out the tasks of government, but, above all, so that the government of this independent country will be such as to command the confidence and the respect of the people whom it governs. A people may be able to blunder along without being highly efficient in government but they suffer tragically if there is not fair dealing, probity and regard for the public welfare on the part of those who attain power and a measure of trust among those who are governed.

A second requirement of self-government is that a country should be reasonably well equipped to live an orderly and well-rounded life. It is part of our trust to give to these people, not only a parliament, but also a system of law and order, institutions for the administration of justice, hospitals, schools, houses, roads, services of various kinds and the means to provide food and livelihood for the population. History shows with tragic clarity that the past failures of colonialism have been not simply the withholding of selfrule but failures to give the people the means or the capacity for living on their own.

In considering this side of our task we should first understand clearly the actual situation in New Guinea. It is a unique situation and most of the comparisons that are sometimes made between the situation in Papua and New Guinea and situations that may have existed in the past in the newly independent countries in Asia and in Africa are inexact. Except where modifications have been made as a result of the coming of Europeans, New Guinea is still almost unbelievably primitive. It was originally divided into hundreds of small groups speaking different languages and living in a state of fear and enmity towards one another. Even the racial types are greatly dissimilar. There is nothing yet even faintly resembling a sense of nationalism or sense of community over the whole Territory. There was no single religious belief and nothing in the nature of a priesthood but only the fear of the dead and the power of the sorcerer. The existence of most of the people was handtomouth from the garden and the jungle straight to the cooking pot, and, except on the occasions of preparations for a feast, there was little or no storing of food. In their primitive condition the expectation of life was short because of disease, violence and the absence of medical knowledge or hygienic practice. The country itself is made difficult by jungle, precipitous mountains, torrents and vast swamps. These facts are certainly not presented as reasons why the people should not be advanced - indeed we are setting ourselves resolutely to the overcoming of all these difficulties - but, at the present time, the world would be acting in ignorance if it did not appreciate the primitive and unique character of the conditions in the Territory and the size of the basic civilizing tasks still to be completed. The administering power and the advanced native peoples with whom it is working need time for this job.

A further point that is relevant to any international judgment is the relationship between Australia and the people of the Territory. Many commentators both here and abroad have a conventional picture in their minds of what they call a colonial situation. What we want them to do is .to look at the reality of the situation that exists in Papua and New Guinea. The situation there is that the indigenous people number nearly 2,000,000 and the immigrant population of all kinds numbers 25,000. There never has been in New Guinea a situation where the colonizing power has overthrown a previously existing system of government or a previously existing social order. Independence will mean not the restoration of a system or a community that previously existed but the establishment of something which is being newly created under our tutelage.

To this country of close upon 2,000.000 people, who lived originally in a condition of the most primitive savagery, separated from each other into hundreds of hostile groups, we have brought law and order without bloodshed. Our young Australian patrol officers - young Australians of whom we may be very proud - have done by patience, common sense and force of character what was done in some other lands with battalions of troops. We have been scrupulously careful from the beginning about the preservation of the rights of the indigenous people to their own land. To-day, over 70 years after European settlement began, 97 per cent, of the Territory's land is still in native ownership and occupation. Of the 3 per cent, of the land area alienated over 80 per cent, was acquired with consent of the native owners voluntarily given. The native people have been given the opportunity of sharing in the economic enterprise of the country both through their individual effort and through co-operative societies and today their share in economic enterprise is steadily increasing as their interest in production and their general level of progress are raised. This is a situation in which the indigenous people can and dolook upon us as people who have brought them benefits and not people who have given them cause for resentment. Thanks to the standard set by many Australians of exceptional character who have laboured in the Territory on our behalf we can find in the Territory today many instances of close trust and friendship between the indigenous people and our people.

We Australians should not only be aware of these facts but should recognize them and ask the world to recognize them as providing the conditions on which the people of the Territory can progress towards selfgovernment without the conflicts, the stress and the resentments that have made the path to independence so painful in some other lands.

The foundation of justice, friendship and mutual respect between races is one of the most precious things we have in the Territory. Let us preserve it. It is also one of the best assurances for the progress of the indigenous people. The theme which we put forward internationally is -

(a)   The welfare of the people should be the objective, not the gratification of having applied a principle or a theory.

(b)   We should ensure that political advancement leads to the welfare and happiness of the people by making sure that it is accompanied by measures for social, educational and economic advancement. At the present stage of advancement law and order, health, education and how to earn a living are the more urgent tasks.

(c)   The New Guinea situation is unique and comparisons with Africa and Asia are inapplicable.

(d)   Australia is not a colonial power in the sense in which that term is used by anti-colonial critics.

Honorable members, while they subscribe to these statements, may ask whether they will have any effect internationally. It is unfortunate but true that so many questions affecting the welfare of peoples are decided as part of a contest for world power. It is a matter of record that votes in the United Nations are not always the result of a judgment on the merits of a case, but are often cast for reasons remote from the point at issue. Nevertheless, the Government believes that there are countries in the world that will look fairly at the New Guinea situation as it is, will try to understand it as it is, and above all will make a judgment on what will be best for the people of that Territory and serve their happiness and welfare. If that kind of approach can be brought about, the Government has complete confidence in the international judgment on Papua and New Guinea. It must be our constant aim to try to bring about that kind of understanding, in the interest of the people of the Territories themselves.

I have spoken up to date of the paramountcy of the interests of the people. Let us speak plainly, too, of the Australian interest. From the point of view of Australia, in this part of the world, it is of the highest importance that we should have good relations with an independent and selfgoverning New Guinea. We have that in mind, for we are entitled to consider our own security and our own proper selfinterest. If we fail to make sound preparations for their independence - politically, administratively and economically - they may fall in the first years of their independence into such disorder and trouble that instead of being a blessing their independence will be a tragedy for them. We will be held accountable for their ills and goodwill between us will suffer. Goodwill and the good relations for which we are working will not follow if independence is based on inadequate foundations. Let both the people of New Guinea and ourselves be careful about those who would talk us into trouble by precipitate change.

I shall now turn to conditions inside the Territory. At present there is a slowly awakening interest among the more advanced of the people regarding their political future, but there is no pressure inside the Territory for far-reaching political change. There is growing interest in local government - a movement originally promoted by the Government rather than being sought by the people themselves - and we look for a considerable extension of it. The proposals which I will submit to the House later in the session for reform of the Legislative Council will give increased representation to the indigenous people, tooth in members elected by themselves and by appointed official and nonofficial native members. In shaping these proposals for the Government I had the benefit of extensive discussions with the people of the Territory and have followed closely the suggestions made to me in the Territory.

At this point I should record - and I think this statement will be supported by the Leader of the Opposition - that in the Territory in July I had meetings with the leaders of the native people - over 80 in Rabaul, 120 at Lae and several scores of people at Port Moresby - representative of and entitled to speak with certainty on behalf of all the advanced people of the Territory. With unanimity they expressed their desire for us to stay and to help them, their need for us, their wish to be in partnership with us. They rejected talk of early self-government. That was for a more distant future. They told me of their confidence in what the Government was doing.

While saying this, however, I want to repeat what 1 have said before. In the Territory we are dealing with a rapidly changing situation. We need to keep a close and acute observation of these rapid changes, and we must make certain that we do not become set in our ways. Intelligent watchfulness and flexibility are essential in the government of a society that is changing as rapidly as that in Papua and New Guinea, and I think that, as the result of the changes we propose in the Legislative Council, the directions the Government has given for the more frequent use of the native people on boards and committees and the present and prospective growth in the number of indigenous officers in the Public Service, we will have to an increasing extent the assistance of the native leaders to bring sureness of observation and readiness to make adjustments. The Government also recognizes a need to strengthen the Territorial Administration at certain key points, particularly to improve its capacity for planning and carrying out major programmes on matters on which policy has been declared.

The most pressing problems we face in the Territory at the moment are in matters such as education, land tenure, native labour, the living conditions of native people who have left their villages to congregate in towns, and economic development. There is also a need to improve the closeness of our association with the native people through extension services and community development projects. All these require and will receive increased attention from the Government. In the course of the debate on the Estimates I will endeavour to indicate some of our proposals for the immediate future, and members will also find detailed information in the " Notes for the Budget " which I am circulating to them this week.

I now turn to the domestic situation in Australia so far as it affects the Territory. I have already said that there has been a good deal of misrepresentation over recent months on matters affecting the Territory. There have been exaggerated stories, and even some untrue stories published about racial discrimination in the Territory. There have been news items and comments which, when read carelessly, have been interpreted to mean that it is only a matter of a few years before Australia gets out of the Territory. There has been no warrant for any of this. These stories have done harm by causing confusion in the minds of Australian people, by damaging Australia's position internationally and, perhaps most lamentably of all, in promoting doubt and uncertainty in the Territory itself, both among the native people and among the Australians who are working there, and who have contributed their investment and skill to the development of the Territory. Such investment and skill are of the highest importance in the Territory's progress.

Doubtless many of the statements looking to the early realization of selfgovernment, have been made with a genuine concern for advancing the interests of the people. But I fear that some of them may have been made carelessly and without a close knowledge. The situation in the Territory is not a simple one but an exceedingly complex one, and I doubt whether it is within the capacity of even the brightest of journalistic visitors to see the whole of its complexities in the matter of a week or two. In the course of these comments published in Australia, I think less than justice has been done by Australians to the Australian achievement, and a grave wrong has been done to the Australians working in the Territory.

In particular it is necessary to recognize that the rate of progress is not a policy but a circumstance. We proceed as fast as we can. We have no intention to go slowly but, if one has proper regard for the people of the country, the rate of change has to be geared to the rate of response.

Finally, may 1 summarize the main points that emerge from this rapid survey. Australia is committed by the United Nations Charter to the " political, economic, social and education advancement " of the inhabitants of Papua and New Guinea. The end of political advancement is self-government. It is for the inhabitants of the Territory to say, when the times comes, what form of government they wish to have. It is for Australia and the self-governing state of the future to work out by discussion what the relationship between them shall be after selfgovernment has been achieved by Papua and New Guinea. Australia wants the relationship to be close, friendly, direct and permanent.

Both in the present and for the future Australia looks on its work in Papua and New Guinea as being done in partnership with the indigenous people, believing that we need each other, that we can help each other, and that past history and present policy have established respect for each other's rights and brought friendship as well as justice in race relations.

The indigenous people will always be in a vast numerical majority, and Australian policy on such questions as land, the economic advancement of the people and their training in administration is intended to ensure that their rights and interests are maintained so that they can take an effective part in the progress of their own country.

Subject to this, Australia believes that the term " inhabitants " used in the United Nations Charter covers all those who have made their permanent home in the Territory. While the immigrant races permanently resident in Papua and New Guinea will always be a minority, Australian policy is to uphold the rights and the legitimate interests of that minority. Australia has rights in Papua as an Australian territory and in New Guinea by the terms of the United Nations Charter and the Trusteeship Agreement. Our policy is to inculcate and uphold respect for each other's rights and to allow no one-sided abrogation of rights. This principle is basic to advancement in civilization. We have upheld it in our treatment of the indigenous people. We will maintain it.

Before self-government can be effective in a country as primitive socially and as undeveloped economically as Papua and New Guinea is at present, considerable social changes and economic progress will be required. These changes can only be brought about by major efforts by the Australian Government in establishing and maintaining a system of law and justice, in health, education, agriculture and technical training, and by bringing the indigenous people into public administration and membership of all political institutions. In close partnership with the native people, the resources of the country have to be developed, and a diversity of industries established. Australian policy embraces all such activities.

In this political advancement the objective is that there shall be no differential treatment of races either before the law or in social custom except as may be required to discharge our commitment under the United Nations Charter " to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned . . . their just treatment and their protection against abuses ".

The Australian Governments - I emphasize the plural - have been working steadily in post-war years to apply the policy described above and will continue to work for it. As the result of this effort we can now see a firm foundation for progress by the indigenous people of the Territory.

The Government is confident that it has the support of the native people and that the big majority of the non-native people in the Territory share its outlook and are working with it. We are also aware of the fact that Papua and New Guinea is still largely primitive and that it is still a dependent territory requiring large support from outside to give it the medical, educational and technical aids it needs.

There is a tendency nowadays for some commentators to lay chief stress on political independence. We should not let the importance of political progress obscure the importance of other measures. The greatest immediate benefit to the welfare of the people in Papua and New Guinea will come through major efforts for the conquest of disease, medical care, infant welfare, schools, more and better food, and opportunity and training to earn enough to maintain higher standards of living, coupled with measures to develop the resources of the country and so lessen its economic dependence. Unless measures to these ends go alongside political change, political advancement will be only a facade that will give shelter to no one. When social, economic and political advancement take place together the political structure will endure.

One last word: We are not going out of the Territory in a hurry. In our judgment of the situation as it exists to-day, the Territory will need our help for many years to come and the advanced leaders of the indigenous people say plainly that they need us for a long time ahead. We are not going to abandon either them or our own people who are working with them.

The situation may change more rapidly than we can now foresee. We will continue to work in close partnership with the native people for their educational, social and economic advancement and there is not the least reservation in our minds that we are advancing them towards self-government. No one is better qualified than they are and we are, in partnership, to work out the successive stages of change. We believe that we have their confidence and that we will continue to deserve it. When the time for self-government comes we want to move towards the final decisions with our confidence, trust and friendship towards each other still strong and with the certainty that not only the day of independence but the long years that follow independence will give occasion for rejoicing to all of the people. Australia wants to stand with honour in the hearts of the people alongside whom we have fought and worked. We believe we shall so stand.

I lay on the table the following paper: -







Suggest corrections