Developing Australia’s North

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30947, 31 December 1965, Page 16

Developing Australia’s North

SYDNEY, Dec. 30.

Australia is a nation of people living on the fringe of a vast, empty land. One out of every two Australians lives in a capital city. Fortytwo per cent of the entire population live in just two cities.

Many people have been wondering for a long time how much longer the country can afford the luxury of ignoring its empty wastes, and there is no doubt that in 1966 there will be further campaigns waged in the war of the north—“the empty north,” “the neglected north,” “the challenging north.”

A Federal Government report recommending development in the north is at present being studied. A northern development conference, said to be one of the biggest ever held, will get under way in Sydney in the New Year, and with a Federal election not too far distant, many observers believe guns could be brought to bear on the Government.

Sceptics are already saying

that the Federal Government report on the north, which is reported to recommend spending £BO million sterling on roads and subsidies to reduce freight costs in the region is headed for the waste-paper basket. Loss of Six Seats Others, more optimistic, say the Government may have to do something as it lost six seats in Queensland in 1961, mainly because of its cold attitude towards northern development. The report, produced by a six-man committee headed by Sir Louis Loder, of Melbourne, is believed to back an £BO million expenditure programme on roads to expand the beef cattle industry in northern Queensland. Some experts say that with proper development Australia could become the world’s major supplier of beef, building up an export trade on the basis of the cheapest beef .n the world. The Queensland Treasurer, Mr T. A. Hi'ley, has already predicted that development of the north would go down as one of the major controversies of this decade. And while northern development has its adherents,, plus a “people the north committee,” there are also people like Dr. R. B. Davidson, an economist at Sydney University, who set out his views [opposing proposals in a controversial book called “The Northern Myth.” Leading Proponent The leading proponent for northern development—and the man most likely to embarrass the Federal Government—te Dr. Rex Patterson, former director of the Northern Division of the National Development Department, who will be speaking at the conference. Dr. Patterson has announced that he will contest the Federal seat of Dawson at the next elections as an

Australian Labour Party candidate, and has been downgraded in the department to a senior assistant secretary position. Broadly speaking, both those for and against agree that the only parts of Australia above the Tropic of Capricorn which can seriously be regarded as having immediate potential for development are northern Queensland and the north-western region of Western Australia, particularly around the Ord river. These areas are selected primarily because they offer the possibility of agricultural development, but more and more minerals are coming into the picture. While northern Queensland has its huge bauxite deposit and Weipa and the beef proposals, the 500,000 square miles of the north-west of Western Australia has embarked on a major pioneering programme based on cotton and iron ore. Enthusiasts say that this chunk of Western Australia—-one-sixth of Australia and 10 times the size of England and Wales—could supply the world’s needs of iron ore for more than a century, and with dam storage on the main rivers could irrigate rich black soil plains equal in area to the low countries of Europe.

Well Watered

Suprisingly enough, northern Australia is relatively well watered. It has a greater area than the rest of Australia with a mean annual rainfall of more than 20 inches, but this is under monsoonal conditions of high summer and little winter rainfall.

And for major storage purposes the area must contend with high evaporation losses.

Professor C. H. Munro, director of research in the Water Research Foundation, says: “Northern Australia has the lion’s share of Australia's water resources, awaiting development by those Australians who have inherited the pioneering spirit of their ancestors."

But coupled with the guiding principle of Mr David Fairbairn, Minister of National Development, as far as the north is concerned—“it must be economic”—a big question mark is whether enough Australians are prepared to go north. Although confident that the north is going through its greatest period of expansion, Mr Fairbairn must always have second thoughts on spending Federal money on projects in the north, w’hich, initially at least, may have small returns. “Valuable Resources” “The most important reason for developing the north is that there are resources there which are of the most tremendous value to the nation as a whole,” he said. But many Australians have noted that since 1960 more than 13,000 square miles at the top end of the northern territory have passed into the control of interests from America. Singapore. Hong Kong and the Philippines.

It is certain that the owners do not intend to settle on the land. As an investment it is a good risk for them. But for Australia, many think it is a bad policy.