Plug for private interests

Press, 15 January 1986, Page 4

Plug for private interests

By.

PETER O’HARA,

NZPA staff correspondent

London “The Times” delivered a plug yesterday for private interests who want to exploit Antarctic resources. The influential newspaper raised the role of private enterprise as it scoffed at establishment critics of a British expedition, which reached the South Pole on foot on Saturday but whose support ship was crushed by ice and sank.

Noting that 18 Antarctic Treaty nations can put proposals in 1991 for the potentially “enormous” commercial development of the region, and the existence at the moment of a voluntary moratorium even on mineral exploitation, “The Times” said:

“The merciful escape of

the crew of the Southern Quest, coupled with the other good news that their gallant three walkers made the trip successfully, ought to achieve one positive thing, and even the scientists cannot gainsay it.

“It will focus the world’s attention on its most inhospitable corner, and remind us that we have decisions to make in the next five years. And who can say that private enterprise needs to be frozen out?”

“The Times” said exploration had “always been seen as the purview of a jealously-guarded inner circle.”

“No major expedition is ever pursued outside that network without criticism from within the club about ‘amateurs’ and ‘ill-founded, ill-funded or ill-supported

projects. “Scientists imply that the unknown is too important, too dangerous and too sophisticated to be left to any one but themselves, and justify their criticism when things go wrong.” “The Times” added: “On this occasion they have had half an opportunity to get in with their complaints (thankfully there was nothing that gave them greater apparent vindication).” But, it said, the expedition was “carefully researched, planned and supported; the fact that the back-up ship was in touch, and that not a single injury was sustained, is evidence enough of that.” The newspaper said the American helicopter lift of the stricken ship’s crew “must have provided an ex-

citing interlude in what is the endlessly heavy-going monotony of Antarctica. It was better than an exercise, and it worked.” It said there had been questions about the scientific relevance of the expedition. But the “scientific components ... were all there.” “As an integral part of the project, they ranged from testing physical and mental stress to trying out British products in extreme conditions.” The newspaper asked: “Could the nub of the matter be that this was not only a ‘private’ expedition, but that it was funded under the patronage of such meaningful names as Scott and Shackleton by ‘private enterprise’?”