Report on Fiji

Mauritius Times – 70 Years

By Peter Ibbotson

A three-man commission of enquiry, headed by Sir Alan Burns (himself a former Colonial Governor), has just completed a survey of natural resources and population trends in the colony of Fiji. The commission has made a number of important recommendations regarding the future development of the colony: if these recommendations are adopted, £10.75 million will be needed as capital cost, and over half a million a year will be added to Fiji’s recurrent budget.

The commission began by contemplating the population growth in recent years and in the future. Recent population growth has been rapid; the population more than doubled between 1921 and 1956. At present the population is 375,000; by 1968 it will have reached 500,000, and by the year 2000, at the present rate increase, it will be over 1.25 million. In view of this rapid increase in population, many witnesses before the commission deposed in favour of family planning and/or birth control. Few Indians were against birth control on religious grounds:  many were in favour. The commission has therefore recommended that the Fiji Government “should provide additional family planning clinics to help and advise those parents desirous of limiting their families and that contraceptives should be provided free of charge to married persons who wish to use them.” (On religious grounds, Sir Alan Burns himself dissented from this particular recommendation.)

Before making specific recommendation about the future development and diversification of the Fijian economy, the commission made a valuable survey of the problems arising from land ownership and use in Fiji. This survey demonstrated the possible basis of racial tension between the Fijians and the Indians. At present each race comprises just under half the total population; but within a year or two the Indians will begin to outstrip the Fijians, and by 1966 will form a small, but definite, absolute majority of the population.

Historically the land in Fiji belongs to the Fijian people, and Fijian ownership is specifically guaranteed under the deed of session of 1874. The only land not guaranteed is Crown Land and land which in 1874 was already the freehold of non-Fijians. Theoretically, some areas are being designated as native reserves, and land outside these designated reserves can be leased to non-Fijians; but in practice the process of designation is dilatory in the extreme. In consequence there is land-hunger among the non-Fijians.

The Fijians themselves do not use all their land; large areas lie undeveloped; 84 percent of the total area of the colony is, in fact, Fijian-owned; of the 3.75 million acres in Fijian ownership, only 230,000 acres are leased to Indians whose freehold holdings total only 75,830 acres and who lease only another 120,000 acres from the Crown and other freeholders. The Fijians do not fully use all their land; in many cases land which was under cultivation before being designated as reserved land has, since it reverted to native occupation, ceased to be cultivated and has reverted to bush.

Responsible Fijian leaders themselves are aware of the dangers of Fijian reserved land being seen to lie waste. Where useful land is unused can hardly be said to be needed by the Fijians, as Sir Lala Sukuna said in the Legislative Council in 1940. “Land owners have duties as well as rights. Travel the country and you will see small patches of native cultivation here, large stretches of unused land there, further on more scratchings. Is the native, is anyone, justified in holding up large tracts of land in an agricultural country with a quickly growing population?”

Accordingly, the commission recommends that leases of land should be freely available to members of all races. Agricultural leases should be for a term of 60 years (99 where tree crops are to be planted); leases should possibly be put up for auction. Owners of land, whether freehold or communally-owned, should be taxed in respect of land capable of being used, which is not adequately used. This last recommendation is very important; it will ensure the highest possible degree of land-use and productivity.

After this basic recommendation designed to increase total productivity potential, the commission goes on to make a variety of recommendations about diversification or intensification of the colony’s economy. Among them the following are of particular importance:

Productivity per acre of sugar should be increased, and the crop grown as an integral part of a mixed farming system. Confidence in the coconut industry must be restored; tax concessions and Government help are necessary if re-planting is to be stimulated. Better quality copra must be produced: the Development Fund Board must encourage expenditure on hot-air dryers. In areas within easy reach of Suva, so as to make use of export facilities and advantages, banana growing must be encouraged. New crops envisaged are tea and coffee — tea on Vanua Levu, coffee (Robusta, not Arabica) as a peasant crop with the whole family helping with the picking.

Many recommendations are made which are designed to increase and improve husbandry. These include measures to prevent soil erosion and overgrazing: river control; pasture improvement; agricultural subsidies for fertilizers and fencing; increase grants for agricultural education facilities; and an investigation of local phosphate deposits to reduce dependence on imported fertilizers. To encourage the local timber industry, it is proposed that medium-sized sawmills be established.

Although Fiji must almost inevitably remain an agricultural colony, certain reforms of industrial enterprise are possible. For example, encouragement should be given to mining various materials, and tax concessions should be given for new mining ventures. The Colonial Development Corporation should be invited to participate in setting up a fish canning factory, and a Fisheries Division of the Department of Agriculture should be established.

The traditional extravagant social organisation of Fijian society is criticised, and the financing of the recommendations is placed squarely on Fijian shoulders. “The fact remains that ultimately, if Fiji is to stand on her own feet, an increase in internal savings by individuals will be necessary.” Here, as with land tenure and use, there will have to be considerable rethinking by Fijians if they do not wish their country to sink into economic stagnation.

African Colonial World

7th Year – No 300
Friday 27th May, 1960

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 4 April 2025