The ‘instant’ kiaps of late colonial PNG
16 February 2025
PHILIP FITZPATRICK
TUMBY BAY - When I was training to be a pikinini kiap (cadet patrol officer) at the Australian School of Pacific Administration in 1967 - and had developed a more thorough understanding of what I was getting myself in for - I acquired a few reservations about the whole exercise.
Despite the semantics which distinguished Papua as an Australian territory and New Guinea as a United Nations trust territory (rather than simple colonies), I was in no doubt that Australia’s role was a colonial one with many of the features, good and bad, of similar regimes in places like Africa and Asia.
I ran this understanding past Fred Kaad, one of our more venerable lecturers, who agreed with me.
“Don’t let it put you off though,” he said. “You are going to have a front row seat seeing it all come to an end, however that might be. It will be a once-in-a-lifetime experience and you’d be mad to miss it.”
Fred was right of course. After about 1970 life in the two territories, now clearly administered as one, started to get very interesting. And by then I had fallen in love with the place and its people.
Among all the machinations of the Australian government, one of the most fascinating was the way it handled its extraction from the soon to be independent country, especially when it came to its embedded force of kiaps out in the field.
Even as independence loomed, the colonial Administration still needed to recruit field staff to exercise their many duties as well as cope with the rapid change.
By the early 1970s police powers had been withdrawn from the kiaps, with little real effect. Semantics had a big role in the exercise.
Meanwhile, field officers still had an important role in keeping the peace, building the infrastructure and educating the populous in the ways of future independence..
Cadet Patrol Officers became Assistant Patrol Officers, the inference being that their role was no longer career orientated. The Administration then began bringing in mature age recruits on short-term contracts.
Out in the bush, these folk were immediately dubbed ‘instant’ kiaps because they seemed to represent the level of desperation of the Australian government wanting the transition to independence to be smooth.
The government’s selling point revolved around the so-called life experience that these older recruits could bring to the job. That seemed a pretty dodgy idea because nothing could really prepare anyone for the kiap role.
It was also a fairly cynical exercise.
The Australian government knew that independence was on the way and it was looking at having to cough up ‘golden handshakes’ for its permanent employees at some point in the not too distant future.
The introduction of a contract system in 1963 was born out of that realisation. However, offering the kind of short-term contracts that the ‘instant’ kiaps signed up was the point where expectation was trumped by desperation.
As a contract officer who was not ‘instant’, at least I knew I had a firm contract for six years and maybe the option of extending it depending on what happened politically, which was always uncertain.
In 1967 Tom Ellis, the Western Highlands District Commissioner ,had told us we had at least 20 years, and I guess there were a few diehards who lasted that long. A lot of others bailed out around the time of independence in 1975.
Ellis’s optimism aside, the six year contract did make it possible to plan effectively and ride out the changes we all knew were coming.
A keen look-out for post-kiap roles, either in Papua New Guinea or Australia, was a good strategy though.
The ‘instant’ kiaps, however, were jumping in at the deep end. As I recall their contracts were for two years. Nevertheless some of them survived into the 1980s and did some really important work.
Those I knew seemed to experience the same cultural adjustments that earlier recruits went through so ‘life experience’ was of no particular advantage.
That was true even for recruits who had come from colonial situations in places like Africa. Others brought trade skills readily available among Papua New Guineans.
And some of them didn’t appear to bring much at all and took off home as soon as their contracts were up.
One individual I knew spent his time chasing village girls, reading books, boozing and writing fake patrol reports.
What induced these mature aged individuals to take on short term jobs in Papua New Guinea, given what they should have known about the place, would be interesting to know.
Or maybe they were just misfits like the rest of us.
Thanks for the extra detail Ross.
An interesting post from ex-kiap Ian Pattison responding to a similar post started by Paul Oates:
"In the last years of recruiting [for kiaps] the advert said 'Do you want to be a leader of men'. Almost biblical and irresistible .
"I like many others had thrown their hat into the National Service joke lottery. Having failed in joining the suicidal mission to save America, I sought some other way to ensure an untimely and painful demise and the advert called out to me.
"I had a bit of UK Grammar school sociology and anthropology courtesy of Mead and Malinowsky and had survived the culture shock of moving from UK to Australia. Perfect fit.
"Five years before and after Independence must historically rate very highly in the Years of Confusion PNG'.
"On the one side you had the old kiaps who wanted to continue to 'Tame the Savage' and us lot who appeared to have to prepare these people for Independence without a great deal of assistance. We all had to do those political patrols on how everything was going to be so much better after Independence with villagers saying, 'Bollocks'.
"I was continually ordered to return to District Office where apparently the PNG equivalent of Rourkes Rift was taking place. Duties included sandbagging and polishing the 1907 303s ...just in case!
"I persistently refused citing that I was in the process of setting up the Provincial Government single handed and training the poor buggers who were to be charged with running the show and if disciplinary action was to be taken...so be it. There were plenty of white kiaps in WNBP up to Independence and for a while after to assist the rapidly promoted local officers.
"I think I did what I was sent to do."
As Ian points out, things didn't go as smoothly as a lot of people and pollies seem to think.
Posted by: Philip Fitzpatrick | 19 February 2025 at 03:35 PM
At the risk of being called pedantic, there is a bit more to Phil’s explanation that needs some historical context and detail.
In 1884 Britain finally occupied Papua as a Protectorate and named it British New Guinea. This was only done, though, after Germany occupied the northern islands and part of the main island.
In 1902, after Australia’s Federation, British New Guinea was passed to Australian control and this move was formalised by the passing of the Territory of Papua Act in 1906 by the Australian Government.
In 1914, with the outbreak of World War One, Britain requested Australia send a military force to capture and occupy German Pacific territory and destroy its radio network. A combined navy and military force occupied and governed German New Guinea until 1921.
In 1919, at the end of the War and arising from the Paris Peace Conference, a world peace body was formed and known as The League of Nations. The League determined that it would retain responsibility for captured German territory which it called Mandates. Administrative responsibility for the management of these was allocated by the League to appropriate nations and Australia was granted the mandate for German New Guinea.
The military administration of German New Guinea ceased in 1921 and was replaced by a civilian body for Mandated New Guinea and based in Rabaul. The civilian administration for the Territory of Papua was based in Port Moresby.
In 1942, with the invasion and occupation of much of Mandated New Guinea and parts of Papua by the Japanese, in February 1942, the civilian administrations of both Papua and New Guinea were suspended and replaced by a military administrative organisation known as the Australian New Guinea Administrative Unit (ANGAU).
At the end of the Second World War the League of Nations ceased to exist and its role and responsibilities were taken over by a new world peace body, The United Nations (UN). In April 1946, ANGAU ceased to exist and a temporary civilian administrative body took control of both territories whilst a permanent solution was established.
The former League of Nations mandates became United Nations Trust Territories. Australia proposed that the single administrative model established by ANGAU be adopted as the system for both territories. So, in 1949, the Australian Government passed the Territory of Papua and New Guinea Act and created the scenario that Phil speaks about.
Whether it was intended or not, it gave the United Nations an access point of influence for the future of the Australian Territory of Papua as well as the UN Trust Territory and the concept of Independence became a vague, undated, future talking point.
In 1960, as evidence of the more probable move to Independence, the PNG public service began actively recruiting national officers including kiaps. Initial training for these kiaps was at Finschhafen but moved to Vunadidir as the size of these groups increased.
Up to 1962, recruitment for the public service was for permanent employment. For Cadet Patrol Officers, also known as “liklik kiaps” or “pikinini” kiaps, recruits had to be single and between 18 and 24 years.
As Phil infers, the Australian Government and the PNG Administration must have begun considering that long term employment could not be sustained and, in 1963, officers in the public service became contract officers with the length of contract set at 6 years. At the end of the contract period officers could have their contracts extended if they were efficient and the need for employment remained.
Between 1963 and 1967, the age bracket for recruits changed to 18 to 30 years of age but kiap recruits still had to be single men. My understanding is that during the recruitment process it was stressed to applicants that no married accommodation existed on outstations.
In 1968, the exclusion against married recruits was removed and the age bracket increased to 18 to 35 years. In my intake commencing on 24 June 1968, I am aware of at least four married officers who became kiaps.
There was a further change in 1969 when kiap recruitment was divided into two separate age brackets and different job titles for each bracket. Cadet Patrol Officers were between 18 and 27 years of age and Patrol Officers in Training between 27 and 40 years of age. It’s believed that, as older officers were leaving, more mature recruits were required who may have had different and more mature life skills to bring to the job.
Also in 1969, a change took place within the public service that may have arisen from Independence and equality discussions. All positions were designated with a local salary component. An overseas allowance component was added to raise the salary for expatriate employees to the level they enjoyed before this change.
For kiaps, a further change took place. Junior national kiaps were known as Trainee Patrol Officers for the first year of their employment and for the second year advanced to the position of Assistant Patrol Officer. Probably for the appearance of equality of role, existing Cadet Patrol Officers and future recruitment became retitled to Assistant Patrol Officer. For expatriate recruits the age bracket was altered to 20 to 40 years of age.
In 1971, the recruitment period offered for contract officers was reduced to four years in recognition of the imminence of Independence. !972 was the last year that recruitment for expatriate kiaps occurred.
I remained contracted until December 31 1981 when my family and I returned to Australia despite being offered a further contract extension. In 1974, at the end of my initial contract I gained an extension of four years. In 1978, after Independence, I gained a further extension of three years until the end of 1981.
As regards our police role, as Phil says, our Police functions were suspended in 1971 where kiaps were located in Police zones where a uniformed officer was in charge. For areas outside these zones we still retained our Police powers. This was especially so when we were allocated police to accompany our patrols and Police powers were necessary to retain control and allocate duties to these Police.
However, we all probably have different observations and recollections that vary as a result of 0ur differing circumstances and reactions to the many changes that occurred.
Posted by: Ross Wilkinson | 18 February 2025 at 10:35 PM