Niugini Eco-Tourism Services - Scammers and Fradulent Travel Agents

March 4, 2013, 8:04 pm

By Mariël Lancee

I am writing this blog in English because I want the whole world to know about this deceiving travel agent based in Mt. Hagen in Papua New Guinea.
After living for 2 ½ years Port Moresby in PNG it was time I discovered a bit of the remote areas in this country. Until then I had only visited various tropical islands which was a very nice experience. For going to remote areas, I decided to do a Sepik tour with a friend and found online the travel agent Niugini Eco Tourism Services: http://www.png-tourism.com/. A very nice website and easy to find the trip you want. We chose the adventurous ‘Upper Sepik River Tour’.
On 18 February 2013 I asked them for a price quote and the email correspondence with Daniel Stanley went very smooth. On 19 February I told Daniel we wanted to be sure to be booked in the In Wewak Boutique Hotel, because we heard from other people that the other hotels/guesthouses were of poor quality (in the trip itinerary they promote on the website, you spend the first and last night in this beautiful hotel). Daniel answered positively the same day. The next day Wednesday 20 February I did the payment of 8840 kina for two persons (= € 3.322,00 / US$ 4.194,00 / AUS$ 4110,00) and sent them a copy of the deposit slip.
After that I didn’t hear anything from Niugini Eco Tourism Services. On Tuesday 26 February I sent Daniel an email with the question if all the bookings were confirmed. No answer. Then I got a bad feeling and started googeling and what a shame! All over the internet this travel agent with the owner Ben Nickintz / Ben Nikints was mentioned as a scam/fraud etc. The scam already started before 2006: tourists from USA/Europe arrived in Wewak and the In Wewak Boutique Hotel was not booked. They ended up in a rundown cheap guesthouse or they had to pay again for a room. And that is something you don’t want in PNG, because it is not an easy country to travel in.
After reading the stories on the web, I called the In Wewak Boutique Hotel. They informed me that: “due to outstanding bills, they cannot accept any booking of Niugini Eco Tourism Services anymore”.
I went to the bank and see if could undo the payment; the branch manager of the bank in Mt. Hagen contacted Ben Nickintz, the owner of the travel agent and the account. Nickintz told him before doing a refund, he first wanted to talk with us. As he did not contact me, I sent an email to Daniel that I would like to cancel the booking and was looking forward to a refund as soon as possible. He answered me that we would get a refund according the terms and conditions of cancellation. This was pretty strange because he sent me a link which cannot be found on their website, nor was it working in the link which was added to the invoices.
I sent Ben an email in which I asked him for a 100 % refund, because he didn’t yet make any costs on behalf of us. This was part of his answer:
“We have been sending tourists to Boutique hotel in numbers over 100s. We owe them only a K1200-K1300. I’m not sure of the exact amount which we accidently paid into a wrong account. After recouping the money from the bank we did not pay into their account again due to xmass and New year holidays where I was abroad. Now they are labeling us as some kind of criminals. This is very funny. My staff Daniel has been emailing them for the outstanding invoice and no one at the hotel has been responding…… I am pretty sure you will not get your full refund but certain percents as indicated in the booking guidelines”.
I answered him that I disagreed with the explanation of the refund because we explicitly asked for this hotel before paying the bill. The reason for not booking this hotel is his responsibility and not ours. Further, I told him if I didn’t have proof that the money was refunded before Tuesday 9.00 am, I would use all my contacts in PNG to expose the unfair practices by him and that this would have all the publicity consequences a tourist operator in PNG does not wish.
Yesterday morning I got another email from Ben, part of the email:
“My understanding is that you cancelled this trip within that 14 days prior
to tour commencing days. You cancelled the tour on the 28th Feb 2013 which
means that you cancelled the tour 10 days before the tour actually started.
This now means that you have to come on this tour at all cost or you will
loss 100% of the payment. I will do my best to book you two at Wewak
Boutique Hotel. I will also put all my best effort to ensure Cyril offers
you the best tour in Sepik River. I will also ensure extra security measures
are in place. This I will do at no additional cost.
After the tour if you are dissatisfied I promise you I will make a 50%
refund. I think I am being fair on you with these propositions. Please
revert to me asap on this matter so I can start making all the land
arrangements”.
Promises, promises, he probably cannot make, because clearly the In Wewak Boutique Hotel doesn’t want to do business with him anymore (which I understand).Our husbands sent him another mail today with the request to refund the money:
“Two European women travelling to the Sepik is not an easy trip and should from the beginning feel good. After having read some of the e mail correspondence between my wife, Daniel and you we do not feel comfortable that this trip will be made in the conditions wished. I kindly ask your cooperation in cancelling this trip and as a gesture of your good intentions reimburse the amount for which you have not yet committed costs”.
After 7 years abroad in less developed countries and at least a hundred bookings on the internet, for the first time I am a victim of a scam. I feel deceived and can’t forgive myself for not checking the internet before payment. On the other side, I am lucky that I live in Port Moresby and could easily contact the hotel and of course we are not going. Imagine (as quite a lot of tourists unfortunately already experienced), you come from the USA or Europe after 30 hours of travelling and nothing is booked.
As Ben did not pay the refund today I will take further steps. I will do anything within my reach to get my money back. Nature wise PNG is one of the last pearls on earth. The PNG Tourism Promoting Authority is trying to get more tourists to this country. But as there are not many travel agents in PNG who organize this kind op trips, I think they first have to get rid of fraudulent deceiving persons like Ben Nickintz / Ben Nikints.
If, after reading this, you still want to book with Niugini Eco Tourism Servcis, please read the links below. He already had a few businesses under different names, but every time the same owner Ben Nickintz / Ben Nikints. Unfortunately we were not the first and probably not the last people who got deceived. Be aware, he is operating under different names all leading to the same website: http://www.png-tourism.com/. Don’t book on this site! As soon as we got our money back, I will remove this blog.
Read here the stories of other victims of Niugini Eco Tourism Services:

↧

Wake up to yourselves PNG

March 5, 2013, 1:08 pm

≫ Next: 2012 Elections was a systemic failure

≪ Previous: Niugini Eco-Tourism Services - Scammers and Fradulent Travel Agents

By Susan Merrell

In the past week, PNG Blogs has given voice to:

•The first issue of Sovereign Bonds
•The latest on the controversial deep water mining (Solwara)
•Witch burning - both news and analysis
•News and analysis of the 'Unitech saga'
•Serious allegations of corruption within the Central Supply and Tenders Board. (CSTB)
•A tell-all (?) exposé about Susan Merrell (who?)

Some of those articles have made it onto the site's "Most Popular" list (right hand side, under the comments), such as articles on witch burning, the CSTB and Unitech.

Also deemed worthy by readers are a couple of older efforts about how Belden Namah is acquitting himself as opposition leader and what issues he's tackling in parliament. Peter O'Neill also gets a guernsey with an article about his curious immigration decisions (fugitives welcomed, professionals deported). And of course no 'Most Popular' list would be complete without something about PNGs collective sporting obsession, Rugby League.

With all of the subjects on the list of 'Most Popular' being so vital to the interests and well being of the nation of Papua New Guinea, why, oh why, are none the top-billed article?

Instead, the top-ranked, 'Most Popular' article (and you all put it there) is a factually incorrect, self-indulgent, jealous rant of a self-styled expert with absolutely no authority and very limited knowledge - speaking on a subject that should be of little interest to anyone – Susan Merrell.

The article is a blight on the landscape and an insult to all the other bloggers who are tackling the real issues.

Keep focussed PNG. Your country needs you.

↧

2012 Elections was a systemic failure

March 5, 2013, 3:00 pm

≫ Next: The World's 'Third Worst' Firm Runs Manus

≪ Previous: Wake up to yourselves PNG

NEWS.COM.AU

AUSTRALIA'S last-minute surge of support for Papua New Guinea's 2012 election stopped what would otherwise have been "an even larger failure", says corruption watchdog Transparency International PNG (TIPNG).

A recent report by TIPNG says 21 per cent of polling place observers said the process was unfair or very unfair, while 45 per cent said it was mostly fair.

"These numbers are troubling," the report said.
"No Election commission should see it as acceptable that in 45 per cent of polling places observers found elections were only mostly fair.

"A large number of people appear to be disenfranchised as a result of roll inaccuracy and possibly wrongful removal from the roll. This brings into question if the will of the people was truly expressed."
Just 37 per cent of election observers reported that the process was very fair.

TIPNG sent 282 election observers around PNG for the 2012 election, double the number it sent for the 2007 election.

The report says Australia's support of on-time elections in the form of logistical aid was a sign the system had failed.

"Surely in what was PNG's 37th year of independence we must regard the fact that our former colonial master had to again step in with major logistical support is a sign of major systemic failure," the recently published report said.

"There should be no doubt that the last minute 'surge' in support provided by the Australian Civilian Corp (ACC) averted what would otherwise have been a larger failure."

The report also expressed TIPNG's concern at the "highly variable" application of the secret ballot, with 36 per cent of observations saying there was never or only sometimes secret voting.

In the Highlands region 60 per cent of polling observations reported there was little or no secret voting.

During the elections AAP witnessed children voting in the Highlands town of Tari, while in another incident a police officer told of how a mother and breastfeeding baby were given two ballots so she and the child could vote.

The near-term run-up to the PNG elections were also chaotic.

For a year leading up the election the nation was locked in a political and legal battle between parliamentary elected PM, Peter O'Neill, and the court's choice, Sir Michael Somare.

Former deputy prime minister and now opposition leader Belden Namah led the charge to delay the elections on behalf of Highlands MPs who expressed dissatisfaction with the electoral roll.

Mr O'Neill, who following the election was returned to power at the head of a massive 94-strong coalition, briefly supported the delay but backed off following a massive public protest and international outcry.

At the time the TIPNG report was compiled there were 104 court challenges against the election results for 83 electorates.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/png-2012-poll-systemic-failure-observers/story-e6frfkui-1226590960986#ixzz2MhypgcgP

↧

The World's 'Third Worst' Firm Runs Manus

March 7, 2013, 1:30 pm

≫ Next: Border markers missing: PNG Official

≪ Previous: 2012 Elections was a systemic failure

By WENDY BACON

Last week detainees on Manus Island reported acute water shortages. Who is responsible for sanitation? Wendy Bacon investigates G4S, the notorious company contracted to operate the facility

Asylum seekers on Manus Island say their hopes were crushed by visits from the Minister for Immigration Brendan O’Connor and his shadow, Scott Morrison last week.

The visits took place during six days of water shortages which left toilets overflowing. Some 274 detainees, including 34 children and six pregnant women, were unable to shower or wash in the hot humid conditions.

Neither politician took time to carefully investigate the conditions in the camp, in which the detainees have been imprisoned for months.

Minister O’Connor told AAP after his visit that he disagreed with the United Nation Refugee Agency’s recent report that conditions are"harsh or oppressive" and described them as "adequate" for a "temporary facility". Detainees told the Refugee Action Coalition (RAC) this week that "we told him everything about the facilities here and the lack of water". A spokesperson for the minister said that he did have some concerns about lack of books for children and the crowded sleeping arrangements.

Detainees told the RAC that Morrison spent 15 minutes inspecting the compound and five minutes talking to them. They say they told him about lack of water, electricity, air-conditioning, proper medical facilities including any access to emergency treatment and the problems being experienced by pregnant women. "We told him that we sleep in wet beds and about the mice and snakes," the RAC was told. They did not see him visit the toilets.

The despair and conditions on Manus were less dramatic than the desperate scenes that would have greeted O’Connor and Morrison had they visited Nauru, where there are daily chanting protests. Between 20 and 30 asylum seekers are on a hunger strike and some have been so for up to 17 days. Of these, eight have sewn their lips together, four have been hospitalised on Nauru and one evacuated to Australia.

Following the politicians’ visit to Manus, a 17-year-old Tamil girl attacked her body with a plastic knife after hearing news that a fellow asylum seeker friend on the mainland is going to school. While she suffered no serious physical injury, it was a sign of severe mental distress. Even those detainees who have been motivated to write stories say their hopes for freedom and an education are subsiding into a deep depression for which there is no treatment apart from counselling which they do not find helpful.

Their depression, which psychiatrists have repeatedly warned is produced by indefinite detention, is exacerbated when toilets overflow and there is no water for showers and washing in the stifling humid conditions that have left beds and tents sodden. This was the situation when the politicians visited.

O’Connor visited the camp on 25 February. On Sunday 24 February, there was no water for washing purposes between 10pm and 7am. On Wednesday 27 February, water ran out twice for hours at a time and on Thursday there was no water for six hours. This is not the first time water and power have been cut off during the long hot wet season on Manus Island. Even when the water flows, asylum seekers have only limited access to showers and must wash at scheduled times.

New Matilda does not know if O’Connor saw the toilets but a spokesperson for the minister who accompanied him said that she did not inspect them and used toilets elsewhere. No media were allowed to accompany the politicians.

In such a hot wet climate, one would expect that plenty of fresh water supplied by tanks on Manus Island. But there are no tanks at the camp.

When the decision was made to reopen Manus, the Australian Government knew that there was no fresh water. This had been one of many serious problems with the camp when it operated for two years under the Howard government. So it is not surprising that there have been continual complaints about the supply and quality of water since the camp reopened.

New Matilda asked DIAC for information about how the water is supplied and what is causing the breakdowns.

A spokesperson for DIAC told New Matilda:

"The department has ensured appropriate water supply solutions for the Manus regional processing centres, including harvesting of seawater through three Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Units (ROWPUs). The garrison service provider provides several trained ROWPU operators dedicated to the management and maintenance of the ROWPUs."

The "garrison" sounds like a military term but is in fact a reference to G4S, the world’s biggest security firm that operates the camp. G4S is being paid $80 million by the Australian Government to operate the detention centre until October. Part of that contract includes the provision of water, which in Australia would be supplied by a public utility. As DIAC explained: "The contracted garrison service provider is responsible for managing water production vs consumption and applying appropriate water restriction measures if and when applicable."

What this means is that DIAC has left it up to G4S, a profit-making company, to decide how much water the detainees get each day and to apply restrictions if and when it wants.

DIAC also said, "the standards of water facilities and amenities in the Manus regional processing centre are in line with the living standards and amenities for local PNG residents on Manus Island." According to the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, only 10 per cent of Manus’s 50,000 residents have access to safe water and adequate sanitation which why there are outbreaks of diarrhea, cholera and typhoid on the island.

G4S received worldwide publicity last year when it failed to deliver on its contract to supply sufficient security guards for the London Olympics. Recently, it was voted the third worst company in the world in awards presented at the World Economic Forum in Davos by Public Eye, a project run by Berne Declaration and Greenpeace Switzerland. After the announcement, G4S rejected the claims made by its critics but the accusations continue.

Only last week, G4S’s heavy involvement in Israeli prisons led to a protest outside its headquarters in London after Palestinian Arafat Jaradat died after allegedly being tortured in a prison where the company provides security services. G4S is also involved in other Israeli prisons including al Jalame interrogation centre where children have been locked in solitary confinement for as long as 65 days.

G4S security guards were also detaining Angolan refugee Jimmy Mubenga when he died during a forced deportation flight from the UK in 2010. The Home Office and G4S initially said Mubenga had been taken ill on the flight. However, a Guardian investigation found witnesses who said Mubenga complained of difficulty breathing while being restrained by G4S guards, shouting "they are going to kill me".

Speaking during a House of Lords debate in which he criticised the decision not to charge the guards, an ex-Inspector of Prisons, Lord Ramsbothom spoke of an earlier case: "There had been stringent criticisms by the coroner in the case of Gareth Myatt, a 15-year-old who died in Rainsbrook secure training centre following the use of similar procedures for restraint by G4S guards," he said. "He, too, had called out that he could not breathe before he died."

According to a report in the Daily Mail in 2012, G4S paid no tax last year on its $279 million UK earnings.

G4S’s current job on Manus Island is similar to its other thousands of contracts around the world. It aims to deliver on its contract, including the production of water, while minimising costs and making a profit. Its chosen ROPWU units are designed for military or disaster purposes for temporary use when there is no clean water available. The units are powered by diesel which has to be imported. When they break down, as they periodically do, there is no water until they are fixed. All drinking water is supplied by plastic bottle, the current brand being Kakadu Kanteen.

New Matilda asked G4S’s Australian branch a number of questions about the water on Manus Island on Tuesday to which it said it would respond shortly. Answers had not been received at time of publication. Answers will be posted after they are received.

New Matilda asked DIAC if G4S could penalised for breaching its contract for failing to supply adequate water. DIAC said that it does not answer questions about potential breaches of contract.

In January, Humanitarian Research Partners (HRP), an NGO that specialises in human rights research, sent a detailed report to the Minister for Immigration, then Chris Bowen, the Minister for the Environment and Sustainability, the National Water Board and the Water Ombudsman detailing its concerns that the failure to provide safe and adequate supply of water was a breach of human rights, including several United Nations Human Rights conventions.

HRP Director Ben Pynt told New Matilda that he received letters from the Board and the Ombudsman telling "us that were concerned at the issues but it would be more appropriate to go the directly to Minister". He has received no reply at all from the ministers so he sent the report to O’Connor again last week, specifically asking for an explanation of why no back-up water systems has been provided for the ROWPUs which can breakdown.

Pynt argues that temporary large tanks for fresh water are often used in refugee camps when no permanent tanks are available. They are easy to transport and not expensive. The reason why no one can given him an explanation could be because the government has outsourced its decision-making power over the water supply to G4S.

Pynt said:

"It’s really quite negligent on the government’s behalf not to put any back-up systems that are cheap and really simple in place. It’s a clear violation of the right to water and right to health of these vulnerable people who are in detention … we are of opinion that it is cruel and inhuman punishment as covered by the Anti-Torture Convention.Within a month people can go from fairly stable state of mind to uncontrollable anguish and a lot of that has to do with indefinite detention and a lot of that is to do with the physical conditions in which they are being processed."

HRP are currently trying to find ways of holding the Government responsible and making "sure they understand what they are doing and what effect it can have on people". During the Rudd Labor government, Australia said it would sign the option protocol of the Torture Convention which would allow individual complaints to be made, but this has not occured.

After his visit, Opposition immigration spokesperson Scott Morrison expressed some "reservations” about the state of the detention centre, raising the possibility a Coalition government could seek to shut the facility down or construct a permanent one. DIAC told New Matilda that it had no knowledge of plans for a permanent facility. A spokesperson for the shadow minister said that he had inspected a possible site on the island when he was on Manus Island last week.

So the asylum seekers are left with no idea of what is going to happen to them other than that they will continue to live in these conditions. It must be scarce comfort to know that although O’Connor found the conditions to be adequate, Greens Immigration spokesperson Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, the UN, the Refugee Council, HRP, Amnesty and many other human rights organisation consider the Government’s treatment of them to be harsh and mentally and physically punishing.

The latest person to want to investigate complaints for herself is Australia’s Human Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs. But the Government has advised her that she cannot go to the island to verify complaints although she does have the power to investigate them from Australia. This is despite the centres being set up for Australia, operated by private providers according to contracts negotiated in Australia and paid for with Australian taxpayers’ money.

Part of the aim of having the detention centres offshore is to avoid Australia’s responsibilities under its own human rights bodies and international conventions. It may be, however, that Triggs will not need to visit Manus to establish that failure to provide adequate water is a denial of human rights.

This article was first published by NEW MATILDA on the 7th of March 2013

↧

Border markers missing: PNG Official

March 10, 2013, 3:08 pm

≫ Next: PNG Leaders lack integrity

≪ Previous: The World's 'Third Worst' Firm Runs Manus

Monuments along the country’s international land border with Indonesia are deteriorating, Department of Western national agency coordinator Richard Aria says.

He said the national government had ignored the international border monuments by not funding for their maintenances.

“We have more than 50 monuments, some still remain as cement markers and it is hard to locate them without the use of GPS devices,” he said.

Aria said the border posts run from Wutung in West Sepik on the meridian 141 and alter at the Fly River bulge then across the remote mountains and down the swamplands to the mouth of Torasi River in Western.

“The monuments on the border are deteriorating, nobody knows the divide,” he said.

“It’s very confusing because we have the local villagers on the border, and the monuments will signal to them to be officially recognised as Papua New Guineans.

“When the monuments deteriorated at Torasi area, the Indonesians built a new sign board and put their flags 30m east into the PNG side.”

Aria said the monuments are the national icons of the country, and they played a vital role in identifying the two countries’ border.

“We have a couple of concerns, in the Fly Bulge, high flooding and sedimentation have covered the two monuments – MM10 and MM11,” he said.

He praised the Western government for its support in maintaining the monuments.

The National questioned the acting secretary of Foreign Affairs Lucy Bogari during a media briefing on Tuesday in Daru about the government’s ignorance in maintaining the monuments. Bogari responded: “We’ve got plans in place to be approved by the NEC.”

“I want to reaffirm that we have officials from the provincial affairs here to ensure that the monuments are visible.”

She added that the government would replace the monuments that had disappeared or were barely visible.

“You can be assured, the monuments will be developed with PNG flags flying high on them,” Bogari said.

Island Business

↧

PNG Leaders lack integrity

March 11, 2013, 3:40 pm

≫ Next: Give power plants to super-funds

≪ Previous: Border markers missing: PNG Official

IT has become patently obvious that some of our national leaders are taking advantage of their positions as policy makers and the legislators of this land.

Whenever we hear of parliamentarians involved in deals between the state and big businesses, the ever-present shadow of corruption seems to loom large.
Have we ever asked ourselves why many members live lavish lifestyles after they have been elected to office?

If they were men of wealth and power before parliament, how their riches seem to have increased manifold.
How many, if not all of them, entered office as individuals of modest means, but have somehow become the clichéd “overnight millionaire”?

Do we stop to question their conduct in a way that does not rely on the “what’s in it for me” attitude?
Have we stopped to really ponder why the culture on self-enrichment and placing oneself ahead of the greater good seems to be a significantly accurate epithet for leadership in this country?

This may not be true for all our nation’s leaders but it is close to reality for a good number of our MPs.
No one (rich, poor, educated, semi-literate, self-professed churchmen, traditionalists, idealists and basically all manner of men) seems to be immune to the temptation of misusing public monies, especially when the there is a perceived sense of entitlement that offsets unethical and immoral conduct.

As difficult as it may be given, the low rate of convictions and successful cases against our elected representatives by the leadership tribunals and the Ombudsman Commission, our leaders are still left to their own devices when it comes to disbursing and directing funding.

Perhaps another reason why our leaders are wont to fall prey to the largesse is the inordinate amount of money they are allocated for their electorates.
Currently, the amount stands at K10 million. That means through the course of a term, which lasts five years, an MP has at his disposal at least K50 million.

The use of that money is discretionary and the check and balance to account for its use are the annual acquittals that members are, by law, expected to make.
Have we ever asked ourselves what qualifications and proper training do our leaders possess to be able to effectively use such allocations?

It is safe to say that a minority have their books in order when the inquisitor comes knocking.
But that seems to be the problem.

The application and policing of standards, particularly in relation to the use of public money, is poor.
How else can we explain the lack of sustainable development and change within our electorates?
It has often been quipped that these slush funds that MPs are given yearly are nothing more than the perks of being in office.

Imagine that, there is already an entrenched mentality, covert in most cases but none the less insidious, regarding how people in this country consider what is proper and acceptable conduct when it comes to the use of taxpayers’ money.

The question that faces now on a daily basis is can we, as individuals, families and communities, act to address this problem?
As the old adage says, we must “practice what we preach” and live our lives consistent with those tenets.
If we want to eradicate corruption, then, we must not tolerate it anywhere and anytime.

It is a hard road to take and, being human, we are bound to fail repeatedly.
But, if we continuously set high standards of conduct and enforce them diligently, then, we can eventually change our collective mindset.

Of course, the drive to change may not necessarily come from within; there has been a school of thought that to ensure best practices are consistently met, we need to have an external influence, hence the need for cooperation and collaboration with other countries that have the track record and proven methods to get the best results in administration and governance.

This may not always sit well with our nationalistic views and mores but we can only see the tangible results and judge if the steps we have taken are worth the trade-off.

Given where this nation is at present, and where it could be with a better attitude and direction, the sacrifices will be worth it in the long run.

OP-ED

↧

Give power plants to super-funds

March 12, 2013, 2:09 pm

≫ Next: PNG learning not to count all its LNG chickens before they hatch

≪ Previous: PNG Leaders lack integrity

THERE is talk of a plan to build a new 40 megawatt power plant in Port Moresby to complement the electricity supplied by the PNG Power Rouna hydro scheme, its diesel generated plants and those supplied by the private Kanudi power plant.

Word on the grapevine is that there has been a great deal of interest shown by companies, both from within and outside, vying to build the plant.
To our mind, the government must take a long-term view on the issue of who is engaged to provide services to Papua New Guinea.

It is true that there is a lot of interest in building a power plant for Port Moresby because there is a big market for it. It would be a profitable venture.
The same interest would not be shown if the tenders were out for a power plant for Banz in Jiwaka or Bogia in Madang, Maprik in East Sepik or any of the other small townships around the country.

Yet, these places need provision of power, perhaps more so than those places which already have access to power supply.
So those companies which show an interest in one place must be able to also, if required, build in the smaller and less profitable places.

Only the state can undertake those services provision in these areas and, if it were to be awarded to a private group, it would take a very unique team with a longer term view and not just quick short-term
profits.

Such a team would have to put up a lot of money upfront but be prepared to wait longer for the money to be returned and for profit to be made.

It would take a team which believed that the initial provision of services to far flung areas would create excitement and stimulate economic growth, which would in time expand the customer base for the service and in the end return a profit. Such a team can be put together if the superannuation funds could be convinced to be involved in these ventures.

The funds are cashed up. If the investment fits their investment guidelines and if their separate boards can be convinced to put up the money, such an entity could well provide the government with a very powerful group that could undertake the provision of power, water and telephony services in towns and cities as well as elsewhere in the country.

Our proposal would be to pit together the combined resources of private sector workers’ Nasfund, the public officers Nambawan Supa, the Defence Force Retirement Benefits fund and even draw in other funds such as the Teachers Savings and Loans and the Police Savings and Loans to form a mega service providing company.

This would, if the various acts could allow for such a entity to be created, provide the entity that would form the pincher movement to advance against the chronic lack of services and under-development in
PNG.

Workers funds in the region has build up neighbouring Singapore, Malaysia and many of the other Asian tigers. Service provision in this country is quite unique. It costs a lot of money. Service has to be extended to many parts of the country, in most parts it would be quite uneconomical for businesses operating purely for profit.

All providers of essential services such as water, power and telephony services among others would need to be in there for the long term. That is why right from the start it is important that there is no one off knee jerk reaction to appoint companies willy-nilly for this project of that.

Companies must show long term commitment; that they are willing to go in for the profitable urban based services as well as the less profitable rural based infrastructure.

Only a group made up of local players with the reach, the cash and the long-term view ought to be selected.
We believe such a team should be headed by the superannuation funds The money spent or earned gets to remain in-country.

OP/ED

↧

PNG learning not to count all its LNG chickens before they hatch

March 14, 2013, 4:21 pm

≫ Next: PNG Supporting West Papua's Indepencence

≪ Previous: Give power plants to super-funds

By ROWAN CALLICK

There's a common view around, even in Australia where after all these years people really should know better, that mining is merely about digging stuff up and shipping it to eager buyers.

Those who think this may well also believe that “attracting” miners is a redundancy: that there's a load of mining money around, and the trick is to choose the best, fight off the rest, and then regulate them sufficiently to make sure they don't utterly destroy the environment, and take off without having paid any taxes.

Our closest neighbour, Papua New Guinea, offers a good insight as to how difficult it can be to build and maintain a mining industry, and how relatively easy it can be to lose one.

Independent PNG, like Australia today, has been substantially built on its resources industry. About 80 per cent of its export earnings comes from resources -- chiefly, until liquefied natural gas kicks in in a couple of years, from minerals.

The big persisting dangers for PNG include spending the money before it's been earned and thus building debt; the usual Dutch disease challenge of preventing resources from crushing the rest of the economy, especially agriculture, which is by far the chief employer; and, of course, debilitating battles between rival groups over the spoils.

The dominant source of this revenue -- and by far the biggest taxpayer in the country -- has in recent years been Ok Tedi Mining.

Recently we've seen the newly elected government ban Ross Garnaut from entering PNG, while he was the chairman of Ok Tedi, and effectively direct pressure on BHP Billiton, which had set up a trust to run the mine, to accede to the changing of the constitutional arrangements that hold substantial dividends back until the mine closes, and also constrain government access to the funds available now for local development.

Finance Minister James Marape has this month sought to redirect some of those funds, which have recently been used to buy boats and aircraft for local use, to a new lobby group.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are now coming into play in this dispute, as the government places pressure on Ok Tedi in one area after another, including the ultimate sanction of refusing to allow an extension of the mine after its approvals end this year.

Then a new operator could be invited in. But from where?

Although copper is today's most sought-after mineral, there is not a long list of aspirants. A Chinese buyer is probably most likely. But with Ramu Nickel, operated by Chinese government corporation MCC, enjoying a 10-year tax holiday, this will mark the starting point in any negotiation with Beijing. Just 100km from Ok Tedi lies another huge copper/gold resource, Frieda River. But unfortunately for PNG, this is mostly owned by Xstrata, which eventually completed just before Christmas, after some postponements, a feasibility study, but which is destined for imminent merger with Glencore.

And Glencore will not want a bar of even such a vast, promising resource as Frieda. Its chief executive Ivan Glasenberg, who will head the merged entity, said last week: "We are afraid of greenfields," which are risky and have capital overruns, and have deals "which kill the NPV (net present value) on those projects".

Glasenberg is a trader not comfortable with waiting five years for a return. The Xstrata-Glencore merger is awaiting approval from regulators in China, which could prove a beneficiary with the promising greenfields Frieda project coming into play.

Brisbane-based Highlands Pacific, a minor partner at Ramu and Frieda, and also an explorer with promising assets close to Ok Tedi, is looking on with hope mingled with anxiety.

Besides these tangles, PNG is fortunate in having landed the firm focus of Newcrest, the world's third-largest goldminer. Half of Newcrest's resources now lie in PNG, and the firm has the technical and strategic skills, the capital, and crucially, the combination of commitment and understanding of how PNG operates, to realise those assets steadily.

The bottom line for PNG is that its government understands that, despite all the zeroes on the dollar figures anticipated from LNG alone, success in managing a massive resources sector is not guaranteed, and that those revenues can dwindle almost overnight, leaving it with no obvious replacement.

This article was first published by The Australian newspaper on the 13th of March 2013

↧

PNG Supporting West Papua's Indepencence

March 17, 2013, 2:41 pm

≫ Next: Good Versus Evil Battle At UNITECH: Will It Reveal Peter O’Neill’s Helplessness At Fighting Corruption?

≪ Previous: PNG learning not to count all its LNG chickens before they hatch

Melanesian support for a free West Papua has always been high. Travel throughout Papua New Guinea and you will often hear people say that West Papua and Papua New Guinea is ‘wanpela graun’ – one land – and that West Papuans on the other side of the border are family and kin.

In the Solomon Islands, Kanaky, Fiji and especially Vanuatu, people will tell you that “Melanesia is not free until West Papua is free”. This was the promise that the late Father Walter Lini, Vanuatu’s first prime minister made.

Ordinary people in this part of the Pacific are painfully aware that the West Papuan people continue to live under the gun. It is the politicians in Melanesia who have been slow to take up the cause.

But that may be changing.

Earlier this month, Powes Parkop, Governor of the Papua New Guinea’s National Capital District, nailed his colours firmly to the mast.

In front of a crowd of 3000 people, Governor Parkop insisted that “there is no historical, legal, religious, or moral justification for Indonesia’s occupation of West Papua”.

Turning to welcome West Papuan independence leader Benny Wenda, who was in Papua New Guinea as part of a global tour, the governor told Wenda that while he was in Papua New Guinea “no one will arrest you, no one will stop you, and you can feel free to say what you want to say”.

These are basic rights denied to West Papuans who continue to be arrested, tortured and killed simply because of the colour of their skin.

Governor Parkop, who is a member of the International Parliamentarians for West Papua, which now has representatives in 56 countries, then went on to formerly launch the free West Papua campaign.

He promised to open an office, fly the Morning Star flag from City Hall and pledged his support for a Melanesian tour of musicians for a free West Papua.

Governor Parkop is no longer a lone voice in Melanesia calling for change.

Last year, Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister Peter O’Neill broke with tradition and publicly admonished the Indonesian government’s response to ongoing state violence, human rights violations and failure of governance in West Papua.

Moved by 4000 women from the Lutheran Church. O’Neill said he would raise human rights concerns in the troubled territory with the Indonesian government.

Now Governor Parkop wants to accompany the Prime Minister on his visits to Indonesia “to present his idea to Indonesia on how to solve West Papuan conflict once and for all.”

Well known PNG commentator Emmanuel Narakobi remarked on his blog that Parkop’s multi-pronged proposal for how to mobilise public opinion in PNG around West Papua “is perhaps the first time I’ve heard an actual plan on how to tackle this issue (of West Papua)”.

On talk back radio, Governor Parkop accused Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr of not taking the issue of West Papua seriously, of “sweeping it under the carpet.”

In Vanuatu, opposition parties, the Malvatumari National Council of Chiefs and the Anglican bishop of Vanuatu, Rev James Ligo are all urging the current Vanuatu government to change their position on West Papua.

Rev Ligo was at the recent Pacific Council of Churches in Honiara, Solomon Islands, which passed a resolution urging the World Council of Churches to pressure the United Nations to send a monitoring team to Indonesia’s Papua region.

“We know that Vanuatu has taken a side-step on that (the West Papua issue) and we know that our government supported Indonesia’s observer status on the MSG, we know that.

“But again, we also believe that as churches we have the right to advocate and continue to remind our countries and our leaders to be concerned about our West Papuan brothers and sisters who are suffering every day.”

In Kanaky (New Caledonia) and the Solomon Islands, West Papua solidarity groups have been set up. Some local parliamentarians have joined the ranks of International Parliamentarians for West Papua.

In Fiji, church leaders and NGO activists are quietly placing their support behind the cause even while Frank Bainimarama and Fiji’s military government open their arms to closer ties with the Indonesian military.

This internationalisation of the West Papua issue is Indonesia’s worst nightmare; it follows the same trajectory as East Timor.

The West Papuans themselves are also organising, not just inside the country where moral outrage against ongoing Indonesian state violence continues to boil, but regionally as well.

Prior to Benny Wenda’s visit to Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu-based representatives from the West Papua National Coalition for Independence formerly applied for observer status at this year’s Melanesian Spearhead Group meeting due to be held in Noumea, New Caledonia in June, home to another long running Melanesian self-determination struggle.

While in Vanuatu Benny Wenda added his support to that move, calling on Papuans from different resistance organisations to back a “shared agenda for freedom”.

A decision about whether West Papua will be granted observer status at this year’s MSG meeting will be made soon.

In Australia, Bob Carr may be trying to pour cold water on growing public support for a free West Papua but in Melanesia the tide is moving in the opposite direction.

PACIFIC SCOOP

↧

Good Versus Evil Battle At UNITECH: Will It Reveal Peter O’Neill’s Helplessness At Fighting Corruption?

March 17, 2013, 6:22 pm

≫ Next: Is Unitech SRC President a SELLOUT?

≪ Previous: PNG Supporting West Papua's Indepencence

By Concern Educator

“UNITECH Saga 2013” as students now call it, has been labelled a fight between good versus evil. It’s also turning out to be a public test of whether Prime Minister Peter O’Neill has any real power to control rogue elements that exist within today’s PNG educated elite. There are disturbing signs that O’Neill finds himself powerless against these elements as they manipulate the system to cover up wrongdoings and screw their opponents, while screaming ‘defamation’ whenever they hear any allegation of impropriety.

All this is happening right now in UNITECH Saga 2013 where such rogue creatures look determined to destroy the best opportunity UNITECH has had in more than a generation to experience true reform and progress.

Perhaps our Prime Minister was blinded to this growing picture by what seemed to be an initial focus on counteracting a once unspeakable blasphemy: Papua New Guineans publicly demanding that a European be their boss over ANY alternative national. These demands must have made some older educated Papua New Guineans want to vomit. After all, as PNG’s first educated elites, we led the drive to localise. We were the ones who were supposed to sustain the early high quality of PNG’s education for future generations as we replaced the departing expatriates.

Many of us failed to fill those shoes and our younger generations now demand better. If their national teachers teach out of date information and continue to passively accept rundown facilities, they want the expatriates back.

Who can blame them? Yet it is almost unbelievable that 38 years after independence, we might have to start over again, repopulating our universities with majority expatriate teachers and administrators. Divine Word University has essentially done this and look at their results. Here at the Office of Higher Education many still shake our heads in disbelief at how low we’ve sunk. We got the bad news in 2010 with the Namaliu-Garnaut report on PNG tertiary education. We enter 2013 knowing that we’re still going backwards.

However, our PM pushed all these realities aside in January, telling students that Albert Schram is not irreplaceable, that UNITECH’s progress doesn’t depend upon one person, etc. It seemed to be an intentional attempt to prepare UNITECH for a world without Schram. The fact that those remarks have fallen on deaf ears is a clear indication that UNITECHers believe the PM is either unwittingly or helplessly on the wrong side.

Anyone in PNG today who dares to state that students graduating from UPNG or UNITECH will leave with a world class education may hear laughter in reply. Yet, for many years former UNITECH Chancellor Philip Stagg perpetrated the lie at each UNITECH graduation. Apparently he felt that if he said it often enough his delusion would come true. Not quite! Students aren’t stupid. They see the decay all around at UPNG as well as UNITECH and their visiting parents often react with horror at today’s skeletons of the fine institutions they once attended.

Knowing all that, was it any surprise that last April Stagg was chased like a rat out of UNITECH, his car burnt behind him as he frantically climbed the boundary fence in fear for his life, ripping his nice trousers? What brought on that spectacle of justice well served? It all started when he and the now arrested former Registrar Alan Sako tried to double handedly sack the new Vice Chancellor Albert Schram. It didn’t work that day because a strongly honest SRC president spread the news and the students went after Stagg and Sako. Thinking back to those events must even now make both of them shake with rage, since it seems that getting payback against Schram has become Stagg’s top priority. It’s even more obvious that the well being of UNITECH was never high on his list.

When the Stagg Council first welcomed Albert Schram to UNITECH, they seemed to have no problem with him. After all, they were the ones who offered him the job. However, Stagg and Ralph Saulep (former Pro-Chancellor in the Stagg Council) in particular seemed to turn on Schram the moment it appeared that certain past horrors of bad governance and corruption at UNITECH were going to see the light of day.

Thanks to Schram and his small army of honest hard working nationals, today we see real progress in cleaning up UNITECH. Four UNITECH people have been arrested for fraud and conspiracy (hopefully more to come): former VC Misty Baloiloi, former Registrar Alan Sako, Bursar Jimmy Imbok, and former HOD of Electrical Engineering Narawan Gehlot. Gehlot is a dual Indian-American citizen who speaks like a con artist, writes poorer than one would expect from a doctorate degree holder, and allegedly received a personal PIP money cheque of over K675,000. Allegedly much of this money funded the 2012 campaigns of Sako and Baloiloi (a sin far worse than what Baloiloi denied to the newspapers - that he had “never put stolen food on the table for his family”).

It has been obvious to insiders that UNITECH was in a mess for years during the Stagg Council’s governance. The worst smell seems to centre around the Baloiloi family (3 members of whom were serving as UNITECH academics, with son Wayne getting an M.S. Degree in less than 2 years, thanks to Gehlot – then quickly being hired as a new faculty member!). Other published rumours also need investigation, including the allegation that past Registrar Alan Sako received a sizeable cash advance prior to his contesting the 2008 election which was never repaid.

Even though they seem to know most of the above history, some UNITECH students still question why they should pursue this fight to the end, since they came to uni simply to earn their degrees then find a job. Actually, that’s what UNITECH’s students decided in 2008 – to do nothing. That year, the Stagg council (yes, you read this right) had been suspended by the government (yes, you read right), replaced by an interim council headed by Sir Nagora Bogan (again, you read right). History repeats itself identically, except that in 2008 UNITECH’s deterioration was being managed by Emperor Misty, well known for praising blind loyalty while harshly punishing critics.

Emperor Misty’s decrees in 2008 resulted in the resignations of 20 staff, including some of the most talented nationals that UNITECH could ever hope to find. The Stagg Council regained its power. And because the students didn’t sufficiently support those brave UNITECH staff in their fight against mismanagement, nepotism and corruption, the staff lost, vocal dissenters were forced out of the system, and the university’s decline accelerated. UNITECH’s diminutive virtual “Professor” (how does an academic who hardly ever publishes get that promotion?) “Dr” (Baloiloi has always evaded demands for proof that he has anything other than an honourary doctorate degree from UPNG) continued his comic, ego-obsessed reign.

All of us in PNG should be thankful that UNITECH Saga 2013 has a more concerned student body than during Saga 2008. In 2012, thousands witnessed the distinct difference in Baloiloi’s versus Schram’s management. For a start, Albert Schram didn’t kill 8 cows to celebrate his new job as Emperor Misty did to self-honour his departure (the food was served some 7 hours later than scheduled in the darkness of night, ending the royal debacle). Unlike the Emperor, Schram often walked around campus meeting students, personally visiting departments, and eating in the student mess. What UNITECHers seem most delighted with that year was the miraculous elimination of potholes in the university’s main roads plus the student’s peaceful acceptance of dorm double-bunking for 2013. Not only that, over 20 new staff houses began construction. For the first time in people’s recollection it seemed that UNITECH’s demise was not preordained, which questioned where the money went during the Emperor's reign. Schram’s management brought high praise from the majority, although there was a disgruntled few who would rather have an Emperor than a European as their boss, and mounted a failed rebellion against Schram, which ended in their demotion, departure or termination. And naturally, Schram greatly offended all who have since been arrested for fraud.

All told, if the majority UNITECHer wish prevails, good will win over evil, proven effective management will return, and Dr Albert Schram will be back in the VC’s chair over in Lae before long. Unfortunately there are disturbing signs that the rogue elements may yet win this war by bypassing the PM and fulfilling their goal of either reclaiming power or exacting sweet revenge against the man they blame for their public humiliations. Either way, Peter O’Neill will look helpless if not hopeless and certainly powerless to take control of the situation.

Suspicions of the PM's underlying intentions and involvement now abound: In January, he announced there would be a 2 month inquiry into UNITECH’s affairs. Yet nearly half that time elapsed without a bit of action. Then there was the Prime Minister’s odd promise that Albert Schram could come back to PNG anytime he wanted (on a “tourist visa” if necessary, the PM said – which is essentially an invitation to commit fraud!). The reality is that each time Albert Schram tried to enter PNG over the past weeks, he was deported (Foreign Affairs initially didn’t want to use that term in a transparent game of deception). This indicates that the Prime Minister and his Minister have lost control over their own Foreign Affairs Department, and that Stagg, Saulep or cronies are the real behind the scenes power brokers.

Even more bizarre are the terms of reference for the so-called objective inquiry into UNITECH’s affairs that the PM has promoted. Has he bothered to read the terms of reference? It completely ignores the numerous allegations of fraud and corruption during the time of Stagg and Baloioi regime, and focuses almost exclusively on Schram:

1. Establish whether proper due diligence process was followed in the search, short listing, selection and appointment of the VC – Dr Albert Schram.

2. Establish whether the Registrar’s office [at UNITECH] was involved for background search and recommendation.

3. Establish whether proper process was followed in the two instances of termination of the VC’s contract.

4. Establish whether the meeting of 8th November by the Council to terminate the VC’s contract was validly convened.

5. Establish whether the termination of the VC on the 8th November was lawful and valid.

6. Establish the truth or otherwise of allegations that Dr Albert Ernst Giovanni Schram fabricated and/or lied about his Academic Qualification and/or identity.

Only the 7th term of reference focuses squarely on the Stagg council: “whether the conduct and management of the Council was consistent with the relevant governing Acts and Council By-laws and as such, were lawful. In addition, establish whether or not the role and actions) of members of the Stagg Council had a direct impact on the impasse”. According to some, the result will screw Albert Schram even if it appears to indict the Stagg Council – because if Stagg’s Council is, in fact, judged guilty of wrongdoing, then Schram’s hiring might automatically be voided.

One wonders how Peter O’Neill could possibly present this as an objective inquiry when it looks more like a setup against Schram. Our PM has conspicuously avoided addressing this, which again makes it appear that Stagg & company are the real powers in this game. As students in greater numbers read the TOR, the PM ends up with more egg on his face.

All this brings forth a bigger concern: Is the O’Neill government’s anti-corruption campaign actually being trumped by rogue elements twisting the PM around their little fingers?

Many citizens have noticed that even now, no top dog ever seems to be jailed for more than a few minutes, even when Sam Koim’s task force is involved. Wondering: If the stolen UNITECH PIP money is quietly returned, will Koim proudly claim that over half a million kina was recovered while Baloiloi, Sako, Imbok and Gehlot are quietly released, free to try and reclaim their former positions at UNITECH?

If the rogue elements win UNITECH Saga 2013, there’s no doubt about it, PNG loses big time. Our PM doesn’t seem to realise that. Perhaps neither does the PNG public. Do you?

God bless our PNG universities and God bless PNG. Both will never regain their former glory unless we all start speaking out and spreading the word more forcefully. Starting with UNITECH Saga 2013.

↧

Is Unitech SRC President a SELLOUT?

March 18, 2013, 1:50 pm

≫ Next: PNG regulator shakes up telecoms

≪ Previous: Good Versus Evil Battle At UNITECH: Will It Reveal Peter O’Neill’s Helplessness At Fighting Corruption?

By CONCERNED UNITECH STUDENT

After I read the essay that Unitech SRC president Mr Livingston Hosea put on this blog recently I knew I must write another side to this story. Mr Hosea writes about the many government actions or inactions that have caused the crisis we now have at Unitech and how it led to our effective VC being deported to Australia. All that seems to be true and accurate. In his essay Mr Hosea also explains his strategy for bringing back the VC. He bends over backwards almost touching the ground to assure everyone that we students will not be protesting. I guess that means we students were only thinking about the Unitech crisis but not doing anything. Or maybe we were thinking a little, while going to class and studying. Maybe also eating, playing sports, sleeping, going to town and talking with friends. That kind of relaxed attitude could not train us students to focus on the issue of Schram mistreatment. It does not put our concentration into giving our very best to convince the government to let him return to PNG.

All that time when we were busy thinking, eating, going to class and studying, playing sports, sleeping going to town and talking with friends, our SRC president was negotiating. Anyone learning about business management knows that you must negotiate from a position of power if you want to win. The only power Mr Hosea could rely on was people power which would have to come mostly from Unitech students and staff. However students who are busy thinking, eating, studying, going to class and studying, playing sports, sleeping, going to town and talking with friends but never protesting, don’t look very concerned to anyone looking in and can't provide the people power that is needed.

The result is that our SRC president found his negotiation going nowhere. It seems from his essay that he never wanted us to protest: ““We never protested from day one and we will not”. Why would Mr Hosea reveal his negotiating strategy to his opponents from the start? WHY?
Finally after Mr Hosea woke up to what happens when you try to negotiate without strong power supporting him, he called on us to boycott classes. For a while staff were joining us. During last week’s boycott, our SRC president flew more than once to Port Moresby
to speak to people in Waigani. He met with the PM we are told but didn’t say much of anything during that rare opportunity. What was the point. Our proof that nothing was accomplished is that the VC has not
returned. And some of us who keep to ourselves and are quite but not fools, began to ask again WHY?

From my viewpoint this was beginning to look like what happens when Asian investors come into a village and invite local leaders to go overseas with them. Village leaders return and tell everyone all about the important people they met and what great changes would happen.
Of course they don’t give any details of what was discussed but ask the community to support them by signing papers. Next thing you know Asians are invading their land with some SABL con development and the
village people find out they have gained nothing and lost everything. Our SRC president’s actions made some of us wonder if something similar was happening. As the week went by, critical times when he needed to hold a forum to keep all students updated also went by
without a word. When the purpose of our boycott (or so he said) to get Peter ONeill to come to campus and explain everything to us on Friday failed, again there was no forum to explain things after he returned
from POM.

It was almost like our SRC president wanted the boycott to collapse by staying silent and letting our energy disappear. This weekend Mr Hosea disappeared. Now those close to him say that he is backing down on everything. No student mass withdrawal on Tuesday as he originally threatened the government, and no boycott after that. What might explain these strange events? Could it be the word SELLOUT?

Livingston Hosea let down all students who are concerned and dedicated to winning this struggle. We feel stupid to believe he was negotiating with our interests at heart. Again we ask ourselves why so much talking with top people at the same time he was telling us not to
protest. And now he is going to tell us to end the boycott? SELLOUT! Most of us have seen this happen before with our newly elected MPs. They tell us they are going to fight for us if only we help them win the seat. Once they win they spend a lot of time in POM, talking to the big people. The next thing we see is that they forget all about the people who supported them and go to the other side, stealing the money meant for our development projects. SELLOUT! Is our SRC president doing secret deals? Why else would he be ready to stop the boycott even though the government hasn’t backed down on
anything? That is never the result when there is too much protesting. It only happens when there is not enough! Why is the SRC president not urging us to peacefully protest more strongly than ever to demand some real answers from the government? SELLOUT?

Why are we now learning that the government investigation that our SRC president supported is actually a big joke? It seems that investigation is all about the VC credentials and does not look into any corruption at Unitech. Why is Livingston Hosea not informing us clearly about why he shook hands with government to support this joke investigation? Why is he not calling us students to massively protest that big joke? SELLOUT! Now the SRC president has started putting all his trust in politicians. Whatever got into his head to think opposition leader Belden Namah who has many corruption suspicions over his head will do anything but poison our protest? What is the point of getting MPs to ask questions of the PM in parliament when all ONeill has to say in reply is that he set up the current investigation to address the Unitech problem .

For someone who says he wants to bring back our VC, Livingston Hosea sure doesn’t show it with his actions. First he tells his negotiating strategies to his opponents. Next he tells them that Unitech students will never protest. After that he hardly ever holds forums for students and staff at critical times but spends heaps of time in POM behind closed doors with the big shots and politicians. SELLOUT! Livingston Hosea you have a lot to explain to the students and staff at Unitech.

↧

PNG regulator shakes up telecoms

March 19, 2013, 8:41 pm

≫ Next: Demystifying law enforcement

≪ Previous: Is Unitech SRC President a SELLOUT?

The entry of a new player and an increasingly assertive stance on consumer rights protection by Papua New Guinea’s (PNG’s) telecommunications regulator bode well for competition in the sector. However, a continually evolving playing field and objections to new policies from telecoms operators may create considerable challenges for the regulatory body as it attempts to improve pricing and services.

On January 28 the National Information Communication Technology Authority (NICTA) ordered state-owned Telikom PNG to cease the sales of its range of ZTE handsets until the firm complied with the regulator’s approval process. Local newspaper the Post Courier reported that Charles Punaha, CEO of NICTA, had informed Telikom that certain ZTE smartphone models were yet to be approved.

This move followed attempts by NICTA in November 2012 to push Telikom toward making the country’s principal fibre-optic connection available to all internet service providers for direct sale as broadband products, a move that NICTA hopes will open up the sector. However, Telikom questioned both the request to cease sales of its ZTE handsets and the recommendations for broadband allocation.

In another attempt to improve competition in the market, NICTA published a ceiling related to retail mobile service prices in October 2012, saying it would restrict the extent to which market leader Digicel PNG can discriminate in the pricing for pre-paid mobile voice calls. As a result, the operator will be required to revise a number of its tariffs to reflect a more competitive pricing model.

PNG’s telecoms market is currently comprised of three mobile operators (Digicel PNG, BeMobile and Citifone) and one fixed-line operator (Telikom). While the market is growing, it is highly concentrated and suffers from a lack of infrastructure, particularly in rural areas. NICTA says the telecoms market has been impacted by a number of harmful anti-competitive market practices, such as price discrimination, market collusion and “predatory and excessive pricing”.

However, NITCA has received unequivocal support from the national government in its bid to improve the sector, with Jimmy Miringtoro, minister for communication and information technology, stating in August 2012 that the NITCA’s measures are in “the best interests of consumers in PNG”.

“The everyday issues of high internet charges are still embarrassing compared to other countries ... There are others issues, such as international roaming and high interconnection charges, that need to be critically looked at and appropriate decisions made to ultimately bring costs down,” Miringtoro said.

The IMF has also supported the decisions recently made by NICTA, writing in a report in February 2012 that plans to improve competition “by replacing Telikom’s monopoly with an updated regulatory framework” were positive and build on successes in the deregulation of the telecoms industry.

However, it is clear that mobile operators will need to play an integral role in the market’s evolution. In 2012 Digicel played an important part in ensuring mobile access to rural areas through the development of portable COW (cell-on-wheel) towers, which provide effective communications to the numerous mine sites around the country. As of 2012, Digicel had raised some 700 communication towers, increasing mobile network coverage of the population to about 75%.

Changes are also underway at operator BeMobile, following reports in mid-December 2012 that Vodafone Fiji would take over management of the firm. Indeed, the Post Courier reported that Vodafone Fiji and the Fiji National Provident Fund (FNPF) have decided to acquire equity in BeMobile from the PNG government. Local media has speculated that Vodafone is readying to enter a potential pricing war with market leader Digicel.

NICTA’s pro-competition moves mean Digicel “will be forced to allow open access to its tower network and elements of its backhaul infrastructure to competitors”, wrote technology magazine Memeburn. “Vodafone will be able to piggy-back on Digicelʼs tower infrastructure, increasing its network coverage from around 20% to one matching Digicelʼs.” According to Memeburn, BeMobile (and Vodafone, once they take over management) will also benefit from regulatory changes in the market, such as seeing network coverage significantly enhanced.

While the telecoms regulator is to be lauded for its efforts to improve competition in the sector, a more inclusive process and better communication with the market’s operators could create a win-win situation that equally benefits providers and consumers.

Cambridge Business

↧

Demystifying law enforcement

March 21, 2013, 2:40 pm

≫ Next: ‘Black Jesus’ among Papua New Guinea prison escapees

≪ Previous: PNG regulator shakes up telecoms

By SAM KOIM

My role has brought me to confront the mysteries of law enforcement in contemporary Melanesia.
I have come to appreciate that we have adopted western laws that are individualist oriented, to be applied and enforced in our communal setting. Our communal existence imposes certain obligations that more often clashes with the demands of the law.

For instance, you try to hold one person responsible for his/her own wrongdoings but, more often, you find yourself dragging the whole tribe/group.
The society is conditioned to protect even the worst criminal.

In Western cultures, when someone commits a crime, everybody, including their immediate kinship, treat that person as undesirable for the society and readily have him handed over to be dealt with according to law.
While in our culture, we are prepared to protect the perpetrators, even to the extent of putting up a fight.
Say, in a case of a rape, we put compensation money and hide the perpetrator.
If the victim’s people insist to go after the perpetrator, we are prepared to fight.
In so doing, we pervert the course of justice.
Yet, we complain of lawlessness.

In electing leaders too, we vote according to our tribal/kinship lines even if we know that the person is not the right person. Even Christians pray hard for a right leader and blindly vote the wrong person in.
Remember what Jesus said: “Watch and pray, lest you fall into temptation.”
Yet, we complain of corruption. Shame on us.

And, to a certain extent, when law is about to catch up with them, there is a general expectation for a level of tolerance by law enforcement agencies. That is because traditionally, we are supposed to respect, protect and be loyal to our leaders even if they do something wrong.

Of course, there are many other factors that contribute towards the breakdown of law and order, such as incidents of bribery and external influences that may temper with objective law enforcement.
Those incidents have led our people also to be skeptical about law enforcement, which in turn diminishes the respect and legitimacy of the people it should otherwise deserve.

People are inclined to build nexus to tribalism and rivalism as the first point of reason whenever law is enforced.

Notwithstanding all of that, our customary values and expectations also have some influence in law enforcement in Melanesia.

While the process of occidentalisation had helped to develop our country in many respects, there is also an obvious disconnection, in that our people had not been fully acculturated to the Western cultural values.
Unless we take a paradigm shift, we will still have law and order problems.

Sam Koim is the lead investigator of the government-sanctioned Task Force Sweep team, which was set up to fight corruption and bribery in high places. The views expressed here were posted on Facebook and Sharptalk.

↧

‘Black Jesus’ among Papua New Guinea prison escapees

March 24, 2013, 1:28 pm

≫ Next: High cost of business in PNG

≪ Previous: Demystifying law enforcement

A manhunt was under way on Sunday after 49 prisoners, including an infamous cult leader known as “Black Jesus” who is suspected of cannibalism, broke out of a jail in Papua New Guinea.

The escape happened from a prison in Madang on the poverty-stricken Pacific nation’s east, with convicted rapist Stephen Tari among those that got away, Australian media reported.

Tari, a failed Lutheran pastor who was widely known as Black Jesus, was found guilty in 2010 of raping girls who belonged to his Christian-based sect and sentenced to up to ten years.

At the time, he had thousands of village followers, including a core of armed warriors to protect him, in what is commonly referred to in PNG as a “cargo cult”

As part of his “culture ministry”, he preached that young girls were to be “married” to him as it was God’s prophecy.

When he was captured in 2007, there were widespread allegations that his cult also practised cannibalism and sacrificial blood rituals, but police only charged him with rape.

PNG police could not be reached on Sunday but PNG Correctional Service’s spokesman Richard Mandui told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation the break out on Thursday occurred while guards were changing shifts.

“Actually, one of the guards left his guard tower,” he said.

Very dangerous

“While he was on the way, the detainees found a gap. They left for freedom.”
He said they used an unidentified tool to cut through a fence.

Madang’s provincial police commander Inspector Jacob Bando told ABC some of the escapees were extremely dangerous.

“These people are very, very dangerous and they may be armed,” he said, adding that Tari was a particular risk.

“He must be arrested because our ladies will most certainly be at risk due to his past offences.”
PNG is a sprawling nation where black magic, sorcery and cannibalism sometimes occur.

Last year, police arrested dozens of people linked to an alleged cannibal cult accused of killing at least seven people, eating their brains raw and making soup from their penises.

There have been several other cases of witchcraft and cannibalism in PNG in recent years, with a man reportedly found eating his screaming, newborn son during a sorcery initiation ceremony in 2011.

AFP

↧

High cost of business in PNG

March 25, 2013, 1:12 pm

≫ Next: PNG to grant gas concessions to Thai firms

≪ Previous: ‘Black Jesus’ among Papua New Guinea prison escapees

A senior United States government official says Papua New Guinea will continue to have development issues unless it brings its internet rates down like other Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) member countries.

We do not need to wait for somebody from the outside to come to tell us that unpalatable truth, of course.
PNG’s own Communication and Information Minister, Jimmy Miringtoro, has told us as much in recent days.
Information and communication technology charges are way too high in Papua New Guinea.

And there is a long list of other important socio-economic sectors where costs remain extremely high.
Minister for Trade, Commerce and Industry Richard Maru announced on Monday that the cost of travelling internally and internationally is too expensive. He called for more competition on international routes with carriers from other countries.

Maru, as the man charged with growing trade and the economy, is extremely concerned about the high cost of doing business in PNG.

“PNG is part of the global economy,” Maru said. “It must be competitive to be successful in a global economy. With high costs, PNG just cannot be competitive.”

Cost of accommodation is unrealistically high.

Real estate rates today make it impossible for any person, expatriate or national, even in management positions to afford housing on their own salaries. Housing, therefore, has to be written into contracts as a condition of employment and paid for by the employer.

Security costs much more in Papua New Guinea than in most other countries in the region. Companies have to pour in hundreds of thousands of kina to pay for static guards or put up high-tech security devices to secure premises and personnel from marauding criminals day and night.

Maru is right. How can he or his department promote commerce, trade and industry if the cost of doing business is prohibitive?

It is uncertain where PNG’s high cost structure has its beginnings but it might have to do with emulating our nearest neighbour and former colonial administrator, Australia, from whom much of PNG’s experience derives from across every sector.

Australia is not a good example in this sense. Recent surveys have found Australia to be one of the most expensive places to do business in, placing it 40% above the United States.

The International Monetary Fund has found that Australia was the third most expensive place in the world to do business after Norway and Switzerland.
Attitudes towards doing business globally, particularly towards the expanding Asian market, is not altogether friendly.

A survey of 6,000 business decision-makers, of which more than 4,000 were from Australia, found Australians typically placed a relatively low level of importance on access to, and knowledge of, Asian markets and bilingual staff.

If this attitude and the prevailing high cost business atmosphere is a big issue for businesses in Australia and for those businesses looking at Australia, then it must be doubly important for Papua New Guinea.

Australia is a first-world economy, PNG is not. There are aspects to Australia that are attractive to the overseas businessmen or women which are not present in PNG.

Taken together, PNG’s high levels of crime, under-developed or failing infrastructure and high cost structure are a deadly combination that hinders PNG’s ambition to become a successful economy or a destination of choice for the foreign investor. It prohibits international competitiveness.

It behooves government to start introducing policy interventions to lower the extremely high costs which run across the entire economy.

OP/ED

↧

PNG to grant gas concessions to Thai firms

March 26, 2013, 3:13 pm

≫ Next: Lowering the cost of internet

≪ Previous: High cost of business in PNG

Photo Source: SOUTH PACIFIC POST

Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O'Neill has agreed to grant natural gas concessions to the Thai private sector during talks with his Thai counterpart Yingluck Shinawatra.

The decision applies especially to PTT Exploration and Production Plc (PTTEP), Thailand's sole oil and gas explorer.

Yingluck was on a two-day visit to Papua New Guinea which ended yesterday.

Her trip was aimed at forging closer ties between the two countries and boosting cooperation in energy investments. PM O'Neill praised Yingluck for being Thailand's first female prime minister, who came to power through an election, and being a role model for Papua New Guinean women.

She thanked her Papua New Guinea counterpart for the praise.

The two government leaders also agreed to cooperate in agriculture, fisheries and tourism.

Papua New Guinea wanted Thailand to transfer technological knowledge on agriculture and Thai rice species as Papua New Guinea was Thailand's second largest rice importer after Australia, she said.

During the talks, Yingluck said O'Neill wanted Thailand to run direct flights to his country, which has many popular diving sites.

Papua New Guinea also offered to remove tax obstacles to Thai businesses, she added.

Thailand wanted to use Papua New Guinea as a gateway to the Pacific islands, said Ms Yingluck, who led a Thai delegation comprising representatives from 30 businesses. The countries have also agreed to hold a joint parliament meeting annually.

The Thai Prime Minister has invited her Papua New Guinea counterpart to visit Thailand.

ISLAND BUSINESS

↧

Lowering the cost of internet

March 27, 2013, 2:36 pm

≫ Next: PNG'S Growth to Remain Strong but Protection Needed

≪ Previous: PNG to grant gas concessions to Thai firms

Internet or international network has reduced the size of the global village considerably since its big leap in the 1990s. More than a third of the world’s human population, or about 2.4 billion people, have used the services of the internet as of June 2012, according to Wikipedia, the internet’s “free encyclopaedia”.

Papua New Guinea, being part and parcel of the global community, also enjoys the services provided by the internet. In fact, the lives of an increasing number of our citizens now revolve around the internet.
Last week, a visiting United States government official expressed concern about the high cost of internet services in PNG, which may hinder greater access by our people to this world bank of information.
To access information via the internet, we need to have connectivity links, which are directly influenced by two major telecommunication infrastructure fronts.

This relates directly to the international undersea fibre cable landings and the nearest high capacity broadband satellite landing stations within our region and reach. In terms of the high speed/capacity fibre landings, PNG is fortunate to have two major undersea fibre landings. One lands at Ela Beach in Port Moresby – APNG-2 and other in Madang – PPC-1.

The APNG-2 fibre cable has termination points in Sydney, Australia, while the PPC-1 fibre cable link has one termination point in Guam and the other in Sydney.
Currently, access and pricing to these capacities and bandwidth is controlled more or less as a monopoly by Telikom PNG.

The government announced last week the determination from a recent public inquiry into the pricing regime on the international cable access which was carried by the country’s ICT regulatory and policy arm, NICTA.
In a nutshell, the inquiry found that while it was not wrong for a single entity such as Telikom to have monopoly over these cable access, it was also anti-competition as they were in the commercial space of providing internet services and, hence, positioning other players not to directly compete with them to offer such capacities, which could in turn lower the internet rates.

Looking more at the fibre cable access, one does not have to look far to compare the current retail internet prices offered by Telikom retail services Telinet, Digicel and bemobile.
It is obvious that Telikom has the lowest retail rate despite its monopoly on the international cable access and the internet gateway services.

As for internet service providers in PNG such as Datec and Daltron, the internet gateway access is still not deregulated and all ISP are still required by law to connect to Telikom, which owns this internet gateway and the international cable access. So, how can we move forward to lower our retail internet cost?

The recent government announcement on the determination of the international cable access is a breath of fresh air for all ISP providers and telecommunication in PNG. But the government still has more to plough through and make this a reality. Regulatory bodies such as NICTA and ICCC need to initiate a strategy and implementation plan to deregulate the internet gateway services.

In line with the recent announcement, this can mean two positive options for ISP with deregulation of the ISP gateway. The ISP companies could either secure cheaper direct cable access to competitive offshore ISP gateways of their choice and commercial viability. Alternatively, they can secure a lower and attractive fixed wholesale rate from the existing provider, Telikom, which would naturally respond to competition to lower their prices. The ISPs can readily factor lower wholesale pricing into their retail pricing models.

This can mean only one thing, a brewing of competition among ISP and other internet service providers, including the mobile phone operators. The government can also empower ICCC to ensure a pricing regime on all ISP and mobile operators. Once that rate is determined and set by law, it must continue to monitor all ISP and mobile operators on their retail pricing.

Having achieved that, the government must create appropriate policies to attract more media content deployment in-country as internet usage increases. This can be done by creating attractive business environment, taxing regimes and other policies pertaining to ICT operations.
With the appropriate mechanisms in place, this will transpire into a lower internet cost per byte and give the majority of Papua New Guineans greater access to internet services at affordable rates.

OP/ED

↧

PNG'S Growth to Remain Strong but Protection Needed

April 1, 2013, 5:15 pm

≫ Next: PNG GOVT TO TAKE CHARGE OF OK TEDI FUNDS

≪ Previous: Lowering the cost of internet

PNG's Growth to Remain Strong but Protection Needed against Future Shocks

Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, 26 March 2013 – While Papua New Guinea’s medium term growth outlook of 5.5% in 2013, and 6% in 2014 remains strong, provisions must be made to allow the economy to withstand future economic shocks according to the new issue of the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) Pacific Economic Monitor, released today.

The report– a tri-annual economic review of ADB’s Pacific developing member countries —says as the construction phase of the PNG Liquefied Natural Gas Project winds down, economic growth in PNG will be supported by increased government spending and output from mining operations.

“It is critical that government plans to increase investment in national infrastructure and social services are balanced with maintaining fiscal buffers that will allow PNG to withstand future economic shocks,” said Aaron Batten, Country Economist of ADB’s Papua New Guinea Resident Mission.

The ADB report offers policy advice on how fiscal risks may be reduced against a backdrop of increased government spending.

Key policy recommendations in the report include: slowing spending growth to reduce the size of future budget deficits; shifting the focus of spending towards routine maintenance of existing capital assets; restructuring the domestic debt portfolio to reduce how often government needs to refinance its debt; ensuring all public debt is created and recorded through the annual budget process, and; cautious utilization of potential new foreign sources of debt to ensure exchange rate risks and debt servicing costs remain moderate.

These policy recommendations will be vital in building up the country’s economic resilience and avoiding the boom-bust cycles of economic growth that have plagued PNG’s economic development in the past.

Papua New Guinea joined ADB in 1971. It is ADB's largest partner in the Pacific in terms of loans for public and private sector development.

ADB, based in Manila, is dedicated to reducing poverty in Asia and the Pacific through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration. Established in 1966, it is owned by 67 members – 48 from the region.

↧

PNG GOVT TO TAKE CHARGE OF OK TEDI FUNDS

April 2, 2013, 3:59 pm

≫ Next: An Election Candidate’s Sad Experience

≪ Previous: PNG'S Growth to Remain Strong but Protection Needed

AAP

The government of Papua New Guinea will restructure the management of the Ok Tedi copper mine to ensure its funds are managed in PNG and not in Singapore, Prime Minister Peter O'Neill says.

In a two-page article written by the PM in Port Moresby's Post Courier newspaper on Tuesday, Mr O'Neill vowed to end what he termed "secret arrangements" between the mine's former owner, BHP Billiton, and the PNG Sustainable Development Project.

The PNGSDP was created by BHP in 2002 to manage OK Tedi's profits on behalf of the people of Western Province, following massive environmental damage caused by the mine.

OK Tedi's mining lease expires at the end of 2013.

"When the lease expires, the national government will put in place management arrangements that end any secret arrangements, and ensure that the people of Papua New Guinea, including the local landowners, have a say in the mine's future and its management," Mr O'Neill said.

"We will ensure the PNGSDP is managed in Papua New Guinea, and its funds are held in Papua New Guinea, and used transparently for the good of the people of the Fly River Province, and the nation generally."

The $US1.4 billion ($A1.35 billion) PNGSDP fund is currently held in Singapore, where the company is registered.

Mr O'Neill wrote the article in response to a Fairfax newspaper column last week which described the PNGSDP as "by far the biggest act of corporate philanthropy in Australian history".

BHP had nothing to be proud of, Mr O'Neill said.

"Nor can BHP be proud of its majority ownership and managerial control prior to 2002 when it divested itself of its majority shareholding, and pretended - and I use the word advisedly - to end its control over the mine," he said.

"The establishment of the PNGSDP was designed by BHP to keep control of the mine, and the direction of its profits, principally through the PNGSDP, over which it clearly exercised effective control."

Mr O'Neill said past claims by BHP that it had no say in running OK Tedi and the PNGSDP were untrue and that the company held effective control over the mine "through a myriad structures".

In 2010 the OK Tedi mine was the largest single contributor to PNG's tax revenues, to the tune of $US543 million.

In November, former chairman and noted economist Ross Garnaut resigned from the PNGSDP and was replaced by former prime minister Mekere Morauta.

Professor Garnaut was also banned from PNG by Mr O'Neill after he implied publicly that the government would not use the fund's money wisely.

BHP announced in September last year it planned to no longer appoint board members to the PNGSDP.

Future directors would be chosen by the board, which also includes PNG government nominees.

However, it is understood BHP must agree to any changes in the core terms of reference under which the trust operates.

PNG's national government and the provincial government of Western Province jointly own a 36.6 per cent share of OK Tedi, while the PNGSDP currently holds a 63.4 per cent stake.

Both the PNGSDP and BHP have declined to comment.

↧

An Election Candidate’s Sad Experience

April 3, 2013, 1:32 pm

≫ Next: Open letter to Rt Hon. Peter O’Neill CMG MP, Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea and his Cabinet

≪ Previous: PNG GOVT TO TAKE CHARGE OF OK TEDI FUNDS

Vanilla Farmer Alan Bird talks about his 2002 Election experience, this article was first published on the National Newspaper's editorial section on the 2nd of July 2002

Being a strongly ideological person, I entered this election race not only confident of winning the seat but also of being a catalyst to the dawn of dramatic, positive change to the economic and social fabric of my Sepik society. My high-minded ideals have taken a real battering in the last three months of electioneering.

As we neared the end of the campaign, I became much more philosophical, as the reality of the depths of the corruption that pervades our society dragged me out of my dreams. On the one hand I wept at the total lack of interest that had been shown toward Sepik people on the other side of the Sepik River between our borders with the Highlands and West Sepik. On the other, I was shattered by the attitude of people on my side of the river whose sole drive in life appears to be to live off government or MP freebies for the rest of their lives. These people appear to be under the impression that their MP, all intending candidates, and the Government owe them something. Why the voters are owed money and freebies still remains a mystery, at least to me.

Being a farmer I was fortunate to only associate with hard-working people for a good part of my time here in Sepik, but as I tried to make the transition from farming to politics the other side of my society began to rear its ugly face. I am not a Member of Parliament and may never be, but I already have more than K30 million
worth of "funding requests" sitting on my table. Almost all of these requests have no real basis and will give little or no social or economic benefit to anyone, save for a few lucky individuals.

This is excluding the many verbal requests for me to buy radios, give PMV fares, lunch or dinner money, drinking money or money for hospital fees, funeral money or some other item I am "required" to pay for because I am running for elections. I have even had many individuals tell me in no uncertain terms that if I wanted to be an MP, I must pay (bribe) the voter because that "is the way we do things around here".

Even some so-called "born again" Christians and Pastors facilitate this mentality. Worse still, I now have people coming to me with long lists of people who have supposedly voted for me and to whom I must now be indebted and give priority to simply because they voted for me. I thought this was a secret ballot where free elections will be held. The things that trouble me about this brand of "PNG Democracy" are many, but two issues immediately come to my mind, which I think all Papua New Guineans who love this country must
consider.

The first one is this: are we voting for all these MPs to serve our personal interests or to work for the common good? What are we really "giving" these MPs? Do we think we are making them instant millionaires? Is this why we must also share in the spoils? What is the role of the MPs anyway? Is it to bring
home the bacon so we can all cut it up? Say the ESP provincial Budget is K40 million; should we simply buy radios for all the voters, give them another K50 each and forget about our roads, schools, hospitals, and public service and then wait around for the next budget? The next question is: how did all this start? Or more to the point, who started this? Are our MPs corrupt, or is our society corrupt? If our MPs are corrupt, where did they come from? Did they fall to earth from outer space, or did they come out from society?

After my experience, I am not surprised one little bit about why our MPs disappear to Port Moresby and never return. I have witnessed how disgusting our "morally upright" voters can be at my local MP’s home. His wife and children stand at the kitchen all day and night churning out pots of rice and tinned fish to feed the electorate. At one stage, I could not take it any more and angrily chastised those lazy ...forgive me, good voters” for this conduct.

My MP bolted when I did so, but I could see the relief on his wife’s face. Sadly, that is exactly what the electorate desires of their elected representatives in PNG. I am certain if I fronted up at the home of another East Sepik MP, I’d find the same going on.

I believe in hard work and sweat to get my bread and butter and I know therein lies the problem with my country. Most of us are simply content to sit around under the shade of a tree and wait for the government or the local MP to give us some money so that we can put food on the table.

Some others prefer to rob the few of us hard-workers who till the land for sustenance, either through fees or at the point of a gun or other device. I have never campaigned dirty against another candidate, including the sitting MP and should I lose, I would be greatly relieved not to have to deal with the many parasites that exist in our society.

Finally, in all fairness to those voters who did vote with their heart, and not because of the swelling of their pockets, may I suggest to the new government the following measures to reduce the effect of our corrupt society on our system of government.

• Do away completely with the RAP, EDF, or whatever it is called. MPs should not be regarded as a pipeline to never ending supplies of cash and goodies. This system fosters the cargo cult mentality and breeds laziness in our people. We need to do PNG a favour and get all those lazy members of our society back to work.


•  Legislate so that any MP or intending candidate (or their associates) who give money, food, clothing, accommodation, or other inducement, no matter how small, is guilty of an offence punishable by dismissal from office or in the case of elections, being ineligible to contest. This way we protect the MP and the candidate from the corrupt voters and we protect the voters from themselves. This will also have the added benefit of evening out the playing field for all candidates. We cannot continue to allow this situation of rich 
people with money kowtowing to  the whims of corrupt voters and destroying our collective ability to vote for genuine leadership.

↧