'Hear me out,' said Sir Michael

From PAUL OATES

'Hear me out,' said Sir Michael
Under a newspaper heading 'Sir Michael gives judiciary, NGOs and the media a tongue-lashing', Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Somare yesterday reportedly lashed out at his country's judiciary, NGO's and media over the delays in dealing with high profile legal cases and his government's amendments to the Environment Act.
Sir Michael is quoted as saying he is outraged at the constant delays in processing court cases involving himself, his son Arthur and former chief secretary Lupari.
Yet could it not be said that Somare himself is the author of his own discontent? If his lawyers had not constantly raised objections and delays, surely these cases could have been dealt with in a timely manner? If he had provided sufficient resources to his own Ombudsman Commissioners to allow them to perform their proper role, these apparently irritating delays may not have occurred.
On the issue of the Amendment to the Environment Act, Somare "accused the media of misinforming the public and described NGOs as an unelected group representing no one. He said the amendments were done after getting "the best advice from three best brains". (I wonder who they belonged to?)
Sir Michael reportedly went on to explain that he himself had gone to China four years ago and convinced the Chinese government that they should invest K800 in developing the Ramu nickel mine. "The government will lose a lot. No country can come to PNG and put US$800 million on the spot" he is quoted as saying.
Yet again, Somare has only himself to blame. Why wasn't there full and open debate on the Amendment prior to the vote being rushed through Parliament? Why hasn't there been effective legislation passed to ensure the PNG people are protected by effective and robust environment laws? If there was effective legislation in place already, there wouldn't be a need for the people to have to take their own legal action to stop the government and the developer from potentially destroying their environment? If Sir Michael did indeed convinced the Chinese to develop the mine, and not vice versa, why didn't he use those four years to pass proper environmental legislation to protect his people. Why leave it up to his own people to defend themselves and then criticize them for doing it? There has been plenty of previous indications that this and other developments require effective legislation to protect PNG's environment from being potentially destroyed.
Clearly the PNG PM has been caught out and is behaving like a cornered animal, enmeshed in its own web of dishonourable deceit.
So perhaps his country should either 'hear' or in fact see Sir Michael out?
Err.. which way did he come in?