Keeping it clean

About 50 men and women turned up at the Ela Beach in Port Moresby yesterday to clean the beachfront, The National reports.Among the group was Community Development Minister Dame Carol Kidu. Their efforts were in view of the National Volunteer Day, an annual event that recognises the important role and work of volunteers across all sections of society, both local and overseas. Appropriately, yesterday’s event was themed “a cleaner environment to fight cholera”, a disease that had created quite a scare throughout parts of the country in the recent times.-Nationalpic by EKAR KEAPU

Pangu, PAP back Somare to remain

LEADERS of key partners of the National Alliance have made it clear they are behind Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare to see out his term, as lobbying continues for a possible vote of no-confidence when Parliament meets next week, The National reports.

Housing Minister Andrew Kumbakor and Commerce and Industry Minister Gabriel Kapris told The National they would stay with NA and Sir Michael for the sake of stability.

The two claimed their party members were with them, although members were now not bound by any party resolution or the view of their leader.

If they stick together, combined Pangu Pati and PAP have 10 MPs.

With NA’s 41, a Pangu/PAP/NA group swells the number to 51. Then, there are the People’s National Congress, United Resources Party, United Party, Melanesian Alliance and other smaller parties that give Sir Michael a comfortable majority to fight off any challenge.

There is a faction calling itself the “middle group”, which included PNC’s Ken Fairweather. They claim 11 MPs.

Kumbakor said yesterday the intention of the Organic Law on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates (OLIPPAC) was to provide stability in politics.

“Pangu is intact and we stand in coalition with our partners in government to provide stability. I see no reason for people to be jumping up and down.”

Kumbakor said the members, including Kavieng MP Martin Aini, Nipa-Kutubu MP Philemon Embel and Talasea MP Francis Marus, were all intact and stand firm behind the government coalition partners.

He said those who wanted to remove the government were doing it to assume power but warned MPs that power could be very dangerous.

He said the very same people who had been pushing for the integrity law were the same people now claiming that this law was not good.

“Papua New Guinea is full of hypocrites.”

Kumbakor admitted that Pangu, like all other parties, had failed to muster the numbers in the 2007 elections and National Alliance, who won the most seats, were invited to form government.

Kapris assured investors that his party would not move for the sake of stability, good governance and favourable economic climate.

“PAP, with its six members, had joined hands with NA since 2002 and 2007; we will not be moved.

“We will always stand with the PM and take the government to the end of this term of Parliament.”

He said the government had delivered the LNG project and Vision 2050, setting the road map that would see change in the livelihood of the people.

“It is sad to see young MPs like Sam Basil, who have no respect for the founding prime minister who had brought PNG this far.

“Some of us, young leaders, must swallow our pride and praise the prime minister, who is a well respected person and the people of Sepik, for 40 years, had given him that support.

 “As a leader and minister for commerce and industry, it had taken me awhile to market PNG to the world as not many countries know PNG; and the many years of hard work cannot be undone by the instability created by the opposition,” Kapris said.

 

Prime Minister urges opposition to tell the truth

PRIME Minister Sir Michael Somare has urged the opposition to exercise responsibility and honest leadership instead of feeding lies to the public and stirring emotions, The National reports.

“The statement by the opposition is unbefitting of people who want to lead the people of Papua New Guinea into the future.

“These comments are highly emotional, defamatory and discriminating.

“They reflect the opposition’s insatiable appetite for power at all costs.

“They have continuously created lies about my family,” Sir Michael said in a statement in response to Sir Mekere Morauta’s allegations that the prime minister was building a family dynasty and power entrenched in the Somare household.

“I know no occasion in my 42 years of politics when I have tried to score political points by rubbishing the family of another politician.

“The opposition has gone too far. They have not offered Papua New Guineans any alternative policies or conclusively proven any of their allegations against my government,” he added.

“The courts are dealing with some of the matters raised by the opposition and they should not be pre-empting any of the rulings but respect the process and allow it to complete its course.

“The opposition also cannot say that they represent the people of Papua New Guinea. The people spoke through the polls and gave National Alliance the numbers to form a coalition government.

“Papua New Guineans did not even give 10 people to Sir Mekere at the polls. He cannot say that he represents much,” Sir Michael said.

“The opposition’s continued abuse of the process of democracy will only lead our country into upheaval and possible unrest.”

Sir Mekere had also urged MPs to listen to the people and destroy the house of Somare.

“Sir Michael Somare is trying to build a dynasty. In doing so, he has been involved in scandal after scandal over the last eight years,” Sir Mekere said.

“Power is concentrated in the hands of a small group of people, a group I have previously called the kitchen cabinet.

“Issues of national interest are discussed inside one family kitchen rather than among parties, and power is even more concentrated in one household called Somare.

“This is a recipe for disaster. It is a recipe that is eroding the roots of liberal democracy and promoting dictatorship,” Sir Mekere said.

 

 

Marus speaks out on claims

DEPUTY speaker of Parliament Francis Marus has, for the first time, come out publicly to rubbish allegations by suspected bank robber William Nanua Kapris, The National reports.

He described Kapris as someone trying to blackmail him.

“The reason for being silent at that time, of the court hearing, was because I respect the rule of law, and that I trust that truth will prevail in the end,” Marus said.

He said Kapris had the right to defend himself for the MRO robbery in 2007.

“After all was said and done, it seemed that someone was trying to blackmail me and the two other ministers named by Kapris.

“During the time the robbery took place in 2007, I was not a Member of Parliament, and I am innocent of all the allegations by Kapris,’’ Marus said.

He made the statement to the media in the presence of Pangu Pati leader and Nuku MP Andrew Kumbakor at Parliament yesterday.

Marus said there had been a lot of criticism by the public and also by his fellow Members of Parliament.

“But, I am a leader mandated by my people and, like all other MPs, we should respect the rule of law and let police investigations find the truth,’’ he said.

“I have no reason to hide anything and, if the public chose to believe the allegations made, let it be. But I can only, honestly say I played no part, and only God is my witness.

“I believe a National Court judge had called on police to investigate the three leaders named.

“As a national leader, I am open to investigations by police to establish if these allegations had substance and I will co-operate as much as possible to prove my innocence.”

Marus said like any other human being, such serious allegations had hurt him, his family and friends and had tarnished the name of his Talasea electorate in West New Britain.

“I call on the police commissioner to make the findings of the investigations public, so the matter is put to rest,” Marus said.

Roz Savage to be guest speaker at British graduates meet

The British Graduates Society of Papua New Guinea (BGSPNG) will host a presentation in Port Moresby by world record setting British rower Roz Savage.

Ms Savage, who rowed solo across the Atlantic Ocean in 2005 and last month added the Pacific Ocean to her bag of record setting feats, will make a brief stopover this week in the PNG capital on her way to Malaysia.

She spent four weeks in Madang to recuperate and encourage awareness on environmental issues following her arrival from Tarawa, Kiribati early last month.

BGSPNG president Vergil Narokobi thanked the British rower, author and conservationist for accepting the invitation from the alumni to do the presentation.

 

“The British Graduates Society of Papua New Guinea is privileged to have a speaker of her stature. I am sure Papua New Guineans and members of the British Graduates Society will be eager to hear of the challenges she faced in her incredible journey across the Pacific and be motivated to face life with similar vigour and passion. I also thank the British High Commissioner David Dunn for offering the venue for her presentation and this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to the BGSPNG,” he added.

 

Ms Savage was given a rousing welcome upon her arrival in Madang with 100 traditional canoes escorting and guiding her into the harbour. The Madang Resort Hotel became ‘home’ for a month.

 

A latecomer to the life of adventure, Ms Savage was previously a management consultant and project manager at an investment bank before realising in her mid-30s that there might be more to life than a steady income and a house in the suburbs.

 

The presentation will be held at Moresby House on Wednesday 14 July from 6.30 pm and is open to members of the BGSPNG and scholars who studied in the UK and intend to be members of the alumni.

 

For further information call telephone (675) 3251677 and ask for Kila Kome or email ukgraduates.png@gmail.com .

 

A 'university for the community'

The University of Natural Resources & Environment (UNRE) is known to the people of Maprik in East Sepik province as the ‘university for the community’.

Speaking highly of the integrated agricultural training programme (IATP) of the university that is being conducted in their area, many locals expressed their appreciation for the university which they said had contributed immensely to sustaining and improving their livelihood.

Maprik/Wora LLG ward member, Danny Lingin Raminibi, who was one of 25 participants at the program’s recent interview techniques and extension skills workshop in Maprik, said the training had greatly assisted him and his two colleagues (ward members).

He said the workshop had changed their mindsets, and enabled them to effectively plan and strategise programmes and projects to sustain and improve their people’s livelihood.

Mr Raminibi said the training was timely.

With the technique and skills he gained, he said he was now able to follow up on other trainings his people have received.

“Mi hamamas olsem Sepik go kirapim ples blong yupla na yupla kam bek na helpim mipla,” Mr Raminibi said.

A division of primary industry officer Betty Ninawale said the training she has received had boosted her morale to continue her extension work.

Ms Ninawale said many times she felt like giving up, particularly because of the lack of resources, but the university through IATP had given her courage and the confidence to work with relevant stakeholders including UNRE to continue delivering farmer training as well as other basic training to women.

Monica Otto of Foundation of Women in Agriculture Development appealed to all stakeholders to work in partnership with the university to sustainably improve the lives of the people of Maprik as well as East Sepik. 

“Yumi kolim UNRE olsem em university blong komuniti na yumi olgeta mas wok bung wantaim,” said Ms Otto. (We call UNRE as the University for the community so we must work in partnership with it).

 

New strategies for farmer training

The farmer training arm of the University of Natural Resources & Environment, Kairak Vudal Resource Training Centre (KVRTC), has developed new strategies to effectively deliver its integrated agriculture training programme (IATP) to farmers.

The centre through its monitoring & evaluation (M&E) section developed three new strategies: livelihoods analysis, interview techniques and extension Skills; and stakeholder’s analysis which they recently implemented in Maprik in East Sepik Province.

Officer in charge of the M& E section, Linda Ningo, said these new approaches were introduced to ensure that IATP trainings brought maximum positive benefits to people’s livelihoods.

Miss Ningo explained that livelihood analysis assisted  the university know exactly which IATP training module would be most relevant to the needs of a target group of people in a certain area.

The stakeholders’ analysis finds out how effectively the university can work closely with stakeholders in delivering IATP trainings; while the interview techniques and extension skills assists field data collectors establish whether or not IATP trainings achieved their desired outcomes with farmers.

The three strategies were trialled in Maprik last month by university lecturer Mathias Liu and three KVRTC officers Leo Darius, Janna Candy and Ms Ningo.

Livelihood analysis was conducted in two areas: Kuminibis village 1&2 in Maprik/Wora LLG and Ulupu ward in Yamil/Tamaui LLG; and focused on five target groups: women, men, young women, young men and community leaders.

Based on the analysis, the team came up with recommendations for the areas.

Modules recommended for the two wards were: sustainable livelihoods, basic book keeping, land use and soil fertility, vegetable farming, cocoa, livestock and market and supply chain management.

The stakeholders’ analysis conducted involved four stakeholders, Foundation of Women in Agriculture Development (FOWIAD), division of primary industry, commerce and Coffee Industry Corporation.

The team discovered that in order to effectively deliver training to people, the university should continue to remain neutral and work closely in partnership with all stakeholders in Maprik and East Sepik province as a whole in delivering IATP trainings.

In the interview techniques and extension skills workshop that was conducted for two days, 25 participants from various organisations such as FOWIAD, Division of Primary Industry and some women’s groups were assisted to develop questionnaires to ascertain suitable interview methods to find out whether IATP trainings had benefited the population. The interview techniques and extension skills can also be used for M&E purposes.

Ms Ningo said the outcomes of the two analyses carried out and the workshop were successful and would recommend that the same approach be taken in all new areas IATP trainings were taken into.

 

UNRE vice chancellor awarded

“The QUEEN has been graciously pleased, on the occasion of the Celebration of Her Majesty’s Birthday, to give orders for the following promotions in, and appointments to the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire.”

This was the official announcement from Papua New Guinea’s Head of State Queen Elizabeth II last weekend that saw more than 50 Papua New Guineans either join or advance within the ranks of the Order of the British Empire.

Among them was University of Natural Resources & Environment (UNRE) vice chancellor Prof Philip Siaguru (pictured).

From an ordinary member of the Civil Division of the Order of the British Empire (MBE), which he was awarded in 2002, Prof Siaguru was promoted to the rank of ordinary commander of the Order (CBE) for service to forestry and education, particularly his commitment and dedication to the University he has been at the helm of since 2005.

Those who know Prof Siaguru have seen firsthand the vice chancellor’s passion for the institution.

“I have never met a man who is so passionate about a state institution,” Commission of Higher Education chairman and UNRE council member Simon Kenehe once said.

“You can see the map of Vudal on his face.”

Prof Siaguru, who learnt about the award from his older sister Dr Angelica Braun of the Office of the Prime Minister, said it was an achievement for UNRE, because the recognition was given for his efforts for the university.

Many university staff that joined Prof Siaguru’s family and friends in congratulating him on this achievement, described him as an example for others to follow.

Meanwhile, many other Papua New Guineans were awarded titles under other British Orders such as the Order of Saint Michael and Saint George.

For Prof Siaguru however, who lives for his country and his institution, being awarded a title under the Order of the British Empire is befitting because his loyalty to Papua New Guinea and dedication to the University of Natural Resources and Environment ably reflects the commitment required in the Order’s motto “For God and the Empire.”

Prof Siaguru also received the Silver Jubilee Medal in 2000 for contributions to forestry science and forestry education in PNG.

He also had the honour of having the department of forestry building at the University of Technology named after him in recognition for his contributions to the development of the revised forestry curriculum which shifted the training focus from the traditional log harvest to sustainable forest management.

This particular honour also recognised that he was the first national to localise the position of head of the department of forestry. In fact, he was the first Papua New Guinean to become a substantive head of any department at the University of Technology (Unitech).

Indeed, this down-to-earth vice chancellor from Boikin in East Sepik is a man of many firsts. These include among others: first Papua New Guinean to receive a doctorate (PhD) in forestry, founding president of Unitech’s National Academic Staff Association and first national vice chancellor of the university.

Prof Siaguru’s achievements can be attributed to his late father Petrus Siaguru, who himself displayed exceptional wisdom and leadership qualities.

These virtues were echoed by UNRE chancellor Sir Rabbie Namaliu who knew him.

“The late Mr Petrus Siaguru was not only a highly-respected leader in his own right but he had an incredible reservoir of wisdom. He was a wise man in the true sense of the word and was a man ahead of his time,” Sir Rabbie said.

The chancellor said Prof Siaguru’s father had a vision and great goals not only for his family and children but through them for his church, his province and for his country.

“Not only did he succeed in translating his vision but also in achieving his goals. He was an admirable and great role model that we should all aspire to be,” Sir Rabbie said.

For his outstanding service to the Catholic Church and the community in East Sepik Province, late Petrus Siaguru received an MBE from the Queen; and an Order of Logohu (OL) and Silver Jubilee Medal from the Government of Papua New Guinea.

This pillar of strength for the Siaguru family passed away peacefully in his sleep in May this year at the ripe old age of 97.

He had lived only to serve God and his country, a fact he made sure all his children knew and respected.

His legacy, values and principles, however, live on in his son, Philip Yembi Siaguru. Like father, like son - For God and the Empire.

Vice chancellor challenges students

KIS visit: UNRE Vice Chancellor Prof Philip Siaguru with students of Kimbe International School

Students graduating with an undergraduate diploma or bachelor degree from a university must not think that it is the end of the road.

This was a challenge issued by University of Natural Resources & Environment (UNRE) vice chancellor Prof Philip Siaguru to Grade 12 students of Kimbe International School (KIS) last Monday.

Prof Siaguru said most students thought that getting an undergraduate diploma and degree was the pinnacle of university studies.

“That is not true. At a university there are six more steps to go to reach the highest level of educational qualification,” said Prof Siaguru.

He said after receiving an undergraduate diploma or a bachelor degree which takes about 2-3years and 4-5years respectively, the other types of qualifications include:

·        Honours degree (1-2years);

·        Post-graduate diploma (1-2years);

·        Masters degree (1-2years);

·        Doctorate of Philosophy by research (4-5years);

·        Doctorate of Science by publication (depends on individual commitment); and

·        Professorship by research and publication (depends on individual commitment).

He added that those goals depended on their full commitment and focus on their studies and challenged them to achieve post-graduate qualifications.

Prof Siaguru, who is an avid campaigner of the sustainable use and management of Papua New Guinea’s natural resources, encouraged the students to seriously think of choosing careers in the fields of agriculture, fisheries, forestry and tourism.

Speaking bluntly, he said, “Some of you are probably thinking of becoming accountants and lawyers but I can tell you quite honestly that there is a limited market for those skills. You will be making more of a difference for your country, yourselves and your children if you choose a career in agriculture, fisheries and marine resources, forestry or even tourism.

“We are now enjoying the benefits of our non-renewable resources but these will run out one day and if we don’t sustainably manage our natural resources now, we will be in serious trouble in the future.”

Stressing his point, the vice chancellor said: “When the economies of almost every country in the world were falling the PNG Kina remained stable. Why? Was this because of the revenue generated from our mines and oil fields? Was this because we had enough saved in foreign reserves?

“No. We survived because of our coffee, our cocoa, our oil palm, our tea, our balsa, our barramundi, our tuna, our beche-de-mer and our other renewable natural resources.”

Prof Siaguru warned that while the country would make millions of kna from the liquefied natural gas project, if the money was not put into sustainably managing the country’s natural renewable resources, PNG could end up as destitute as Nauru, a country which once boasted the second-highest per capita GDP in the world because of its phosphate mines.

“If we do not manage our natural renewable resources sustainably, 30 or even 20 years from now, we will be classified as an economically failed state. Look at what happened to Nauru. Its people became rich almost overnight from their phosphate mines but they did not plan for their future. Their economy is now in deep crisis,” he said.

Prof Siaguru said this was also why the students had to understand and embrace the Government’s Vision 2050 and its seven pillars now.

“Ten to 20 years from now, you will be in the driving seat of this Government initiative, that is why you must make it your business to understand it now,” he said.

Prof Siaguru left the students with a Red Indian philosophy that he learnt while in Seattle in the United States.

“In PNG we are very proud of the fact that we own about 97%of the land. The Red Indian philosophy is different. They believe the land owns them, they are only custodians. So while they have the use of the land, they use it wisely so that the next generation also benefits from it,” he said.

Prof Siaguru’s presentation was welcomed by KIS teacher Genevieve Lavei, who said it was good for the students to hear facts about their country and make decisions that would benefit not only themselves but PNG as a whole.

“The presentation really opened the students’ minds. They came here to learn about courses offered by the university that will benefit themselves as individuals but are leaving with a sense of duty for their country because they now know that its future depends on them and the choices they make today,” she said.

Mrs Lavai said she wished all students in the country had the opportunity to listen to Prof Siaguru’s “straight talking” presentation.

“Many young people do not think much about the effects of mining or the importance of managing natural resources and even Vision 2050 because they think these are issues for older citizens to worry about, but this presentation has shown us that young people have a very important role to play in achieving a healthy, wealthy, smart and happy society,” she said.

Mrs Lavei also thanked Prof Siaguru for donating two copies of Vision 2050 to the school’s library.

Former UNRE lecturer visits

From left are Graeme and Philippa Hockey, and Dale and Belinda Rogers

Papua New Guinea University of Natural Resources & Environment’s Vudal Campus recently welcomed a former lecturer who once taught at the institution 40 years ago. 

Graeme Hockey from Darwin, Australia, who lectured in cattle farming in 1970 when the institution was known as Vudal Agricultural College, visited the campus with wife Philippa.

Welcoming them, University registrar Henry Gioven said it was good to have former staff of the institution return to see the progress it had made since then.

University vice chancellor Prof Philip Siaguru gave the visitors a presentation of the progress of the institution and its future development plans.

Mr Hockey said he was impressed with the inspiring presentation and the fact that the state asset had been developed and is being looked after.

He said he had not known what to expect because he had left when many parts of the campus grounds were still covered with thick bushes and kunai grass.

Mrs Hockey, who used to work at the institution as personal assistant to the then principal Syd Saville, said she was particularly impressed about the developments that had taken place at Vudal over the last 40 years because the infrastructure at many of the other places they had visited had been neglected.

“Some of the places we went back to didn’t have anything anymore and it was sad to see that,” she said.

The Hockeys said they were proud to be part of the history of the university that was still expanding.

Mr Hockey arrived in PNG in 1967. In 1968 and 1979 he worked as a Department of Primary and Industry officer at Warangoi.

In 1970, he joined the institution as a lecturer specialising in cattle farming, where he met and married wife Philippa. In 1971, they moved to Kagua in Southern Highlands and from 1972 to 1973 they were based in Popondetta.

Mr Hockey returned to Darwin in 1973 to help his father to take care of the family’s cattle farm. In 1977, he joined Northern Territory government and worked for 25 years before he retired.

Currently he works with a tour company and also does volunteer work in East Timor.

The Hockeys were accompanied by Philippa’s sister Belinda and her husband Dale Rogers.

A huge Asian population increase will leave Australia increasingly isolated

By COLIN FRASER in The Australian
AUSTRALIA is on the brink of an offshore population explosion that threatens to change almost every aspect of our lives during the next 40 years. It may well decide who will own our country in centuries to come.
Locked in combat over essentially domestic issues, none of our political parties is seriously addressing or explaining the unprecedented rise in people numbers already happening in Asia and Southeast Asia.
One map on this page records our reassuring atlas's vision of our country: a unique island continent, its importance and security confirmed by its huge land mass.
But the new political reality is revealed in the right-hand map, in which the area of each country in our region has been re-configured according to its population.
As never before, Australia, a Western island in an Asian sea, faces the possibility of becoming a remote outpost in a new Asia-dominated world. Every year the gap between our populations is increasing with extraordinary speed.
The UN and US census bureau say that during the next 40 years Australia's population will rise from 22 million to a minimum 29 million. An Australian Treasury forecast is for 36 million.
Simultaneously, seven or eight already overcrowded countries across an arc to our north are predicted to increase their total numbers by some 1.25 billion, at least 90 times Australia's gain.
Within 40 years, people in Asian countries will number six of every 10 worldwide.
Coincidentally, one of the US's most respected research organisations, the 70-year-old non-profit Foundation for the Study of Cycles, has identified the start of a 500-year geopolitical cycle. It says its result will be a huge and permanent transfer of relative wealth and power from West to East.
Australia faces an urgent need to create a new population strategy that goes way beyond just stemming the flow of a few thousand boatpeople.
We now attract record numbers of approved migrants: 297,000 net in the year to June last year, compared with 97,000 a year 10 years ago. Even on the basis of the UN-US lower prediction of 29 million, our average annual intake must be at least maintained at its present level till 2050.
If the more favoured prediction of 36,000,000 should prove the reality, our intake will need to rise to some 350,000 a year. Comparatively few Australians presently welcome such a prospect. Nor are we prepared for it.
Already, in most of the countries above us, the need for adequate water is chronic, affecting some 40 million in China alone, even more in India. Food shortages multiply while groundwater tables fall year by year.
As populations mushroom, it is inevitable pressure on our borders will come not just from uninvited asylum-seekers, but from northern governments, demanding Australia pull down its barriers and share our energy, ore and agricultural good fortune on practical and humanitarian grounds.
We may argue others don't understand the challenges of our country's great distances and desertified landscape. But in times of great human trial, rationalisation gives way to desperation. History shows that the urge to conquest is rarely far below the surface. It is scarcely a somewhere else phenomenon.
This writer was in Dili, East Timor, and little more than 700 km from Darwin, just ahead of the outbreak of World War II in the Pacific. On the pretext of helping Timor's then Portuguese masters, Japanese military, naval and civil administrators were already outnumbering Europeans four to one. Their interest in Timor was patently, unquestionably, as a springboard for a future move on Australia.
Remembered also is an amicable conversation with a Japanese professor during a seminar coffee break in Tokyo 10 years after Japan's defeat. "You know," he said, "we can't help looking at that big empty country of yours and thinking, 'We would have done it better.' "
Australia has long enjoyed the protection of two of the world's leading powers: for a couple of centuries the British empire, for the past 70 years the US.
It is unlikely that we can now rely on the protection of either. Both have extraordinary burdens of entrenched unresolved debt. Their governments must focus on their own survival.
Economists calculate US unresolved debt now exceeds the combined cost in today's dollars of all its financial crises since 1803, including world wars I and II, Vietnam, Iraq, the Great Depression, the moon landings and the entire NASA space program. And now the government's massive post-meltdown stimulus payments.
As the world's wealth and power moves to the East, Australia's destiny almost certainly lies in becoming the new Switzerland of our region. Despite its size, Switzerland has weathered centuries of surrounding turmoil. It is respected for being economically strong; highly industrious; determinedly independent; self-sufficient according to plainly promulgated principles; technologically advanced and, for a small nation, defensively deterrent.
Australia's future security must be earned similarly.
Our claim to special status lies almost entirely in our Lucky Country's natural bounty: extraordinary coal, natural gas and ore resources; expanding offshore and onshore oil and gas fields; huge areas of unoccupied land; abundant water (but most of it's falling in the wrong places and most running out to sea); vast quantities of uranium (as new technology and safeguards propel nuclear power into a major source of future energy in country after country); and, in our drought-free years, a vital source of grain, livestock and produce to help feed the world.
We must respect the pressing magnitude of our region's challenges. For instance, China and India alone estimate that the global financial crisis threw about 70 million of their citizens out of work, more than three times Australia's total population.
Despite China's disposition for conquest or absorption (Hong Kong, Tibet, potentially Taiwan) it is highly probable Australia's real-politik path will prove to be a mutual benefit and co-operation agreement between our two nations, and a similar one with India.
As with Switzerland, our contribution to such stabilising alliances will be that we continue to provide the things the most powerful countries above us need.
If the new mining tax's effect should be to diminish Australia's perceived reliability as a future supply partner, its biggest unintended side effect may be to accelerate China's and India's search for new sources of alternative oil, coal, gas and uranium.
Certainly Australia holds no long-term monopoly. Billions of serious dollars are being spent to increase production and to prove promising new discoveries in at least 20 countries. China scours the globe to appease its appetite for energy, with no shortage of government funding available to pay for assured supply.
Australia must accept quickly that we cannot refuse to share our good fortune, nor set our own comfortable pace.
China continues to build new-coal-powered plants, each month adding the generating output of Australia's entire electricity network. It is surging ahead with the expansion of its infrastructure, building 30 new high-speed rail networks and thousands of new roads. It is planning 30 new nuclear-based power-generating plants and plans to soon market safe turn-key generators to the world. It is still increasing its network of dams, both in China and beyond its borders in the Mekong.
It is determined, along with India, to become the world's biggest automotive manufacturer and its most profitable and competitive manufacturing power.
By contrast, Australia is perceived to have slipped from its pre-eminence (with Canada) as the nation which entered the global financial crisis with an enviably sound economy, the product mostly of strictly focused policies from the Howard-Costello administration. While China (and India) race to build their infrastructures, Australia has largely exhausted its Building Australia Fund on poorly explained and administered projects (broadband, domestic ceiling insulation, assorted school buildings, emissions trading scheme) at an estimated cost of $8 billion. Many see a desire to make good these expenditures as the principal reason for the estimated $9 billion mining tax.
Infrastructure Australia, a body set up by the Rudd government about two years ago to involve leading businessmen to help attack Australia's ever-growing infrastructure backlog, now calculates its necessary budget at $770 billion.
Of this, Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson has said Australia needs to spend $100 billion to keep power on and avoid inevitable blackouts, brownouts and health and business disasters.
No determined plan appears to exist to finance a solution, nor to save us from repeatedly rising domestic and industrial electricity charges. No co-ordinated plan to build new generating installations for up to 14 million new citizens appears in sight.
As in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, investment in refurbishment of coal-fired generation has been extinguished by fears of carbon particle pollution.
For our northern neighbours, our coal is a humanitarian product. In China, especially, it sustains jobs and powers its manufacturing industry. It also powers the cheap electric pumps that raise groundwater for millions of small farmers. Indian authorities say any loss of cheap coal, or even the removal of its subsidies, would trigger a widespread and chaotic rural revolt.
Both countries regard the discomfort and health effects of carbon particle fallouts as localised problems to be endured for a time in their quest for larger, longer-range economic objectives and not to be confused with the Copenhagen claims that carbon dioxide can permanently and disastrously change the world's upper atmospheres and its future climate.
Few of us welcome the prospect of a surge of millions of new immigrants, but we need to accept their coming presence as inevitable and valuable. They underline our obligation to radically attack our neglected infrastructure. We are not building the housing or infrastructure to absorb them.
The world needs to know that we are leaders in our quotas for immigrants and genuine refugees. But we must also state clearly our tough-cop rules: uncompromisingly no admittance for boatpeople returning to the lowest levels of the Howard years.
We urgently need to find a public consensus about the individuals and families we most want and need to bring to our country, their skills, their backgrounds of hardship, their readiness to commit to Australia's attitudes and values.
As in Switzerland, we need to ensure that our defensive capability is constantly modernised and strengthened. Defence Minister John Faulkner has noted with concern that China is rapidly expanding its naval forces, with plans for new nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers.
In modern Australia we must demand an end to incompletely explained and appallingly administered government ventures, initiated without cost-benefit evidence.
The 40 years to 2050 is a heartbeat in the global timetable. Many of our needed responses cannot be readily bought off-shelf, nor can the skills to bring them to life be imported at short notice.
Time now for a rapid overview of the tasks which must be attacked most urgently, their priorities, justifications, employment needs, estimated costs and financial benefits.
The clock is ticking. Too fast for comfort.
Journalist Colin Fraser was sent to Timor and Singapore by Keith Murdoch at age 19. He was Australia's youngest accredited war correspondent in World War II. He held senior editorial and management positions with Melbourne's Sun News-Pictorial and The Herald, forerunners of News Limited's Herald Sun. He was an Australian television pioneer and later national vice-chairman of advertising agency George Patterson.

What should Australia do about Papua New Guinea?

By REGINALD RENAGI

Papua New Guinea got her Independence in 1975.  In that time until today, Australia has for 35 years been propping up PNG's annual budget with free money.  This substantial grant is currently estimated at some A$ 13 billion.  This is free money that we don't have to pay back.  Or do we in perhaps other forms? 

Anyway the free money from Australian taxpayers is meant to develop PNG and improve the quality of life for ordinary Papua New Guineans.  This has not happened and Papua New Guineans since then have in recent times asked: where has all this Australian money gone to? 

A good question with many answers.  One tends to get different responses from politicians from both Waigani and Canberra, including academics, public servants, and private citizens. However, one thing is clear and prompts this next question: why hasn't this huge grant from Australia raise PNG out of its current abject poverty?

We hear in recent times the angry demands from many well-intentioned people both PNG and Australians calling on their respective PM and governments to fix the ongoing problem(s) with Australian aid.

Many efforts have since been made to correct this.  From independent to joint government aid reviews by both countries, but still this nagging doubt: 'how do we improve the efficacy of AusAid' to the mutual benefit of PNG and Australia?

Australia is an incredibly-charitable nation, as evidenced by the hundreds of millions of dollars it grants to PNG and other developing countries as foreign aid.  This may sound good to constituents but now it's time for Australia to stop.  Giving so much of its hardworking tax-payers dollars to PNG only props up bad governments our people perceive as corrupt since Independence.

It's high time, new Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard reviews her country's AusAid programme and makes a basic fundamental change that none of her Australian predecessors have done since PNG's Independence. 

All recent AusAid reviews before and after any Joint Ministerial Forum meetings are basically the same.  New changes made are mere cosmetics at best to give the impression to citizens of both countries that new positive benefits will automatically flow on to the PNG people. 

This is a fallacy and has not happened. Because the basic root cause of why the AusAid programme has not been effective to date has not really been addressed with real seriousness by our politicians and its over-bloated beauracracy. 

The reality is when our government complains, Australia rewrites another AusAid policy agreement paper in Canberra for joint signatories at the next Ministerial Forum or some G to G sponsored special event in future.  The basic problem remains until the next time PNG raises another aid-related issue.  Than another policy redraft by Canberra just to make Waigani happy and quiet for a while until another foreign Ministry representation about "some oversight aspect from our last meeting ..." resurfaces later, and so on. 

But Julia Gillard can change all this nonsense starting this year when she later visits Port Moresby.  So PNG might not expect it now but she needs ALP's endorsement to get tough with PNG.  Australia must do this because its aid money is wasted in PNG. 

As 'charity begins at home’, Gillard now needs to also do more for her own poor people, especially the majority of Australian indigenous and the Torres Strait people, instead of sending it north of the 10th parrallel.

While the whole AusAid programme has merits, the basic approach of just giving PNG its taxpayer’s money to be only wasted by our government is fundamentally wrong. 

Julia Gillard must totally cut the AusAid programme down to zero and in its place increase the trade activity volume between Australia and PNG by some 100%.  This in the long run will be more beneficial to the development of PNG and subsequent wellbeing of Papua New Guineans.   

Why must we cut AusAid now? There are many reasons, but for a start: PNG's abject poverty is deeply rooted in government corruption, corruption that actually is fostered by Australia (including other external aid from so-called development partners).

 We should ask ourselves a simple question: Why is private capital so scarce in PNG? The obvious answer is that over the years our country has been ruled by not-very-clever men who pursue ineffective economic policies or try to run a country in a somewhat 'policy-vacuum', laxsidaisical 'bull-in-a-China shop' way.

As a result, Australian aid simply enriches prime ministers and their cohorts, errant politicians, distorts national economies, and props up bad national (and provincial) governments. As a matter of fact, Australia could send PNG next year a warping $1 billion, and this country still would remain mired in abject poverty and supposedly very corrupt as it is now, and getting more worse by the day.

The answer is simply because so many of PNG politicians reject the idea of empowering its citizens from being wealthy, sharing our country's rich resources equally among citizens, being responsive and responsible, accountable, free markets and the rule of law.

Australian aid money enables prime ministers and governments to gain and hold power without the support of the people who today are totally fed up with political corruption since Independence. PNG politicians have learnt to manipulate foreign governments and obtain an independent source of income (especially AusAid), which makes them far richer and more powerful than any of their political rivals; and ordinary Papua New Guineans.

Once comfortably in power and much to the horror of Australian and other foreign governments that funded them, PNG politicians subjugate their own people to a miserable life of helplessness and being dependent on political 'hand-outs'. It is not a good thing to say here, but in reality, AusAid gives PNG politicians the “power to impoverish” Papua New Guineans.

It's time to stop this crime. The bottom line is that despite years of Australian aid, the great bulk of Papua New Guineans than ever are living in abject poverty, which will only get worse in future. AusAid and simply foreign aid does not work, but only fuels more increased levels of corruption, dependency syndrome and misery for PNG; and its people. 

Despite this reality, Australian governments (and other foreign countries) offer to increase aid are always praised for their compassionate and progressive policies.

But what about Papua New Guineans who are suffering here at home, whether from hunger, illness, or poverty? Are their lives and well being less important? Every Australian must now ask themselves this question: Where is the constitutional provision allowing Australian tax dollars to be sent to PNG only to be fretted away by that country's politicians?

Australians should be free to do everything in their power to help Papua New Guineans from suffering, whether by donating money or working directly in our country. But its government foreign aid to PNG do not work, it never has and must now be stopped.

PM Julia Gillard must now direct her DFAT speech writers that she needs a fresh new speech for this year's revised Port Moresby Declaration to be perhaps titled: 'The New Order of Australian-PNG Partnership'.  This must be enduring and clearly spell out: 'What Australia should do about PNG?'

Julia, it's time to cut Aid and increase trade between our two countries. When this happens then watch what happens.  PNG will comfortably pay her way and become less dependent and more prosperous in future.  Future PNG administration will long remember an Australia PM for her toughness to assist our country become more independent, overcome poverty and fight corruption through good governance; and of having a more responsible and accountable government in office.

So the short answer to the title of this article is simple.  Australia should now make PNG truly independent in every sense of the word without Aid.  Australia should now let this country be more of being herself without any strings attached (money or otherwise).

 I hereby invite the public to an open discussion of what Australia should do now about PNG.  The response here should be interesting.  It will undoubtedly allow the Australian High Commission in PNG to better advise Canberra before Gillard pays us a historical courtesy call as Australia's first woman Prime Minister.  When she does, we will welcome her with open arms as we did, Kevin Rudd.