Statement by the NASFUND Board on the burning down of the Burns Philp site

Date: 15 July 2009

 

As you are aware the historic downtown precinct known as the Burns Philp site was guttered by fire last Sunday night. Firstly let me say how fortunate we were, that there was no loss of life. The fire that ripped through the 5,000 square metre site covering nearly a city block is perhaps the worst fire ever in Port Moresby’s history. Sadly we have lost an icon that was the country’s most historic colonial building. The Board has resolved to do what ever it can to ensure that we preserve the Bell Tower and advice to date suggests that it remains possible. The adjoining walls however cannot be saved and now present a hazard to safety. They must be pulled down and application will be made after review by a structural engineer to pull the tops of the walls inwards.

NASFUND as you are aware purchased the precinct two years ago with the express purpose of long term redevelopment that would encompass preservation of the Burns Philp Building. We have over the last two years worked to lift fire and safety measures within the buildings and preserve the original Burns Philp buildings - of which we were two weeks off final restoration.

 

Some pertinent observations.

 

During that two year period, the Board has faced difficulties from a number of quarters in renovating the building. We were aware of regulatory authorities seeking kick backs before approving renovations. NASFUND and its contractor, Hornibrooks NGI refuse to entertain bribery as a means to “getting things done” and this was partly the reason we were faced with an unnecessarily long process in getting full approvals.

Secondly we have had a long drawn out process in trying to break the inherited contract signed between the previous owners and Tribal Den. They have used the district courts to frustrate the process unnecessarily and bolster a case which is in our view untenable. The Tribal Den proprietors have continually frustrated the renovation works and through “carelessness” on a number of times damaged the renovations that were carried out.

Thirdly, Tribal Den operated in a manner foreign to proper business practice. It was well known that girls known as “hostesses” (some allegedly under legal age) were operating in the night club; drugs and breach of trading rules were also common knowledge. Tribal Den refused to live up to its obligations under the Superannuation Act. The manner in which they operated appeared to be one of always “testing the system” – typical of an approach that was at the core of issues relating to the riots of a few months back. Of interest was that two of the people with involvement in Tribal Den have at some stage been deported. Essentially, their mode of operation is not what we believe the community expects nor should it tolerate.

Fourthly, NCDC officials on a number of occasions have warned that the building was a health hazard. We urged relevant authorities to issue notices and for them to seek court orders removing the tenants. Always, they backed off legal action and the issue would disappear. NASFUND could not take legal action as we were prevented by a court order vis-à-vis the lease dispute.

Finally, as only far back as ten days ago, NASFUND worked with NCDC officials to close the Tribal Den Hotel on the basis of;

 

1. Illegal internal constructions – Rooms and Ablutions (sanitary) areas not conforming to building standards
2. 24hr water leaks from the ablutions area damaging walls and adjoining space
3. Rotten timber
4. Inadequate lighting
5. Infestation of rats and vermin
6. Non provision of appropriate fire exits
7. Public nuisance including waste disposal and noise
8. Poor ventilation
9. Previous Hotel management obstruction of officials from entering the building – similar to that experienced by Hornibrooks and others in their dealings with Tribal Den.

 

NCD issued a notice of “Unfit for Human Habitation” on 7 July. Finally we had the tools to evict tribal Den without breaching the court order.

NASFUND and NCDC agreed to close the Hotel on Monday 13^th July at 7.00 am. To this end we sought co operation from the police and a security guard firm was employed to assist. NASFUND had engaged Hornibrooks NGI to brick up the site and Port Moresby Locksmith to change all locks.

This would then allow NASFUND to clear the building of illegal constructions, bring the adjoining building up to building board standards and stop illicit activities occurring in the precinct.

NASFUND having made arrangements for the building to be closed on Monday now finds that 12 hours before, the buildings including the hotel is guttered by fire. The precinct has been cordoned off and is now under the authority of the Fire Department who has commenced forensic investigations. Insurance assessors are also sending an investigatory team from Australia.

 

Questions by Members Answered

 

Question:          Was the Buildings insured

Answer:            Yes

 

Question:          Will NASFUND take a loss irrespective of insurance?

Answer:            Yes, estimated up to K4 million against NASFUND’s half yearly profit is K78 million

 

Moving Forward

 

As we come to terms with this new reality, the Board casts its eyes on the future of the site. We now have to turn loss and destruction into an opportunity. The Board is mindful of its obligations not only to its members but also to the community as a stakeholder. It is also mindful that as the leading PNG owned property developer at present, there are limits to further development by NASFUND as a single entity because of asset allocation restraints.

The following broad understanding has been resolved by the Board.

 

1. The destruction by fire of the sites now presents us with an opportunity to work in partnership in the renewal of Port Moresby Township in a way not seen before. It gives us both enormous scope and flexibility including open spaces and an arts application.
2. NCDC will be invited to be part of this city renewal.
3. If at all possible, the link to the past be preserved, meaning that the Bell Tower should be incorporated in any new developments.
4. The scope of the redevelopment will not include high rise type constructions, but medium density buildings with potential for restaurants and walkways.
5. The redevelopment will require joint venture partners suitable to NASFUND’s vision of a greater downtown Port Moresby.

Finally, NASFUND unreservedly apologizes for the inconvenience that has been caused by the byproduct of the fire including road closure and congestion. We will attempt to resolve these issues as quickly as possible. We also thank the Fire Brigade for their actions in ensuring protection of life and adjoining buildings and doing the best job possible under the circumstances.

 

For and on behalf of the NASFUND Board

 

John Jeffery

Chairman

 

 

Statement by Opposition Leader 15th July 2009 Carbon Trading and Office of Climate Change and Environment Sustainability

Mr Speaker

 

Our country has the world’s third largest rain forest.  We note and applaud the part Papua New Guinea is playing as a member of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations (CRN), a body set up to encourage the reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) and to convert forest assets into revenue without timber or other commercial exploitation.

At the same time, however, we note the paradox between these efforts and the very close connections between the Somare Government and timber companies, as well as the paradox between these efforts and our fiscal regime for forestry, and with logging practices throughout the country.  Paradox might, Mr Speaker, be seen to be a polite word for hypocrisy.

While the Opposition applauds the CRN initiative, we would like the PNG Government to give us more information about the CRN Secretariat – whether for example the PNG Government is contributing funds to the Secretariat, or whether any Secretariat staff are in any way connected to commercial transactions that the Government is entering for the sale of carbon credits from tracts of land in Papua New Guinea.

Of course climate change conferences are popular in 2009, but it would be hard for anyone (apart from perhaps our own Prime Minister) to match the globe-trotting of Kevin Conrad and Co – or indeed the theatrics they are performing.  Last week at Chatham House in London Mr Conrad attempted to defend what he called “irregularities” in PNG Government actions over REDD.

Mr Speaker, we note the alarming developments that have recently come to light in relation to premature carbon trading, and the most unusual agreements that the Government appears to be entering with a large number of individuals and companies to represent and trade carbon on our behalf, without proper scrutiny and without regulatory policy or legislation in place.

On behalf of the Opposition I wish to caution the Prime Minister and his Government and say that we trust that they will ensure that carbon revenue derived in respect of our country will be for the people, not for a few individuals or companies here or abroad.

I deliberately say “trust”, Mr Speaker, because if we are not careful, cowboys operating behind the scenes, using our name and wearing our cloak, will reap the lion’s share of carbon revenue.  Even Mr Conrad has admitted that, quote, “we had every carbon cowboy in the world descend upon Papua New Guinea and try to get a deal with landowners”.

Mr Speaker it appears that the Prime Minister and his henchmen, including the Minister for Planning and more recently the Director of the Office of Climate Change, have been hawking these potential assets around the world to all and sundry, including some of Mr Conrad’s “carbon cowboys”.

As far back as 2005, long before we had an Office of Climate Change, the PM and one of his kitchen circle were dabbling in carbon trading.   On 24^th October 2005, Hon Paul Tiensten, then Minister for Trade and Industry wrote to a company called Climate Assist (PNG) Ltd.

Mr Speaker it absolutely amazes me that a minister of state could sign such a letter as this to anyone.  The lack of policy or process reflected in and by the letter is astounding. 

I quote: 

“The Prime Minister has accepted that PNG has carbon credits and they are trad[e]able commodity.  The Prime Minister and I have accepted that Climate Assist (PNG) Ltd acts as brokers on behalf of the Independent State of PNG to buy and sell carbon credits.

 

The carbon credits have been assigned to Climate Assist (PNG) Ltd through our certificate and monetization that will finance designated projects within PNG.

 

Therefore, this letter sets to acknowledge the role of Climate Assist (PNG) Ltd and advise that the Government of the Independent State of PNG unconditionally guarantee[s] all actions undertaken for the monetization of these credits.”

 

In the years since 2005 Climate Assist (PNG) has been actively pursuing the deal it struck with Mr Tiensten.  It seems that last year, 2008, the PNG Office of Climate Change signed memos with Climate Assist and another company called Earth Sky, whereby these companies would advance $10 million to the Office of Climate Change in return for the rights to sell $500 million carbon offsets, retaining 20% for themselves.  Mr Speaker, that 20% is worth $100 million.

A search of Climate Assist (PNG) Ltd with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) reveals it to be a one dollar company based in Rockhampton with its sole director, Mr Gregory Corby, providing an address in Toowoomba.   We wonder what credentials this company has, Mr Speaker, to be appointed as broker for the state by the Prime Minister and Minister Tiensten.  We also wonder what connections it might have to associates of the Mirigini kitchen cabinet.

Recent media reports have revealed that another Australian company, Carbon Planet, last year advanced the Office of Climate Change $1.2 million.  This payment was reported by Carbon Planet in its 2008 financial statement to ASIC as quote “advance funding on [PNG] origination projects in the 2009 financial year”, that is, money which will be recouped from profits from PNG carbon trading.   

It is interesting to note that Carbon Planet says that it expects the voluntary carbon market to exceed $20 billion by 2012, just three years away.

As with Climate Assist, Mr Speaker, the Opposition wonders what connections Carbon Planet and its Chairman, Mr Jim Johnson have with the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister’s associates.

We also wonder why, when questioned about this payment by an AAP reporter, Mr Johnson would say so defensively (quote): “I am not explaining at all.  I am not having this conversation”.

We wonder what this payment was for, who this payment was made to, and what commitments either the Prime Minister or the Office of Climate Change has given to Carbon Planet in return for this money.

The three cases I have already cited Mr Speaker are not the only examples of premature carbon trading conducted by the Government.  Apparently last year, the Office of Climate Change authorized a Swiss based broker, South Pole Carbon Asset Management, to market 1 million tonnes of avoided carbon dioxide emission per annum from a PNG logging project based in the Sepik, April Salome.

A close relative of the Prime Minister is involved with yet another company, Pacific Carbon.  The media alleges the PM’s relative has been urging people in East Sepik to sign away rights to land for trading carbon to this company.

The Governor for Eastern Highlands brought more anomalies to light at the Regional Conference on Climate Change held in Goroka in May.  Hon Mal Kela Smith asked the Director of Climate Change why foreigners were controlling the millions of kina being poured into the Office.  He asked why the Office’s Advisory Board was demanding a percentage of income raised, rather than having a fixed budget like any other government agency.  He asked why a company based in the British Virgin Islands, Earth Sky, was being used as an agent, and who the real owners of the secretive Virgin Islands company were. 

Governor Smith drew attention to the checkered track record of Kevin Conrad in Papua New Guinea, and his close association with both the failed multi million kina POSF housing scheme (where K17 million disappeared, unaccounted for) and the demise of ANGCO, which resulted in PNGBC having to write off 35 million kina.  Understandably the Governor for Eastern Highlands was concerned about the financial probity of the Office of Climate Change.  Taking his lead, the Conference resolved to request the Public Accounts Committee to examine the Climate Change Office and the Auditor General to audit the books of the Office immediately.

To my knowledge neither action has yet taken place.

Not to be outdone by lesser known companies, Macquarie Bank seems to have also entered the arena.  Macquarie Bank has been in discussions with the Office of Climate Change, offering to broker carbon trade deals and retain 15% of profits.  If the voluntary carbon market turns out to be worth billions of dollars in the next couple of years, as predicted by a number of players, the Bank’s 15% would be very handsome income indeed.

And then we have the controversial Kumula Doso concession in Western Province.  Despite the ongoing court case over this concession between the Eco Forestry Forum on behalf of landowners and Rimbinan Hijau, it seems that Carbon Planet has hooked up with a company called Nupan PNG Ltd, to trade carbon credits in respect of this land - all sanctioned by the Office of Climate Change.  When asked why the Office had issued certificates authorizing such trade, the Director’s lame excuse was that the certificates – all 39 of them – were not real certificates, they were “samples”.

Mr Speaker, it is obvious that the whole situation in relation to carbon trading in our country is a complete and utter mess.  Instead of developing an appropriate policy and legal framework that ensures protection of the interests of landowners and the state, the Prime Minister, Ministers and the staff of the Office of Climate Change have been criss-crossing the globe, appointing “brokers” on who knows what terms, and basically selling people’s and national assets at whim.

Mr Speaker the Opposition wants to know whether Cabinet has approved all of these schemes.  We want to know what the purpose of these so-called advance payments is.  We want to know whether these monies were paid to Consolidated Revenue or directly to the Office of Climate Change or its agents.

If the funds have not been paid to Consolidated Revenue, we want to know how are they being accounted, and what authority the Office of Climate Change has to raise or to spend these funds.

Above all, we want to know why the Government is promoting all these deals, when there is no regulatory policy or legislation for carbon trading in Papua New Guinea.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

 

Rt Hon Mekere Morauta KCMG MP

 

Evidence of substantial efficiency gains seen in Papua New Guinea, according to analysts

Evidence of substantial efficiency gains seen in Papua New Guinea, according to analysts

 

 

Singapore, 15 July 2009 – “Papua New Guinea has made important progress in implementing the Bogor Goals,” says a team of independent analysts.

This statement was made in an external review of the economy’s ability to reach APEC’s Bogor Goals, presented to officials today.  Having reduced tariffs, says the team, will contribute substantively to Papua New Guinea’s ability to reach its commitments by 2020.

According to the same report, Papua New Guinea has made notable efforts in promoting liberalisation and facilitation in the services sector – most notably in telecommunication, legal, tourism and energy services. Progress has also been made in standards and conformance and customs procedures.  The team also applauds efforts to improve regulatory transparency and to combat corruption.

The Bogor Goals are that free trade and investment in the APEC region should be established by 2010 in developed economies and by 2020 in developing economies.

Peer Reviews are conducted by independent, external review teams on a rotating basis and draw from the information found in economies’ most recent Individual Action Plans, reports issued by the World Trade Organisation and academic studies pertaining to the economy under review. 

A synopsis of the Peer Review may be found at:

http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iapbrief_pnewguinea.html

The complete report will be made available at the close of the APEC Senior Officials’ Meeting on 19 July at: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iap_pnewguinea.html

Photographs may be found at:

http://www.apec.org/apec/news___media/news_photos.html

 

For more information, contact:

 

 

Carolyn Williams at cdw@apec.org or at (65) 9617 7316

Anita Douglas at ad@apec.org or at (65) 9172 6427

 

 

How far have APEC economies come in achieving free trade?

Experts ask: How far have APEC economies come in achieving free trade?

 

Singapore, 15 July 2009 – APEC officials are currently considering progress of members in trade liberalization and facilitation.  Specifically, Russia, Papua New Guinea, Viet Nam and the Philippines will be subject to rigorous assessment of seventeen key policy areas affecting trade environments.

Similar exercises are conducted on a rotating basis as economies review and scrutinize the Individual Action Plans (IAPs) of their counterparts.  IAPs outline progress made toward achieving the goals set out in the Bogor Declaration of 1994.  This declaration established a target of free trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region by 2010 for developed economies and 2020 for developing economies; and these goals were adopted by all APEC economies.

To ensure consistent progress, the studies are conducted by independent review teams who also consider reports issued by the World Trade Organisation and studies published by experts who have also assessed the economies in question.  During the Peer Review session, findings and analysis are discussed openly among members and subsequently made available to the public.

Summaries of the four most recent IAP Peer Reviews conducted and cited here will be made available at the close of each peer review, respectively:

Papua New Guinea: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iapbrief_pnewguinea.html (available today)

Philippines: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iapbrief_philippines.html (available today)

Russia: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iapbrief_russia.html (available today)

Viet Nam: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iapbrief_viet_nam.html (available 16 July)

Complete reports will be made available on 19 July 2009 at:

Papua New Guinea: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iap_pnewguinea.html

Philippines: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iap_philippines.html

Russia: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iap_russia.html

Viet Nam: http://www.apec.org/media/2009_iap_viet_nam.html

News photos will be available on the APEC website on the conclusion of respective peer reviews:

http://www.apec.org/apec/news___media/news_photos.html

 

For more information, contact:

Carolyn Williams at cdw@apec.org or at (65) 9617 7316

Anita Douglas at ad@apec.org or at (65) 9172 6427

 

 

Dream comes true

By ISAAC NICHOLAS in The National, Papua New Guinea’s No. 1 daily newspaper

 

THE Hela and Jiwaka people’s dream for their own separate provinces became a reality yesterday when Parliament voted 83-1 for the two new provinces to be carved out from Southern Highlands and Western Highlands by 2012.

The Southern Highlands will lose the gas-rich Hela region, while the fertile agriculture area that is Jiwaka will no longer be part of Western Highlands.

Provincial Affairs Minister Job Pomat said an interim administration would be in place for the two new provinces until the 2012 elections, after which they would have their own full administrations.

When the euphoria of welcoming the two new provinces dies down, the tough task of drawing their boundaries will begin.

In the oil and gas-rich Southern Highlands, it will be tricky which side of the boundary Kutubu, Moran, Gobe and even Juha gas field will be placed. Some of these people and their leaders may want to remain a part of Southern Highlands.

Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare, who pushed for the creation of the two provinces, drew praise from Highlands leaders from Enga, Western and Southern Highlands who turned out in force late yesterday for a joint media conference to welcome the birth of the two provinces.

Southern Highlands Governor Anderson Agiru said it was the greatest gift the Grand Chief could have given them in the twilight of his illustrious political career.

“Today is the date with destiny for Hela and Jiwaka,” Mr Agiru said. “I am very happy to be part of the National Alliance Government that has honoured its commitment.”

He said the Hela people had repeatedly said “no Hela province, no gas”, but the Prime Minister had delivered both the Benefits Sharing Agreement (BSA) and now the Hela province.

Mr Agiru stressed that Hela and Southern Highlands would grow up as two sisters and equally share the benefits of the PNG LNG project.

He said there would be no competition between them and praised all his nine Members of Parliament for supporting the move because the province was so huge, with a population of 600,000.

Mr Agiru thanked the National Alliance party, its coalition partners, Mendi MP Pastor Isaac Joseph and Opposition leader Sir Mekere Morauta.

He specifically mentioned Pr Joseph because even though his party leader did not vote for the Bill, he stood up to be counted.

National Alliance deputy leader for the Highlands, Don Polye, said it was an achievement for the Government that had worked for seven years to realise the creation of the new provinces.

He said a technical working team was put together during the last government, which visited and gauged the views of the people who strongly called for their own province.

He said with the “new provinces comes the challenge to have the administration on the ground, for good leadership and to bring socio-economic development to the people”.

Member for North Waghi and Western Highlands deputy governor, Benjamin Mul, although in Opposition, supported the Bill for a separate Jiwaka province.

Mr Mul said he flew in a delegation from his province to Port Moresby and they were in Parliament to watch “live” Parliament’s approval for the new Jiwaka province.

 

Rural Australian computer terminology

From PAUL OATES in Queensland, Australia

Rural Australian computer terminology

 LOG ON:                          Adding wood to make the barbie hotter.
 LOG OFF:                         Not adding any more wood to the barbie.
 MONITOR:                      Keeping an eye on the barbie.
 DOWNLOAD:                 Getting the firewood off the Ute.
 HARD DRIVE:                 Making the trip back home without any cold tinnies.
 KEYBOARD:                    Where you hang the Ute keys.
 WINDOW:                          What you shut when the weather's cold.
 SCREEN:                           What you shut in the mozzie season.
 BYTE:                                   What mozzies do.
 MEGABYTE:                      What Townsville mozzies do.
 CHIP:                                    A bar snack.
 MICROCHIP:                    What's left in the bag after you've eaten the chips.
 MODEM:                            What you did to the lawns.
 LAPTOP:                            Where the cat sleeps.
 SOFTWARE:                      Plastic knives & forks you get at Red Rooster.
 HARDWARE:                    Stainless steel knives & forks - from K-Mart.
 MOUSE:                              The small rodent that eats the grain in the shed.
 MAINFRAME:                  What holds the shed up.
 WEB:                                   What spiders make.
 WEBSITE:                          Usually in the shed or under the verandah.
 SEARCH ENGINE:         What you do when the Ute won't go.
 CURSOR:                          What you say when the Ute won't go.
 YAHOO:                            What you say when the Ute does go.
 UPGRADE:                       A steep hill.
 SERVER:                          The person at the pub who brings out the counter lunch.
 MAIL SERVER:             The bloke at the pub who brings out the counterlunch.
 USER:                               The neighbour who keeps borrowing things.
 NETWORK:                    What you do when you need to repair the fishing net.
 INTERNET:                    Where you want the fish to go.
 NETSCAPE:                    What the fish do when they discover the hole in the net.
 ONLINE:                          Where you hang the washing.
OFFLINE:                         Where the washing ends up when the pegs aren't strong enough.

 

Today's farm report

From PAUL OATES in Queenslands, Australia

The winter sun slowly burns the morning mist away and melts the frost on the grass as I deliver the cattle's molasses based lick. All through the paddocks there were thousands of dew drop covered spider webs  . Brrr.. it is definitely Polar bear weather, so we visited 'Seaworld' yesterday to watch the bears there.