Power returned to the people

The restoration of fairness and general social wellbeing in Papua New Guinea

By JOHN FOWKE

Even if 2012’s election sees a really dedicated reformist group in the lead, a compromise will already have been made. Fence-sitting parties must be promised inducements to join in coalition, so forming a majority. Inducements shaped in a mould formed by tradition, but a mould filled with the spurious metal of personal greed and opportunism. An alloy entirely lacking in idealism or care for the future, devoid also of that most essential ingredient, the principle of separation of powers.

Here is hegemony. Here are opportunities for men who, though well-educated, possess little understanding of the outside world or care for principles of probity and transparency in public life. Such men, once elected, adopt lordly guise, endowed with the means to dispense largesse in the name of “electoral development funds.” Funds provided as of right with sketchy supporting budgets and plans. Funds dispensed without reference to relevant government managers and technocrats, completely sidelining these in task-related lines of control and technical expertise. Hungry for personal wealth and the adulation of their own clansmen, a great number of today’s MPs are in the game entirely for themselves.

It was not until the end of WW2 that Papua New Guinea began to understand anything of the rest of the world; its material and social substance; its history, its systems of law and its main preoccupations. Some peripheral inland areas remained un-contacted by exploratory patrols until as late as 1960.

Then in a dozen years beginning with the compilation of the first national electoral rolls, the first national election which followed in 1964, and ending in full independence in September 1975, this tribally-constituted society took a huge and unprecedented leap. Ancient tradition and custom was the underlying basis for belief and lifestyle everywhere. Full independence and emergence onto the world stage as an independent nation-state was rejoiced in, but it created opportunities and empowerment for a privileged few who have led the new nation along a steady downward path in terms of the health, wealth and the wellbeing of many.

As years pass, the people, once joyous in their new, enhanced free status, have become dissatisfied, perplexed and justifiably cynical regarding their leadership. They don’t know where their power has gone. There was never any social dichotomy based on variances in wealth, opportunity or the ownership of land and resources. No class of hereditary aristocrats, landowners and priests with an interest in suppressing a lower order existed. All were landowners; all had a voice in communal affairs within the admittedly small clan-based societies in which they lived. Because of this happy circumstance there was no need for party-based politics here. PNG’s society identifies with its land and the burial-places of its ancestors; not with a class system and associated iniquities and privileges. A regional representative system would have fitted well, but did not arise. The established party-system floats on society’s surface like a film of oil in a pond. No-one understands it except its managers and the MPs themselves. To these the system represents a collection of opportunistic clubs endowed with the potential to move a man from an ordinary social background to an environment where wealth and influence are easily appropriated by one who is both manipulative and socially adept.

As it stands today PNG is in a state of rolling social/civil crisis. The rule of law is almost entirely absent; there is no firm hand upon the steering-wheel; the arrival of predicted vast returns from the newly-sanctioned gas resource projects will only increase pressure and disorder and discontent within this society. A society which already has great difficulty in managing and accounting for the rents it receives from extractive industries already established. There is no evidence that the situation will be abated, let alone rectified under the present leadership, and little reason to expect the current style and substance of administration to alter even though names change after the election to come.

How may PNG engender the rise of a sympathetic, socially-conscious, “structured-to-fill-real-needs” sort of political regime? A fairer and more open regime where the basic needs of society are met and the rule of law is re-established? Attempts to persuade politicians unilaterally to improve existing practice and systems in any dramatic way will meet resistance. A revolution or a coup is unlikely in the near to mid- future and in any case will only produce more of the same; more gravy for the already well-fed. Papua New Guineans from all walks of life ponder this question and shake their heads.

But there is a way. A way which is potentially non-confrontational and entirely constitutional, and one which will need little if any re-jigging of current legislation.

Soon after the end of WW2, the Australians initiated a system of Local Government Councils. Tentative at first, the system was accepted by the people and began to be expanded. Valuable as a means to steer society into the ways of western-style democracy, the LGC system as it was called-(today the Local Level Government or LLG system) - replaced the existing didactic, paternal connection between society and government where each village possessed an appointed official, effectively the go-between and enforcer-of-orders as handed down by the powerful District Officer and his subordinates.

The dawn of the councils in the early 1950s introduced the concept of communal elections and the secret ballot. The councils were designed to arise in such a form as would be easy for the people to identify with. Here was to be a meeting-place where the community’s concerns and needs, once examined and agreed might then be sent upstairs to the mighty “gavman” for action or advice. It was hoped that the people would take ownership of this system and the empowering ideal it was based on, and largely-speaking they did.

From the start it was expected that LGCs would take responsibility for maintenance of minor public infrastructure; feeder roads, bridges, communal market-places and medical aid-post- buildings. Recognising that the electorates were not in a position to support such activities from their own meagre resources, the LGCs were provided with the necessary training, the needed funds, and help in planning by the central government via the various District Offices. Through the formative years of the 1960s and early 70s the desired path was followed. In 2010 there are 300 or so LLGs, but almost all are moribund. Only those centred upon urban areas where land-rates and service charges levied by the organisations themselves provide cash-flow, continue as communal service-providers. The rest of the LLGs, the rural majority, have been intentionally deprived of support by the evolving party-based system of national government. They have been side-lined as a political force.

Rural councils, without the means to collect any but a derisory level of income from within their constituencies are toothless tigers. Rural councillors live much as faithful old dogs do; lying in the shade, only stirring to snarl and snap when something threatens the wellbeing of the community. And yet these men command great community respect, for they have been chosen on this basis alone; on the basis of respect and not in any expectation of pork-barrelling or clan-related favours for votes. Community support for the councils as institutions also remains high, for their potential is well-understood. By their very nature the councils, through the various wards, are in touch with the whole community, 24/7. This cannot by any means be said of the MPs, or of the national or provincial public service. Councillors within their wards mimic the function and influence of old-time traditional leaders within the circle of a group of closely-related clans, but in addition they constitute a potential direct link with the seat of power. A link which if activated would connect the grass-roots with the highest authority in the land.

The majority of PNG’s growing population are rural subsistence-farmers. Most live within existing, established council wards. Many wards maintain on their own initiative, community youth groups. This is a reflection of the concern with which a great many mature citizens view the rise of a-social, even hard-line anti-social sentiment among young and virile rural males. Boys who see before them a pointless life of idleness and frustration, deprived of education and opportunity, and at the same time deprived of the purpose and sense of worth derived in the past by young initiated warriors ,valued by all, entrusted with each clan’s physical security in time of trouble. Under the LLGs, despite the lack of support from national entities, youths are in touch with their councillor and vice-versa. This is but one example of the huge social-development-related networking potential which the existing, constitutionally-established web of LLGs represents.

The LLGs provide this society with a potentially reliable, very valuable socio-political building block. A foundation upon which a thoughtful and well-prepared national reform group could build a new, fair and happy Papua New Guinea.

But any resurrection of the LLGs within such a set of plans will restore them in a very different image to that which they presented in the past. Today there will be no tip-trucks; no quarries; no road-building or building-maintenance teams; no council workshops or savings-bank agencies or post-office and telephone services. The supply of civic services will continue to be handled by the relevant government authorities. The newly-revived LLGs will carry out a different but far more important range of duties, for they, the councillors, the presidents and their clerks with their records of meetings and transactions and correspondence, these will become quality-controllers for state-funded service-delivery, for public infrastructure maintenance and renewal, and for the proper function of rural schools, health centres, policing and village court activities. All these services are currently in a state of decay due to neglect and lack of leadership.

Each rural LLG will be provided with one suitable, reliable vehicle complete with driver, fuel and all r&m costs met from the funds controlled by the relevant MP. Under strict LLG control the vehicle will be available to convey health department officials and materials, school inspectors, magistrates inspecting village court records and performance, and as and when urgently needed, to transport the ill and injured to the nearest hospital. Where visits from departmental executives or inspectors are perceived to be needed by councillors the LLG will request these, officially, and negative responses citing lack of transport will be forcefully rejected with reference to availability of the LLG’s vehicle.

During the course of each month the LLG vehicle will be available to carry groups of councillors on official, regularly-scheduled inspections of the various wards with special reference to roads, bridges, schools, medical aid posts, village courts and any rural police-posts or other government institutions present which provide services within the LLG area.

Prior to each monthly council meeting each councillor will prepare a summary report of affairs, needs and problems within his ward and these will be tabled for discussion and action. The MP representing the council area or his delegate must also be present to note matters raised each month.

Before the end of each quarter the Council President must cause a summary of needs, problems and matters for attention by government departments and agencies to be made, and discuss this summary with the area’s MP who must then accompany the President and others to meet the Governor to present the summary and to negotiate solutions and rectification of shortcomings.

Where it is impossible to resolve matters at provincial level the MP will take the relevant matter with supporting background documents to Waigani where he will do his best to ensure that satisfactory outcomes are procured.

Made newly-relevant in society and enjoying increased prestige the councillors will play an essential part in leading a renewal of the services which rural people are entitled to expect from government. They will play a very important role in the restoration of fairness and full equity in society and national wealth for the mass of the nation’s people. The people will become empowered in a way they have never known. An overly-large, costly and often-recalcitrant public service will be forced to perform to expectation. For his part, the wise MP will see that times are changing irrevocably, and that to retain his seat and associated privileges it will be essential to fulfil to expectation the role as newly designed for him. The penalty for reluctance being that his term in parliament will be limited; cut short at the next election. Compliance and fulfilment of expectations, however, will ensure his return regardless of adherence to one or another political party.

The number of parties will fall and those which remain will do so because they represent valid points affecting sections of the community as well as broad ideals in respect of the progress of the nation. Whilst parliament and cabinet as such will continue to rule and direct the nation as empowered, the resurrection of the LLGs as pictured here will usher in a dynamic and progressive era for PNG society at large.

• John Fowke has spent most of the past 50 years living and working in rural Papua New Guinea

Coffee-growing in PNG for well-meaning international consultants.

By JOHN FOWKE

 

Most of what the nation’s academically-trained extensionists and researchers plus allegedly PNG-experienced Australian planners believe and tell us is not relevant to the village coffee grower today. 

The growers’ main problems today are social and infrastructural ones.

 Generational changes in attitude; ever-worsening road access to marketplaces; first- and second-generation coffee garden-owners who are old and tired; a large majority of youngsters who are not interested in active involvement.

These are the major problems which culminate in a reluctance to re-plant a national tree-stock which is well past its prime.

The 1950’s/’60s/70’s trees are like their owners- they are tired and old and they have only another 10 years or so of life left to them.

Massive replanting, replanting done by individual growers, is the only answer to the immediate problem.

It’s a question of re-energising society at large -   it’s a massive social problem, not a technical one.

The arrival of coffee together with roads, airstrips and the “gavman” in the Highlands some 65 years ago precipitated a social revolution and great excitement and interest in new things- it was a watershed in PNG history- nothing since has provided so much stimulation and excitement and, importantly, physical activity and commitment.

Today coffee is just something that’s always been there.

 And our small coffee growers, the backbone of an industry in which they produce 90% of the total coffee crop are subsistence farmers, not small businessmen.

Not people who live, eat, sleep and dream of their business like dairy-farmers or vegetable farmers in other lands where farming is industrialised, part of a sophisticated capital-based system of production.

 This needs to be made plain to all who blame the various extension agencies for declining production.

The problem is not the lack of advice.

It’s the lack of energy among the grower population.

Same story with cocoa, copra, rubber.

All the same thing.

Ageing growers, lazy or disinterested young and lack of reliable access to markets.

 The much-heralded funding soon to be provided to the industry by the World Bank is to be tied to improved marketing of small-holder coffee via certification as Fairtrade or Utz Kape or any of a number of fringe marketing organisations set up in coffee consuming countries.

 This with the object of gaining a premium for programme participants.

Not primarily for expansion of the yield from existing coffee lands, but for the improvement of returns as an incentive for growers to keep growing coffee.

 This is seen as the key to ensuring the longevity and communal value of the industry.

As far as this goes it’s fine, but such a big sum as is being provided will far more than cover the sort of programme, I believe the concerned consultants to be planning.

And more importantly, the all-important question of re-planting gets only a vague mention.

Replanting of the 1950's /1960's/1970's coffee-gardens is absolutely crucial to the ongoing health of the coffee industry.

Not repeated renovation pruning of the already aged trees.

Renovation pruning of the present tree-stock, which is 90% senile, is like dressing an old man in new overalls and expecting him to swing a pick and shovel like a young man again.

 It’s a complete waste of time, money and energy.

All the old coffee in PNG desperately needs to be replaced- and this is very simple- but growers must be persuaded to it – and this is the hard part- this is what all the planners and pollies forget- its not the agencies’ fault that the crop hasn’t grown over the past 20 years- it’s the fault of the growers themselves……laik bilong ol bai inap, em bai namba bilong kopi bai I moa iet….getting the growers to do anything is hard because those who are not “lapun nogut olgeta” are mostly disinclined because their kids will not help them -  they say “ Maski, ol yangpela lain ol no inap halivim wok na lukautim gut kopi, olsem na mipla ol lapun les pinis.”

This is what the industry is looking at - willingness of growers – not the ability of the agencies.

Planting and re-planting and looking after coffee is so simple and so much a part of Highlands culture now that it really doesn’t need advisers or extension specialists at all…what it needs is either a big kick in half-a-million backsides or some very persuasive talking by someone with the charisma of the late Sir Iambakey Okuk.

As for better marketing strategies as an incentive, this is valuable and should be proceeded with.

However, all concerned must clearly understand that they are only fiddling at the edges of a big, well-controlled machine.

A machine powered by the needs and greed of six multinational coffee-roasters and brand-owners and their agencies who, since the lapse of the ICA in the ‘eighties, have gathered for their sector more than 80% of the total value of packed, processed coffee sold around the world.

Growers and exporters and internal service-providers within growing countries such as PNG share between them only 10% of the gross value of their crop as a consumer product in the wealthy parts of the world.

One cannot but remain very sceptical when one knows that the certifying agencies and associated roasters and major charities which retail the certified coffee product are simply part of this huge, selfish complex.

 These self-proclaimed do-gooder organisations justify their existence by squeezing out a relatively tiny benefit to farmers whilst selling their fair-trade or organic or bird-friendly or rainforest-grown certified product in the top range of retail prices around the world.

A certified farmer in isolated Okapa in the Eastern Highlands of PNG will get the benefit of about 40 toea per kilo of green-bean equivalent compared with what he might get from a non-certified buyer.

 Even this small advantage does not hold true much of the time for reason of local market variances and factors such as roadway collapses and so-on.

His product will be sold FOB by the PNG-based certified exporting agency at a premium of some 50 to 60 toea per kilo green bean, above the ruling average FOB for the relevant grade.

Thus where the average FOB lies at around K7.00 per kilo, the certified exporter will receive a bonus of 50 to 60 toea above this to pass down to the farmer via the certified miller.

Once received, say in Melbourne, and roasted and packaged under the name of a well-known international charity, the final product will be retailed for as much as AUD 40.00 per kilo.

Who is pulling whose leg with all this feel-good stuff about helping the impoverished farmers of the tropical world?

CIC and the growers should make themselves aware of the reality of the coffee-trade, world-wide, and the part played in it by the certifying and fair-trade movement.

Then consideration should be given to using as much as is necessary of the WB project funds towards replanting PNG’s existing coffee-lands with new seedlings, as a main objective.

• John Fowke has spent most of the past 50 years living and working in rural Papua New Guinea

 

More investment in tourism promotion urged

By DOREEN POLOH WAIM

 

A TOUR operator from East Sepik province has called on the Tourism Promotion Authority to invest more in industry promotion.

Julie Kenni runs a motel called the Sepik Village Tours at the Angoram station that organises village tours.

But over the years, the number of foreign tourists to her area had significantly dropped, she said.

Mrs Kenni said PNG had a lot to offer in terms of tourism because of the vast diversity of culture and traditions.

She believed the country’s tourism sector could be one of the major contributors to the economy if the Government could assist in terms of investing more into the promotion of the industry.

Mrs Kenni has been in the business for more than 30 years, through which she supported her family.

Apart from providing village tours, Mrs Kenni said she also had a gift shop that sold handicrafts, artifacts and bilums which she bought from local women.

Through this, she could help support her surrounding communities, she said.

Mrs Kenni believed there were  similar businesses operating in isolation.

 

European Union rules to benefit Papua New Guinea tuna sector

PNG can now export to EU markets fish caught anywhere, says Pokajam

 

By SHEILA LASIBORI

 

THE inclusion of PNG on European Union (EU) competent authorisation list of the illegal unreported and unregulated (IUU) regulation 1005/2008 is a boost to the country’s fish exports to EU markets, The National reports.

Prior to this official inclusion last Feb 4 (2010), under the then Cotonu Agreement, PNG (and others) could only export to EU markets duty-free on fish caught only in archipelagic and territorial waters,  Na- tional Fisheries Authority (NFA) managing director Sylvester Pokajam  said.

With the inclusion, PNG can now export to EU markets fish caught anywhere in the world and not just restricted to archipelagic and territorial waters, he said.

Archipelagic waters are those internally-owned by sovereign nations such as ownership of land, while territorial waters are those located 12 nautical miles from archipelagic waters to the start of the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ). 

The economic partnership agreement (EPA) currently being negotiated replaces Cotonu Agreement and the interim EPA (IEPA) was signed by PNG last July.

Fiji signed the same document recently.

The IEPA also gave rise to PNG’s authorised status pertaining to the IUU regulation which came into effect last Jan 1.

“After we signed that agreement, we are now qualified to export globally-sourced fish as long as it qualifies the IUU regulation and the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS),” he said.

The IUU regulation aims to improve traceability of all fishery products traded with the EU markets.

And for every EU-market destined canned fish and loins exports, copies of the documentation of the IEPA must accompany the catch (authorisation) certificate.

Head of the EU delegation to PNG Ambassador Aldo Dell’ariccia had said what now stood to be done by third countries including PNG was to validate the catch certification for products exported to the EU as long as the products came from catches that complied with conservation and management measures.

According to Mr Pokajam, the certificate would be issued only for the fish that was processed and not necessarily for every catch by fishing vessels.

He said this was the latest change by EU which he supported.

 

PNG reciprocity - Is this being applied evenhandedly?

From PAUL OATES

During a past APEC forum, Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare attempted to water down the intense frowning of Western countries on "gifts in Melanesia" seen as bribery. Sir Michael revealed his thoughts at a press conference on his return from the APEC meeting in Santiago, Chile, South America. The APEC member countries include those on - and within the - Pacific rim and include the United States, China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand and all the Pacific Island countries.
Speaking in the context of structural reforms to achieve good governance, a pursuit of many APEC member-countries, Sir Michael said the issue of corruption was one of the concerns that was raised. Referring to PNG and other Melanesian country's gift-giving, Sir Michael said "sometimes people take us wrongly".
"I explained that sometimes the Westerners think that this is buying the right. It is not buying the right. It's appreciation of each other," he said.
Using the example of pig-giving, the ultimate gift in many PNG cultures, he explained that the giving of a pig is likely to be reciprocated by another later.
"That's not my buying you or you buying me. That's just our custom - and I tried to explain that," Sir Michael.
But he told the press conference he disdained the public servants' attitude of waiting for a "six-pack" in order to do jobs that they would be paid for by their employment in the public service. Could this be Sir Michael saying "Do as I say, not as I do!'?
Now on the subject of reciprocity, should one wish to be discerning, one could suggest that the Australian taxpayers have been paying out millions of dollars to assist PNG since Independence and yet apparently not demanding anything much in return. The possible rorting of AusAID funds and 'Boomerang Aid' aside, PNG government has directly and indirectly received many millions in Australian tax dollars with no established agreement about accountability and responsibility for the expenditure of these funds. The Australian culture of giving without expecting a comensurate exchange could possibly be at fault here. Yet if the PNG government happily accepts these yearly 'lumps of largese' why wouldn't the PNG government expect to give back something of an equivalent value return if Sir Michael evenhandedly applied his stated principle of Melanesian culture of 'appeciating each other'?
When a program of Enhanced Co-operation (ECP) was introduced to actively assist PNG police, Morobe governor Luther Wenge claimed he saved PNG by effectively torpedoeing the program, just as the program was starting to achieve positive results with law and order. While the ECP implementation could have been better handled, it was patently clear that Sir Michael and his government didn't lift a finger to try and find a solution to keep the program alive. One wonders why not, given the huge amounts of untied aid that his government had previously received?
PNG people are perfectly familiar with the theory of reciprocity. The only problem is that if PNG politicians start 'giving' presents involving taxpayer funds to people who then reciprocate by giving presents back, where do the real owners of the presents, (i.e. the PNG people) come into the equation? Swiss bank accounts don't seem to feature in most villages but of course no one would dare suggest any actual impropriety. That would require an open an transparent financial record as proof. Recent claims by the PNG Opposition that foreign millions helped Somare retain political power are or should be extremely worrying. What could these possible payments demand in return?
Speaking on a totally unrelated matter, the report that Sir Michael and some other government politicians have inadvertently forgotten to lodge their tax returns for many years does seem a trifle lax. The PNG people are also still waiting to hear who was involved in the Taiwan millions. These matters should be quickly and thoroughly investigated as soon as possible to clear any misgivings about any wrongdoing that some might hold. Unfortunately, it seems to take forever to investigate any suggested breaches of PNG law by PNG authorities. It would be very disappointing to find that the release of the results of these investigations were delayed, like those of the recently released Moti Report, until any period of no confidence votes came into operation.
Until the PNG Ombudsman Commission and the PNG Police Force investigate and publically advertise their findings on all donations, gifts, interests and any benefit derived while in public office, no start can be made to creating and graft and corruption free PNG. Charges must immediately follow any revelation of misconduct.
The rot always begins at the top. Effective leadership must set the example to be followed.
"Corruption thrives on secrecy... the only way to battle corruption is to bring it out in the open . ". (quoted in a Victorian Newspaper.)
______________________________ __________________

(The following chant is set in iambic pentameter, mostly...)
______________________________ ________________


Sapos mi laik givim samting,
Husat imas save tingting?
Em samting bilong mi,
Ino samting b'long PNG,
Emino bagarapim yumi?


Ol pipol isave lukluk,
Watpo yu krai olsem kokaruk,
Mi sandap olsem Gren Sif,
Mi singaut, mi bilip,
Emi gutpela pasin bilong yumi.


Trabel istap long ol raskol tasol,
Kain save istap long ol pipol,
Lain bilong mi ino mekim,
Kain olsem mi no sekim,
Dispela tok ilaik daunim yumi?


PNG ikamap gutpela hap nau ia,
Nogat wari na belhevi istap a?
Yu mas bihainim dispela singaut,
Maski tingting igo wokabaut,
Yu tok tasol; 'PNG i nambawan kantri.'


Kain olsem yu noken wari long moni,
Benk bilong mi igat dispela save,
Bihainim tok bilong mi,
Bai yumi girapim PNG,
Nau tasol, tiket bilong balus istap we?

Papua New Guinea's rape victims get help from vital clinic

DISGRACEFUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/on-the-medical-frontline-where-the-numbers-are-very-raw-20100308-pqs9.html

Papua New Guinea - Where are you now?

From PAUL OATES

On Emmanuel Narakobi's 'Masalai' blog site, there has been an interesting debate that started out about the world's most corrupt countries.
The subject of corruption seems to be a topical one and for some reason, the  discussion turned to corruption in today's Papua New Guinea.
The question of what is corruption seems to be in the eye of the beholder.
In order to define a corrupt practice, there needs to be a commonly accepted benchmark or yardstick. Illegal activities are, or should be very easy to spot and prosecute. Unethical activity however is or can be a very grey area. A recognised and agreed Code of Ethics is therefore required.
Now on the subject of recognised ethics, it seems there could be many interpretations of ethical behaviour. A recent decision, by an Australian government minister, that was announced on the same day as he was skiing with someone who stood to benefit from that decision by a reported $250 million could be merely coincidental. Certainly the minister thought and said so irrespective of what the Australian media seemed to suggest. But if there is reportedly 'no such thing as a free lunch', at what point does a reciprocal favour become unethical and therefore in an official view, 'corrupt'?
Many countries throughout the world have a recognised culture of reciprocity. In an Australian context, reciprocity is sometimes difficult to
appreciate. Australians are traditionally taught to give without expecting anything in return. Yet this does not always apply in many other cultures. Prior to working in PNG, part of our training required learning about the theory of reciprocity and how one might actually give offence to someone by giving them something they had no way of repaying on an equivalent level. This was a new concept for many just as the expectation of paying and receiving a 'tip' is, or used to be, totally foreign to an Australian. Yet in the United States, this practice is expected as a necessary way of ensuring good service and helping the employee augment a limited salary.
Australia has an essential part of most Federal and State governments, an internal audit function. This audit function is also augmented by an external audit authority and in many cases, there is also an equivalent of an Ethics Commission or Investigation Authority to which possible breaches by government officials of the law and ethical behaviour, can be referred.
In PNG, the official body tasked with investigating and reporting on possible breaches of the law and recognised standards is the Ombudsman Commission. PNG's Chief Ombudsman came to the forefront recently when an attempt was made on his life. This attempt amazingly seemed to coincide with some very high level investigations into PNG's political leaders. Reports just tabled in the PNG Parliament by the Ombudsman clearly indicate that some unlawful activities have been made by some high level PNG government
people. There is an indication that some illegal decisions were made that need proper investigation. The report into the Moti affair clearly requires a police investigation yet at the point where the investigation was about to be presented to Parliament, PNG's Prime Minister peremptorily closed the Commission of Inquiry down. The PNG PM seemed unaware of any apparent conflict of interest with this decision. Now it seems there are indications that the PM himself gave the illegal direction to fly Moti out of PNG. Yet a
spokesperson for the PM now reportedly claims that as Mr Moti's case in Australia collapsed due to a technicality, there doesn't seem to be any reason to continue with any investigation. In a post on the Masalai bog, a person claims everyone involved in the Moti flight knew it was illegal but left it up to the 'higher ups' to sort out. As the Americans are want say:"Go figure!'
Now in PNG, there has been slowly increasing culture of unofficial 'tipping' or as it is locally referred to as a 'six pack' culture. This terminology refers to the practice that in order to get a government official to actually do something, a six pack of beer or equivalent, is required. PM Somare is on record as saying that he believes the PNG public service is corrupt yet apparently, he is either unable or unwilling to do anything about it. Recent claims have now surfaced that even the PNG PM is accused of accepting monetary incentives worth many millions from a foreign country in order ensure he maintained political power in the 2007 general election. It is claimed that by reportedly 'buying' members of parliament to vote with his government with this money, Somare was able to keep in power. There is
now a worrying claim by a qualified mining engineer on a 'mine watch' web site recently raised concerns that a giant mine in PNG owned and run by the same foreign country that reportedly gave the millions to the PNG PM has been grossly undervalued to PNG's disadvantage. The foreign owners of the mine have now reportedly blacklisted the 'minewatch' site to all employees.
PNG's ethical standards are set out in the Constitution and subsequent legislation. This legislation was influenced by an Australian and PNG perspective prior to PNG Independence that was and has been accepted by successive PNG governments. The traditional PNG culture of reciprocity doesn't feature specifically in the PNG Constitution. This aspect has allowed some to believe that no stated mention means it isn't illegal under Melanesian culture.
So what benchmark for corruption is acceptable in today's PNG? Surely those elected to the PNG Parliament are elected to serve and look after the PNG people rather than themselves? At the apparent behest of PM Somare, the PNG Speaker of Parliament, who is supposed to be impartial, last year effectively closed down Parliament to prevent a vote of no confidence in the
government. When the Parliament opened again this month, the PNG Opposition moved a vote of no confidence in the Speaker. The Speaker then reportedly had no idea what to do and deferred to the Clerk of the House who also had no clear idea of what to do. The Speaker then ruled that a vote couldn't be taken.
So if those in the PNG government from the PM through the Speaker of Parliament down to all the members are not prepared to permit the PNG Parliament to operate as it was designed to do, then PNG democracy is at an end. It is suggested by a PNG blogger on the Masalai site, that PNG dictatorship has now effectively commenced.