The day the tourism died in Papua New Guinea

By MALUM NALU

Up until the turn of the century, says prominent Papua New Guinea tourism operator Sir Peter Barter, there were positive signs that tourism would continue to prosper providing Papua New Guinea with a renewable resource that was sustainable.

Sunset in Kavieng.-Pictures courtesy of SIR PETER BARTER

Not so, however, statistics show.

  More recently, visitor arrival figures issued by the Tourism Promotion Authority indicated that PNG had one of the “fastest-growing tourist industries in the South Pacific region and constant positive media reports indicated a healthy growth”.

 “Nothing could have been further from the truth,” Sir Peter admonishes.

 Picturesque Tsoi Island, New Ireland province

 “The tourism industry in PNG generally has declined by more than 50% over the past few years.

 “I refer to ‘bona fide’ tourists, not visitor arrivals which in real terms include all types of visitors to PNG.

 “No one disputes there are more people arriving in PNG, (however) the reality is most are not tourists, instead,  they are people visiting PNG for other purposes in most cases work-related, many of whom abuse the ‘tourist visa’ system which help to distort the real situation of the tourist industry.”

Nusa Island Retreat, New Ireland province

Nusa Island Retreat, New Ireland province

Historically, much of the growth of the tourist industry is directly related to overseas tour operators.

It is through the partnership arrangements that have been concluded between local operators in PNG and these overseas operators who for the want of a special word have ‘packaged’ tours or parts of their tours to visit PNG.

Bilbil pottery making, Madang province

 “These overseas operators are experts in their respective markets,” Sir Peter explains.

 “They produce the superb tourist brochures that highlight reasons for visiting a particular destination.

 “In more recent years they have used their websites and internet to expose their destinations and tours, most of whom concentrate on their specific interests, as an example diving, trekking, birding and they know how to market their tours.

 Bilbil singsing for tourists, Madang province

 “The end result is the tourists contract to purchase the product that is described in their brochures and this has a direct impact on bona fide tourists who visit PNG.

“The number of operators featuring tours to PNG from North America, Europe, UK, Japan, and Australia would have been in the hundreds, supported by the various airlines.

mv Melanesian Discoverer at Simsim in happier days

“The exposure PNG received at this time resulted in the industry’s growth.

“This coupled with other marketing by individual operators, agents, airlines - not least Air Niugini - and hotels including the attendances at tourist shows placed PNG in the right direction to expand the tourism industry.”

Visiting cruise liner mv Columbus in Madang

The decline began with circumstances beyond PNG’s control:  fuel price increases, SARS, terrorism, and a general change in which PNG expected a continuation of the industry to grow without the need to retain personal contact with the operators, many of whom also suffered from the same effects.

Bamboo band, Madang province

 Most recently, the worldwide economic situation and continuation of problems in the Middle East have frightened tourists, especially Americans, from travelling internationally and to lesser-known destinations.

“Whilst Air Niugini cannot be blamed for the reduction in tourism, the unreliability of schedules, cancelled and disrupted flights have not been helpful over the past couple of years,” Sir Peter admits.

Bagabag entertainment group, Madang province

“Tourists from developed countries have become increasingly aware of the ease to sue and tour operators are frequently targeted for not providing the services described in their brochures, which in turn has forced tour operators to sell destinations that are better known for their reliability and safety.

“Another obstacle to developing tourism is the withdrawal of commuter air services that previously linked the Highlands with the coast and islands.

“A tourist visiting PNG wanting to see each of the geographic regions is forced to fly back to Port Moresby and connect with flights into the next geographic region,

“This not only wastes time, but also substantially increases the airfares, making PNG more expensive to visit.

“The law-and-order situation in PNG is another obstacle and we have failed to handle this situation well in PNG.

“A good example where it has been handled well is in Fiji, where after three military coups and bad press, the tourism industry coordinated by the Fiji Visitors Bureau have quickly responded and been proactive in offering all types of deals to maintain their fledging tourism industry, which is a very-important part of the economy.

“In PNG, we have done nothing!

“Perhaps worse than the law and order problem itself is the perception created by the various ‘Travelers Alerts’ that are widely dispersed to travel agents, airlines and consumers.

“Having read some on PNG, it is a wonder anyone comes to PNG!

“An industry association no longer appears to exist!

“If it does it is not effective!

“In Fiji, the Fiji Visitors Bureau along with the Fiji industry members have coordinated their efforts to recover the damage done by the coups.

“It goes without saying that a travel or tourism association in PNG could do the same, yet, attempts to date have really failed to support a number of attempts to establish industry associations.”

Sir Peter, however, is not all a harbinger of doom about PNG’s tourism industry.

“There are many types of tourism catering for various interest groups,” he lightens up.

“The one segment that has been doing relatively well is the Kokoda Track, but this year, again, there has been a large decrease in numbers of people walking Kokoda.

“PNG is well-known for its spectacular diving and the dive segment has always shown some growth, but over the past year, it also has experienced a decrease.

“For more than 30 years I have endeavoured to develop a cruising segment and finally sold the Melanesian Discoverer because it was becoming almost impossible to transport our passengers to and from the ship by Air Niugini and charter aircraft in and out of the Sepik.

“Since we sold the ‘Discoverer’, we have been assisting international expeditionary vessels continue to operate in PNG waters.

“We act as ships and tour agents for most tourist vessels visiting PNG and again, the difficulties experienced by the owners of these vessels deter many from coming back into PNG.

“I will not go into the detail, but excessive charges of fees levied, overtime claims by officers, inconsistent rules, policies, charges for services not provided are just some of the obstacles faced in handling tourist vessels.

“TPA and PNG Ports are seriously considering ways in which these problems can be eliminated to restore confidence in attracting motor yachts and cruise ships, as like other segments in the tourism industry, cruise ship operators class PNG as one of the most-exciting and interesting destinations in the world.”

So how does Sir Peter see things in his crystal ball?

“It is encouraging to see competition on the Cairns/Port Moresby route and equally encouraging is the development of more hotel rooms in Port Moresby, Rabaul, Madang, Wewak,” he forecasts.

“Regretfully, most of these rooms have not been built to cater for bona fide tourists, rather, commercial travellers and work related accommodation due to the development of resource projects under way in PNG.

“Whilst Cairns is gearing up to cater for increased visitors that are expected to fly in and out of PNG with the LNG project, little is being done to encourage imported workers to either reside in PNG or take the R and R (rest and recreation) in PNG.

“It is difficult to force this issue unless confidence can be restored as to the safety of the various potential tourist destinations in PNG and this should be one of the tourist industry’s prime objective.

“It makes sense to attract workers in the LNG project to really see PNG and return to whence they come as good ambassadors, rather than pessimists, spreading doom and gloom about PNG which is not warranted.

“We spend millions of kina on the development of our natural resources that ultimately will be exhausted.

“The one industry that is sustainable is tourism and yet it is not given the priority it deserves in PNG.”

Why we get screwed in foreign and trade relations

By MAVARA HANUA

 

In recent times, many Papua New Guineans and Australians have been engaging in a good healthy debate on aid to PNG from Australia. 

Everyone is in some agreement it needs to be relooked but its also quite interesting and perhaps not surprising a growing number of bloggers screaming at the lack of PNG nationals in government, not being able to absorb the aid constructively to deliver to our people. 

I personally have had the rare privilege of sitting around mahogany tables in Canberra, Beijing, Brussels, Geneva, New York and Washington negotiating foreign and trade relations on behalf of our great country. 

Every diplomat and government official we met around the world had one question, “what’s in it for us?”

 Which was what we expected, after all, that’s what former diplomatic hawks in Washington and Brussels taught us.

So how does PNG react towards such a question?

Well, as our colorful history tells you, we try to formulate a negotiating position so as to establish a platform of norms that our partner must appreciate our development needs.

 In return we will allow them access in our markets for their private sector to trade.

So the armada of development assistance comes in.

Our kids absorb  taxpayers money from our friends in education and health projects, and return some of the experts that will help us make shit loads of money, some will dig great big holes in our backyard looking for rocks, oil, gas and others will mop up our fish in our waters.
So how do you measure the success of aid?

 Who is benefiting?

 I don’t know and there may be some formula out there that does this but what I have observed over the years is that it is usually the other party that dominates the entire relationship and eventually wins everything. 

 All because there is a mechanical system of positions being meticulously crafted by experts, officials academics etc… and than is fed to their leaders who than deliver it with utmost conviction and confidence.

 They’re bloody prepared. 

And herein lays the problem for PNG: we don’t spend time and energy in developing a culture of research and analysis on our foreign relations. 

 We go ill prepared and it translates to our leaders not knowing what to do and say. 

But in all fairness, these limitations are not mere incompetence but a clear reflection that we are a nation driven by sectoralism in foreign relations and not on holistic relations. 

 So when our biggest bargaining chip is our resources, we sectorally negotiate resources and not holistically look at everything. 

 So at the end of the day,  instead of demanding quality control in projects, personal and outputs, we are satisfied experts will help us on the gas project. 

 Instead of ensuring our people should have flexibility in working in Australia and benefit from its industries, we are satisfied with Australian businesses coming to help us with our gas project.

 Instead of negotiating greater allocations of our unskilled men and women to work in farms, we are content with a lousy 700 people because that is a trade off or getting more people to help us with the gas project. 

So when the blokes and sheilas that come up are recycled public servants whose only training is hopping around the Arnhem Land teaching Aboriginals what’s right and wrong or have just been farted out from ANU, than remember that your leaders trade it off for our natural resources.
When our people working in the private sector are managed by incompetent managers whose only experience is to run little outfits in regional Australia, Mt Isa or Tamworth, of course you’ll expect little knowledge transfer to help our people in businesses.

 There are, however,  signs of hope in the current Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade who is an exceptional man and commands greater understanding in foreign policy compared to his processors or his fellow ministers. 

 When he barked at aid effectiveness, trade should be the focus of our relations; this was a man trying to save the pitfalls that had already become part of the norm, where we only engage with our partners sectorally. 

 His officers are ringing the same message: holistic foreign relations are the way for PNG and not sectoral trade-offs.

The benefits of a holistic approach allows all development issues to be discussed and more importantly trade if off with our resources. 

 Our linear approach is destroying us. 

At the end of the day we are forced to eat the blueprint of Canberra because of the natural resource trade off. 

And so, an aid programme is implemented with little contribution and for the most part, it is littered with projections that are not in the interest of PNG.
 Discipline is required by the Cabinet to allow Minister Abal and his officers to contribute meaningfully in natural resource negotiations with the Home State (Exxon Mobil for US) of the developers so that they may foster a framework based on sound holistic foreign and trade relations. 

A good start is his strong views on telling his counterpart Minister Smith and PM Gillard, PNG wants less aid and more trade.

 As I said earlier, every diplomat asks the question, “What’s in it for us?” 

 There is nothing in Australia in holistic development because “what’s in it for them” is in those sectoral concessions.   

 

Mole in the camp without notice

From JAMES WANJIK

 

Politics of Puka Temu is becoming very obvious. Politicise removal of young leaders and take a shot at National Alliance Perty leadership as a stepping stone to leadership of PNG government.

Media has done well to expose Puka Temu as a mole in the camp without notice to NA Party members. Exposing truth about Puka Temu the NA Party can now turn on him.

What are Temu's reasons for change of NA Party leadership? What contributions has Temu made to the stability of political parties?

Leaders owe duty to the people. People have a right to know why change is needed in a political party and to its leadership.

Looking at Australian political coup Julian Gillard was driven to act by fear of negative campaign by the miners on mining super profits tax. She has done a deal with the miners that will probably see Australian people throw out Labour government at forthcoming elections.

Damage is deep. Kevin Rudd has now made statement to the effect that Labour Party will lose.

Please Temu tell us why you want to change Somare as leader of NA Party and then to have a shot at Prime Minister's position?

 

Last word from John Fowke

The word according to Moses: final, fini, last tok

 

The blithely-approved-and-imposed Westminster party system has been the nursery within which the political, administrative and social dysfunction which defines Papua New Guinea in 2010 has developed.

 Far from an enfranchisement leading to the empowerment of the people, the party-system set up by – or perhaps it is better said countenanced by Australia, has led to the marginalisation of the proletariat in this once most-egalitarian of societies.

 It has led to the growth of small, unstable, unscrupulous but very tenacious governing elite, divided by greed within itself but united in its concern to keep and expand its hegemonic hold over the affairs of the nation through its exclusivity.

The growth of the very conditions which the Westminster system slowly eradicated in Britain is, in complete paradox, the outcome of Australia’s foolish decision to allow it to arise in a setting where there was no requirement for it.

How could the Australian powers of the day have been so dense?

 The answer lies perhaps in the strong “them-and-us” outlook manifest in the ruling clique of senior administration officials vis-à-vis the elected and appointed “private enterprise” “mission” and “indigenous” members of the old chamber of representation, the Legislative Council, or “Legco” as it was called.

Here was a de-facto governing party and a de-facto opposition operating in a parliament-like situation.

Today it is difficult to find any record of more than superficial discussion of alternatives.

At least one was readily to hand, in the shape of a fully-democratised version of the former Legislative Council supported by the 19 existing district advisory councils, democratised and linked to the network of well-established and democratically-elected local government councils then numbering more than 100.

 This would-have-been governance anchored firmly at the roots of society, government answering the reality of regional needs and interests as opposed to non-existent social, class-based or occupation-based needs.

There was however an aversion at Konedobu to the encouragement of "regionalism"-perhaps engendered by the violence of tribal politics in Kenya and other East African states.

There is a hint of what may have bee the unadmitted and unspoken fears of senior echelon administration men contained in the late Ian Downs's novel “THE STOLEN LAND”.

What to do now, today? Today? In this present, potentially-productive period of turmoil prior to the 2012 election?

Follow the word of Moses, is my very strong recommendation. Moses recommends-

 

1.    Provincial management committees to be created by LLGs and governors along lines of old-time district advisory councils; may be set up as voluntary organisations and registered as such-outside current stautory committees etc. Strength will be in the statutory powers of individual members derived from their outside appointments and in the fact that this is the voice of the people AT LONG LAST!!!!  Not unconstitutional; sanctioned by the laws of the land and the principle of the constitution. This is taking direction as suggested in the stream of articles and papers I have published in PNG in the past 12 months.

 

 2.    These committees to be chaired by the governor in each case and to comprise the provincial MPs and chairmen of all provincial LLGs and  meetings to consider and prepare needed action based on the submitted, signed, sealed minutes of the past three months' LLG meetings. Meetings to be open and very well publicised.

 

 3.   Committee meetings every three months to receive, deliberate upon and provide necessary support/action in regard to quarterly reports received from LLGs -these based on reports presented by councillors at LLG meetings reflecting needs/conditions in each ward.See my series of three published articles in THE NATIONAL in November/December last year.

 

 4. Resolutions to be carried to the provincial public service and to national departments with forcefulness and with publicity both within and outside each province. Dates for completion/implementation to be publicised and referred to regularly.Thus will democracy and fairness slowly arise amid the wreckage of the attempts and failures and disappointments of the past 35 years.These steps are not in conflict with the principles of the Constitution. They need no great period of deliberation, no long and expensive series of conferences for consideration.They are common-sense, pragmatic, simple and able to be adopted and implemented if the people want them to come into being.

 

 

What should Australia do about Papua New Guinea?

By REG 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, private citizens. However, one thing is clear and prompts this next question: why hasn't this huge grant from Australia raised 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 prime minister 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 efficasy 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 bureacracy. 

 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 government to government 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 taxpayers' 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 impoverise 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, but more trade.  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. 

 

 

 

National Alliance holding crucial talks

THE ruling National Alliance party will meet today over the leadership issue as political parties went into camp over the weekend, The National reports.

The meeting, according to party officials, was crucial as horse-trading begins in a move to oust Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare.

NA is mobilising its parliamentary members for this afternoon’s talks at the PNG Institute of Public Administration hall.

Party officials said the meeting would decide on an agenda for the party caucus to be held in Minj on Aug 12, including proposed amendments to the party constitution and a proposed alteration to the party policy and rules.

The NA went into camp at the Airways Hotel while the opposition, led by Sir Mekere Morauta, is at the Bluff Inn Motel outside Port Moresby.

The opposition, meantime, has denied that South-Bougainville MP Steven Kama has broken ranks to join the United Resource Party (URP).

URP leader William Duma said last Friday that Kama had joined with two other MPs, boosting its number to 10.

Sir Mekere claimed in a statement stories were circulating that core members of the Somare “kitchen cabinet” had been buying MPs.

 

Ramu NiCo fails to lift interim injunction on DSTP

RAMU NiCo, developers of the giant Ramu nickel project in Madang, have failed in the Supreme Court to quash an interim injunction to proceed with the construction of a deep sea tailings placement (DSTP) system and get the mine off the ground, The National reports.

A three-judge Supreme Court last Friday dismissed the appeal by Ramu NiCo and its state partners against the lower court’s granting of the interim injunction which had effectively stopped work on the last stage of the construction at Basamuk Bay.

The ruling means that a trial date will be set, probably next month, for the substantive matter to be argued in court.

Four landowner leaders – Eddie Tarsie, Farina Siga, Peter Sel and Sama Melambo – and the Pommern Incorporated Land Group had sought the interim orders in the National Court in Madang in March and April that the DSTP system off-shore of the Basamuk and Astrolabe bays would be detrimental to all landowners along the Madang coastal areas and their entire livelihood.

They also claimed that it was not the best practice of environmental management activity. 

Justices Catherine Davani, Derek Hartshorn and Don Sawong ruled that while they noted the submissions made by Ramu NiCo and its partners, they were also mindful that if the DSTP was allowed to proceed, “the potential environment harm far outweighs the lifting of the injunction”.

“The balance of convenience lies in maintaining the status quo at least until after the trial of the substantive matter,” they ruled, adding that “it is better to take a precautionary approach than to proceed in haste”.

Ramu NiCo and its partners had, in essence, submitted in their appeal that it was lawful for them to proceed with the construction of the DSTP system as agreed to in their joint venture agreement and also based on the mining development contract signed between the parties concerned, including the PNG government and MCC to start mining nickel in the Kurumbukari area of the Bismarck Ranges before the end of this year.

The partners had argued in court that the landowner leaders, in their ILG in this proceeding, only represented their own interests and not that of the bulk of the Basamuk Bay people.