Flawed political model disunites Papua New Guinea
09 May 2012
BY REGINALD RENAGI
PAPUA NEW GUINEA is not a united country after 39 years of self-government and independence because it inherited a flawed political model.
The two-tier (national-provincial) and three-tier (national-provincial-local) government arrangements have not effectively functioned due to an ineffective delivery system of goods and services to all provinces since the mid-1970s when the decentralised system (later renamed provincial government) was introduced.
The current political model is not working and there is uneven wealth distribution. PNG needs major political and social reforms and good political leaders.
The bureaucracy needs to be totally overhauled with a new professional national workforce.
PNG must be now governed under a federal political model so the whole country and its bureaucracy work to deliver services to all provinces.
The country needs to have regional state governments to properly manage and control their own administration, budget, resources and movement of their own people to other provinces.
The state governments of these regions: Papua, Highlands, Momase, New Guinea Islands and the Autonomous Region of Bougainville will in effect manage their own regions with their own budget to develop their own regions.
This will also ensure a good level of autonomy is practiced by each region to see the country's resources properly managed and not squandered as is at the present case since independence.
Hi Reg - I have listened to John Momis on a YouTube clip explaining that, before Independence and settling on a Constitution, the PNG reps on the Committee including himself, Somare and Guise etc asked for ideas from all the PNG regions on what the people wanted. They all wanted a 'home grown' system.
Possibly the result was that they tried to please everyone?
The real problem is that no one in PNG had ever had to cope with a federal government system and the team tasked with assembling a federal system according to John Momis, did not want to borrow anything from overseas.
It still doesn't excuse those who did not allow enough time for PNG to develop an effective system where none existed before.
Perhaps with the benefit of hindsight, it might have been better to borrow a system from somewhere that already had been 'through the hoops' and knew what worked and what didn't?
That's what I've been suggesting with my previous essay in the Attitude about bicameralism.
Posted by: Paul Oates | 10 May 2012 at 08:21 AM
Good to hear your ideas, Reg. I know some other PNG men of experience who hold similar views.
I hear that regional government in some parts of PNG is going well. I hear that talented, well-educated, honest, hard-working people are going back to their home province to help out and use their talents for the good of their home area. This sounds great.
But I hope talented, well-educated, honest, hard-working people will also be willing to work in provinces other than their home province.
Down here some areas of PNG don't have a good name for good governance. They need help.
Posted by: Mrs Barbara Short | 09 May 2012 at 07:45 AM