KEITH JACKSON

THERE ARE TWO CRITICAL stages in the five-yearly Papua New Guinea national election process, and at both the politicians have to confront considerable challenges.

The first stage is the local or provincial constituency election: characterised by large numbers of candidates, many representing tribal and clan rather than national interests. The results are mostly determined on the basis of group loyalty and therefore group size.

The challenge is that of any local politician: how to get the numbers. Foot leather and gift giving play large roles.

The second stage comprises the bargaining and coercing that accompany the post-election period as party leaders seek to gain the numbers that will gain them power positions when parliament eventually sits. During this period, which has already begun even though counting is incomplete, the new members face a very different kind of challenge.

Of the first stage Reilly and Phillpot (‘Making Democracy Work in Papua New Guinea’, Asian Survey, v 42, n 6) wrote in 2002:

“[Elections provide an] arena in which traditional clan rivalries and tribal conflicts can be fought out…. In some areas, electoral contests provide a substitute arena in which traditional clan rivalries and tribal conflicts can be fought out. Elections can also reinforce the salience of clan and tribal affiliations…”

Given that the loyalties, reciprocities and accountabilities are largely local, there tends to be a disconnect between local elections and what happens on the broader national stage. To be blunt, at a local level, most people simply don’t care about the big picture.

It is arguable that most do not comprehend how decisions made in Port Moresby can affect them.

So it is not national politics or the big issues (like corruption) that are likely to influence their vote.

If the first stage is somewhat surreal in terms of national politics in PNG, then the second can be thoroughly venal.

And, in the context of Election 2012, the venality appears to be already showing itself.

Speaking on Radio New Zealand International, the head of Transparency International in Papua New Guinea, Lawrence Stephens, has voiced concern about this practice of political parties buying the support of MPs as the new government is being assembled.

Mr Stephens had this to say after visiting Manus Province, where two new MPs were declared very early in the national vote counting.

“As soon as one of the candidate’s election was confirmed, he was met outside by representatives of one party leader offering a jet aircraft or an aircraft of some sort to fly in, pick him up and take him to the lair of the party leader who wanted to meet with him,” Mr Stephens said.

“And there were even apparently discussions of the value associated with him being involved in that move.”

Mr Stephens said there is evidence that independents and MPs from smaller parties who have so far been declared winners of their seats are being targetted by the major parties.

He said the practice had been adopted in the past, but that the sums of money involved have now soared.

“Many of the players are talking in terms of very large amounts of booty,” he said, “and this is Transparency International’s ongoing concern.

“The fairly blatant corrupt activities that are taking place around buying and selling votes, and disappointment that members approached in this way do not lay official complaints with the police.”

Now this revelation was a case of ‘no names, no pack drill’ for Mr Stephens, but it is enough for us to appreciate the general point that the lack of accountability between national and local level is a critical enabler of this kind of corruption.

In most democracies, voters would not tolerate it; in PNG, by and large, they do not seem to care.

And so vote-buying amongst elected MPs is able to flourish. For many new parliamentarians it marks the beginning of the gravy train.

To the state of the leading parties mid-morning (I combine elected members with leading candidates to gain a clearer picture of party performance):