Academia Nomad

How many bad decisions can PNG take? – Allan Bird

Allan Bird

By Allan Bird, Governor of East Sepik

I spent 5 years in government as a nice flower pot, a decoration of Parliament. I disagreed with many bad decisions of government. But you can only say so in caucus, otherwise you are not a team player.

Government operates by the PM getting what he wants, the Ministers getting what they want and the back benches getting what they want.

Most MPs can’t tell the difference between national interest and personal interest. We think the two are the same thing.

What about PNGans? Is the ordinary Joe in PNG getting what he or she wants from the country? Is the ordinary Joe looking at a bright future in PNG? All the indicators say otherwise.

As we continue to experience power issues, law and order, FX, unemployment, inflation, cost of living, etc, etc. There is no long term gain. A select few lucky people are benefiting handsomely from government while the majority are struggling to buy tinfish and rice.

Our short term pain is now long term pain.

PNG is probably K100b in debt right now and the hole is getting deeper. It’s like a cancer patient and no one is willing to cut out the cancer.

When you speak against the government and its bad decisions, government supporters will attack you. Simply because they are part of the ecosystem, they are feeding in the public trough and you are threatening their lifeline, their food supply.

If an international organization, country or anyone else supports a government that is intent on staying in power at the expense of our people: they are the enemy.

Make no mistake, PNG is failing, its failing because the weight of all the bad decisions is killing the country.

If we don’t change those decisions, if we keep making bad decisions, if we keep choosing all the wrong options, there is only one place we end up. And that’s not a very happy place. We are in it now and it’s not improving.

PNG needs a competent government that will cut back expenditure on unnecessary things, reduce borrowing, stop printing money, reduce the decline in cost of living, reduce cost of doing business and give confidence to investors and consumers. This government is incapable of doing that.

We can’t continue on this path or the situation in PNG will continue to get worse and our people will be affected the most.

Every leader must choose a side. We can support a government that is making life difficult for our people or change course. I, like some of my colleagues; choose the side of our ordinary voiceless people and I will remain until things improve.

My position is simple, I can’t be party to bad decisions anymore. I can’t be a useless flower pot anymore. I have chosen a side, I have chosen to fight for ordinary, struggling PNGans. PNG needs a rescue and I will fight with the rescue team.

Any MP who wants to be PM and chooses a different path to the Marape pathway: will have my full support.

Bougainville issue: unanswered questions and points of contention

The Bougainville issue was debated on the floor of parliament today. Here is a summary of what I think are the points of contention.

Referendum results were meant to be no-binding

This is the most controversial of all: that the referendum results were intended to be non-binding.

This provision is captured in both the Bougainville Peace Agreement and the PNG Constitution. Former Minister for Bougainville Affairs Puka Temu said in parliament today that when he and his Bougainville counterpart visited Bougainville multiple times leading up to the referendum, he told the people of Bougainville that the referendum result would be non-binding.

Many at the time didn’t pay much attention to this provision. And now it’s come back to be the most contentious issue. The question that should have been raised back then, during the peace agreement negotiations, and even before the 2019 referendum, is:

Why conduct a referendum if the results would be non-binding?

This question is so obvious that I’m pretty sure the leaders of the time thought about it. But there is no clear answer why they’d go ahead with the provision on a non-binging referendum.

A possible answer is that this was a compromise between two parties. That there is a referendum, but it’s non-binding. The goal at the time was peace. This question was possibly left for the future generation of leaders to deal with.

PNG parliament has the last say

Despite Bougainvilleans voting 97.7% for independence, the PNG parliament will vote on whether Bougainville becomes independent or not.

The term “ratification” or “ratify” doesn’t appear under Part 14 of PNG Constitution – the Part that deals with Bougainville. It’s only in the Bougainville Peace Agreement. In place of ratify, the PNG Constitution instead says “consult.” The Peace Agreement was signed before the Constitution was amended, so the dilution of the words seems intentional.

So the word “ratify” in the Peace Agreement gives the impression that PNG parliament would, for a lack of better term, ‘approve’ the results.

But as Richard Maru argued, parliament actually intends to “vote” on the results. And the vote can go either way. Governor Powi then asked: what happens the next day after the vote?

There will be a result when there is a vote. How does PNG and Bougainville move on the next day?

Absolute or simple majority?

When it eventually comes before the parliament: many votes does take to decide Bougainville’s political future?

The Bougainville side thinks it should be a simple majority. Simple majority is 50% + 1. That is, of the 118 MPs, 60 MPs.

PNG side thinks it should be absolute majority, that is 76%, which is 89 votes.

The number of MPs on the parliament floor at any time varies, depending on how many MPs are present. For instance, if 100 MPs are present, simple majority is 51 and absolute majority is 75.

Supreme Court interpretation

The disagreements over a constitutional question will always go before the Supreme Court for interpretation. All points raised above are possible constitutional questions, and therefore, has the potential to go before the Supreme Court.

The question is: will either party abide by the ruling of the Supreme Court when the Court?

An uninformed parliament

In my view, Puka Temu’s most important point during the debate is the fact that PNG MPs are not as involved as they should be in the consultation process. The very MPs who are going to vote for the political status of Bougainville are not involved in the process.

Apart from few leaders like Julias Chan, all the MPs in parliament now came into parliament after the signing of the Bougainville Peace Agreement. There is no institutional knowledge of the history and process of the very issue which they are now entrusted with to vote on.

Set aside vote of no confidence and respond to Enga disaster: Pomat

Job Pomat, Speaker of the PNG House of Parliament

I’ve never been a fan of Job Pomat (and for good reason), but what he said today in parliament is what every national leader should say and do in times of disaster.

After the prime minister and opposition leader had belatedly spoken about the Enga landslide and offered condolences, Pomat, in Pidgin said something along the lines of:

“Vote of no confidence will not go anywhere, and leaders you have all the time in the world. We should all agree to put this vote of no confidence issue on aside, and respond to the disaster first. We represent the people, they should remain our priority. We can always come back to deal with the vote of no confidence.”

On the lack of funds, Pomat said something along the lines of:

“We have all received our Constitutency Development Funds. In this time of need, we should all chip in from our CDFs (DSIP/PSIP) to assist our people in Enga.”

Both wise counsel, and both deserving of a leader. A Melanesian leader that is. He could have said that yesterday when parliament just met for 30 minutes and adjourned.

During times of disaster, someone has to speak sense. When all the leaders are driven by self interest for political survival, someone had to speak wisdom.

Fitting for a Speaker of the Honorable House. We hope our leaders take his advise, put vote of no confidence on hold and respond to the disaster. We have up to 2000 people buried under boulders and dirt. The people whom the leaders are elected to represent. Vote of no confidence is pointless when the people who the leaders represent are buried.

We’ll pick up the fight later, but for now, Pomat you have our respect.

If you gat access lo Pomat tokim em mipla Tok tenkyu.

Why the PM nominee should go to Kerenga Kua

Rainbo Paita in a press conference yesterday said he’s still Pangu MP. Allan Bird is an independent after resigning from National Alliance. That leaves Kerenga Kua, a party leader of the PNG National Party and someone whom if nominated by the Opposition as the prime minister candidate, will pass the parliamentary business committee.

Remember that the parliamentary business committee is dominated by the government MPs, and they vet the notice for a vote of no confidence. They can rejected the notice and no one can do anything about it, apart from going to the court.

So what are the risks if either Rainbo Paita and Allan Bird is nominated as PM candidates of the opposition?

Rainbo Paita:

The government dominated parliamentary businesses committee can reject the notice on the grounds that two MPs from the same party cannot be endorsed as there is already a prime minister from that party. Both Paita and the incumbent PM James Marape are Pangu Pati MPs.

There’s nothing stopping Paita from contesting. But that doesn’t really matter. What matters is that the parliamentary business committee can argue that this is a valid ground and reject the notice.

Allan Bird:

It’s the same with Allan Bird. When he was nominated, the government said they would take it to court for clarification because Allan Bird is an independent MP and doesn’t belong to any political party.

These are all baseless and doesn’t have any legal basis, but again, all the parliamentary business committee needs is one little mishap for them to reject the notice.

What happens if the parliamentary business committee rejects the notice nominating Paita and Bird as PM candidates and it goes before the court?

The court will most likely rule in favour of both Paita and Bird. But this buys precious time for the government to entice opposition MPs to switch to the government side. The courts have a backlog of cases, plus there will be so many interveners just to delay the process.

In the meantime end, Marape remains the prime minister. This tactics happens all the time.

What should the opposition do?

Well even if the opposition win all the court cases, they will lose the prime minister’s seat because all the prime minister needs it TIME. In time, all the yo-yos will yo-yo back to the government side, leaving Kerenga Kua and Allan Bird and a few others.

This is what the opposition need to do:

Pick Kerenga Kua as the alternate prime minister. He is a party leader, and he is in the opposition.

My preference is Allan Bird. And my view is that he will win any court case challenging his eligibility for the PM’s post. But in PNG politics if you give the government time, the yo-yos will return.

Now is the opportune time: give the PM candidate to someone whom the parliamentary business committee will not have a reason to reject or delay the notice.

The above are scenarios and it may not play out as stated above.

PNG opposition change alternate prime minister candidate

Alternate Prime Minister Candidate Rainbow Paita

Earlier I wrote about Rainbow Paita, describing the characteristics of PNG politicians that usually become the prime minister during a vote of no confidence. In summary, I said the prime ministers usually emerge from within the ruling coalition, lack principle and integrity, and are able to compromise with competing interests. When I wrote that piece, Rainbow Paita was still the Minister for National Planning under the Marape Government.

On Sunday Rainbow Paita left the Marape government with 18 other members of parliament from the coalition. He joined the opposition and then used the 18 MPs as a leverage to negotiate for the prime minister’s position. The opposition had chosen Allan Bird as the alternate prime minister since February 2024. Allan Bird and the opposition decided to relinquish the prime minister candidacy to Rainbow Paita.

The difference between Allan Bird and Rainbow Paita couldn’t have been more clearer:

– When Allan Bird first left the government and moved to the opposition, he refused the PM post but it was the confidence those around him, who forced him to take it.

– Rainbow Paita and used the 18 MPs whom he took over as a bargaining chip to get the post.

– Allan Bird left the government after a major laws and order issues: 10 January 2024 riots. There was a clear lack of leadership demonstrated using the protest and Bird left.

– Rainbow Paita just left. Just like that. A day before he said Pangu was solid and then left in less than 48 hours. He was opportunistic.

– Allan Bird speaks coherently and logically in parliament. All Rainbow Paita has done is defend James Marape in parliament.

– With Allan Bird you know what he will do when he becomes the PM. From law and order to fixing the economy. Whether he is right or wrong, at least he has a track record of presenting his plans.

– Rainbow Paita has no plans. All he’s ever done in parliament, is being James Marape’s megaphone.

The big question now is: will Rainbow Paita successfully replace James Marape?

That seems unlikely because of a few things. First, senior politicians like William Duma and Powes Parkop, whose respective parties have the second and third largest MPs outside of Pangu, will not support Paita. As stated above, Paita has never presented an opinion of his own apart from talking points supporting Marape. We don’t know what his position is on the economy, geopolitics, security and many others. Secondly, these senior politicians will not support a young man half their age.

Third, public sentiments matter. The public see Paita as a clone of Marape. The MPs may as well remain with Marape then support a clone. The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.

Third, Paita doesn’t command respect from his peers in the same way Allan Bird does. Even though PNG politics is not know for principled leadership, politicans would support someone with the experience of Allan Bird, a businessman turned politician, and who has a track record of speaking sensibly in parliament, over someone like Rainbow Paita.

What we’ve witnessed in the last 24 hours is PNG politics at its height. Numbers matter, and Rainbow Paita had the numbers. It didn’t matter that opposition already had a capable candidate.