The great god rice falters
THE nation has now been officially warned of a potential nightmare we have detailed for years – a shortage of rice.
Already riots have taken place in other countries totally dependent on the grain for their basic food supply.
In the case of Papua New Guinea, successive governments have failed to make any realistic attempts to develop our country’s traditional food crops.
Instead, the national fixation with rice has been allowed to balloon to the point where it has become the staple food for tens of thousands of our people.
Kaukau, taro and yams are only three of a remarkably wide range of PNG root crops and vegetables.
Cooked with fresh fish, fowl, beef or pork, they provide a far more healthy and balanced diet that one based on rice and tinned meat or fish.
Rice has become the crop of choice because it is easy to buy, easy to cook and as an almost totally imported commodity, needs no effort to produce.
Now there is a real possibility that rice will become more difficult and more expensive to buy.
The National has repeatedly challenged government after government to justify this foolish policy of food dependence upon outside sources.
Not only has there always been the possibility of the present situation developing, but the dependence upon rice has cost the nation literally hundreds of millions of kina.
Are we such a wealthy country that we can afford such costs?
There are two issues that have yet to be satisfactorily explained.
First, much practical research has been undertaken to help provide PNG with a realistic food bank including a wide variety of crops, designed to minimise the disastrous effects of droughts, floods and famine.
The food bank approach could be used in the event of a major and protracted rice shortage.
Committed agricultural advisers, agronomists and nutritionists, both national and from overseas, have expended a great deal of effort to try and make this concept a reality.
Would the Agriculture and Livestock Department care to indicate the present status of those efforts?
And would Agriculture Minister John Hickey, regarded as a no-nonsense advocate of open and transparent leadership, indicate the on-going plans of his government to further develop this vital initiative?
The second issue was the subject of an editorial in these pages some two weeks ago
We asked then why PNG governments have consistently failed to support the development of a home-grown rice industry.
We detailed the dozens of experiments that have been conducted over the past 40 years to determine the suitability of a wide range of rice crops – for example the Taiwanese experimental farm at Bubia in the Morobe province.
Since that editorial, we’ve heard from a number of small scale farmers eager to tell of their success in growing and hand milling rice to feed themselves and their neighbours.
Why is there such a signal lack of funding to expand these efforts into a realistic industry?
Not only could we move towards feeding a rapidly increasing population with rice that is grown in PNG but we could eventually close the pipeline that sees huge quantities of national funds channelled overseas to import this product.
Given a choice, we would much prefer to see our people feeding themselves as they have done for centuries on the vast range of healthy foods that grow in our country.
We are indeed blessed in this respect and there is no justification for the thousands of malnourished babies and children that populate not only our towns and cities but our villages as well.
A properly developed and managed food bank seems both essential and possible.
But if our people prove determined to continue their worship of the great god rice, then it is time our governments stopped dithering, stopped bowing to the powerful Australian rice lobby and started meaningful development of a PNG rice industry.
We hear much about the need for PNG to control its own future and exercise independence in all things.
Yet the black hole of imported rice continues to suck in an ever-increasing proportion of our national funds while our own potential rice producers are left to struggle.
Effective government action on this matter is long overdue.
 
Turning tide of whaling opinion
By Chris Hogg
Tokyo: Who has “won” the battle between the Japanese whalers and the environmentalists who set out to disrupt their hunt?
Japan only managed to catch 60% of its quota of whales this season and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, the organisation whose members clashed most violently with the Japanese whaling fleet, said it had “saved” hundreds of whales.
But Greenpeace, the other conservation group who tailed the Japanese fleet through the waters of the Southern Ocean around Antarctica, pointed out that 551 whales were still caught this year – still considerably more than the 440 caught three years ago.
Japan’s quotas have been far greater in the past couple of years than they used to be. Clearly, though, this year has still seen many setbacks for Japanese whalers.
Officials originally said they were targeting 850 minke whales, 50 fin whales and 50 humpbacks.
Within weeks Tokyo changed its mind about the humpbacks – which had been protected by international agreements for decades – in what Japan described as a gesture to try to pacify its opponents.
Then when the fleet sailed to the hunting ground it became clear that the protesters, particularly those from the Sea Shepherd group, planned to use whatever means they could to disrupt the hunt.
In January, two activists boarded a Japanese vessel. That prompted a stand-off that suited the environmental group.
The Japanese demanded assurances they would not be attacked if they approached the Sea Shepherd vessel to return its two crew members. The environmentalists refused to co-operate. In the end an Australian customs vessel had to act as a go-between and shuttle the men from one ship to the other.
Disruption cost the hunt 31 days in total, over the winter.
When one or other Japanese ship was dealing with protesters, it was difficult for the rest of the fleet to continue the hunt.
There were further clashes, some violent, between the Sea Shepherd protesters and the whalers.
Greenpeace activists were also involved in efforts to stop the whaling taking place.
The Japanese seemed unwilling to be filmed or photographed whaling, and so just tailing them closely was enough to disrupt operations for days at a time.
Now Japan says “sabotage” by activists “was a major factor behind our failure to achieve our target”. But a fisheries agency official made clear it was not the only factor. He said few fin whales were spotted, another reason why none of them were caught.
But nevertheless, for the first time in 20 years, protesters are being blamed for Japan’s failure to meet its quota.
Prof Stephen Hesse from Japan’s Chuo University thinks some officials believe the international community will give them credit for culling fewer whales than they had planned to.
“Perhaps they will think this will get them some sympathy, that this will play well for the government, that it will give a sense of the injustice they have been subjected to,” he says.
If that is the case, it is probably a miscalculation. The clashes on the high seas this winter have caused problems for Japan’s diplomats who have been forced to spend a lot of time on this.
There is no sense that as Australia’s prime minister Kevin Rudd makes plans for a visit to Japan in a few weeks time, there will be any softening of his tough line on whaling.
The biggest concern for the Japanese whalers may be the financial costs of not fulfilling their quota.
Although this is scientific whaling, the meat is sold to consumers to try to defray some of the costs of the whaling industry. If they caught just 60% of what they had hoped to, it is reasonable to conclude their income will fall by 40%. – BBC
Editorial