| Sports |
by MAMANDO PAIN
Economy up when Chief is in office
By MAMANDO PAIN
IN his Talking Point column on April
18, Dr Michael Unage contends that I was focusing on making Sir
Michael Somare my idol and that my support for the Prime Minister
was not based on principles.
In essence, Dr Unage made a personal attack on me in his article
rather than confine his arguments to the merits and demerits of
the amended NCDC Act and the Moti saga.
I do not wish to get into a personal war with Dr Unage using the
media as it is not the right thing to do. I doubt whether readers
understood what Dr Unage was trying to say because the language he
uses is academic in nature.
The good doctor should bear in mind the education level of most
Papua New Guineans and that The National is not an academic
journal. Also, he is not writing to me personally.
Dr Unage thinks that I am supporting Sir Michael without giving
due consideration to the leadership principles, character and
performance of the founding father of PNG.
On the contrary, I have studied the leadership principles of Sir
Michael and other great leaders of this nation and world at large
as well as their personal and public life, as required by my
profession as a junior political scientist.
When I was growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, I followed my
parents to idolise Sir Michael just like anyone in PNG without
reason.
When I studied political science and economics at university and
thereafter, I came to appreciate Sir Michael even more. I did a
bit of research to examine the nature of relationship between the
political leadership in PNG and the country’s corresponding
economic performance since 1975 to 2000.
My research noted that whenever a government led by Grand Chief
was in place, there was good economic performance and the economy
was well managed. The reverse was true when Sir Michael was not at
the helm on comparative terms.
One should realise that when Sir Michael was prime minister in
1975-80, 1982-86 and 2002 to the present, there is record of good
macroeconomic management. So the track record shows that whenever
the Grand Chief shows up, the economy goes up as well.
It appears that Dr Unage is making his political analysis from
1997 to 2002 and 2002 to 2007. He is right in saying Sir Mekere
Morauta put in the reforms and the NA-led Government is only
reaping what the latter sowed.
I am looking at the leadership principles and the economic
performance of PNG under the leadership of Sir Michael from 1975
to 2007.
Given such background, I have been writing to the editors to
educate the people of PNG not to take the Grand Chief for granted.
In four of my letters to the editors, I wrote about the leadership
principles, wisdom and philosophy of Sir Michael for the past 32
years.
If Dr Unage or anyone interested in the leadership principles of
Sir Michael, they must read my letters to the editors in this
newspaper where I explicitly spelt out the principles long held by
the Grand Chief and which the citizens must not take for granted.
Four of my letters dealt specifically with the leadership
principles, philosophy and wisdom of Sir Michael which Dr Unage
may have ignored.
My first letter, “PM’s Decision is the best for PNG” (Nov 16,
2006), did a comparative analysis of some of the best leaders in
the world like Sir Winston Churchill of Britain, Nelson Mandela of
South Africa, David Ben-Gurion of Israel and Sir Michael of PNG.
In this letter, I expounded on leadership principles of these
great leaders.
A common leadership principle embraced by these leaders is that
they pursued national interest at the expense of personal
interests.
My second letter, “Chief needs more time to lead” (Jan 11), I
argued that PNG should use the leadership principles of Sir
Michael to build the nation. I looked at the foundation laid by
Ben-Gurion, Sir Julius Nyerere and Dr Mahathir Mohamad in their
respective countries.
In these countries, the leaders ruled for a longer time and the
benefit is for all to see.
My third letter, “Building principles for modern PNG” (Jan 31),
explained the leadership principles of Sir Michael at personal,
family and the public level, primarily his fairness.
I urge Dr Unage to read this letter. Many of the people did not
know that Sir Michael never sent his children to study in overseas
universities until they read the letter and actually came up to me
for pointing this out.
They told me that their perception about Sir Michael changed and
shared my sentiments that he is a fair leader.
In my fourth letter, “Forget politics at regional level” (Feb 26),
I further named the list of selfless and principle-centered
politicians in PNG and first on the list is Sir Michael. In this
letter, I disagreed with Dr Unage and maintained that it is unwise
to rule out Sir Michael as a candidate for Prime Minister after
2007 national election and alerted the good writer not to foster
regional politics in PNG.
I showed the case where Lee Kuan Yew, the founding PM of
Singapore, had to rule for more than three decades to bring island
republic be on par with the developed countries of the world.
I still maintain my view that the NCDC Act and Moti saga are
insignificant to warrant the change of present leadership and I
have given my reasons.
The readers have to decide for themselves whether to subscribe to
Dr Unage’s views or mine. After all, everyone is entitled to his
opinion.
Dr Unage says that the NCDC Governor is a leader of PNG while I
say otherwise. The NCDC Governor is only part of the legislature
that makes the law but he is not the leader of the executive arm
of the Government which is the National Executive Council headed
by the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister is the leader of both the legislature and NEC,
thus the leader of PNG.
The positions of Prime Minister and NCDC Governor are not equal.
Dr Unage says he is not guilty in Moti saga. He may be correct
because the inquiry report has not been tabled in Parliament yet
and we therefore do not know the findings.
Yet, without basis, he accused Sir Michael of committing the
blunder.
However, assuming that the inquiry has found “X” guilty and
assuming that this person is a citizen of PNG, then Mamando Pain
is also guilty because he is a Papua New Guinean.
After all, the Moti affair is not a local issue that we should
point fingers at each other. In any international issue, we should
put away our domestic political differences and stand united to
face the outcome – good or bad, war or peace.
Given the foregone, the NCDC Act and Moti issues are insignificant
to warrant the removal of the NA-led government.
Opposition leader Peter O’Neill’s apparent decision to team up
with the NA-led Government in the elections is a landmark move in
the political history of PNG and a vote of confidence in the
present leadership.
Note: The writer is a former tutor at the
University of PNG, University of Southern Queensland and
International Training Institute where he is now a consultant.
 
|
