| Sports |
by REGINALD
RENAGI
PM must have vision for future
PEOPLE may or may not agree with the
views of Dr Michael Unage in his article, “The best among equals
for PM” (Jan 31).
I found his assessment rather subjective and wish to add to the
discussion.
Whatever anybody thinks about who is the best person to be the
next prime minister depends very much on perception and politics
is all about perception.
For example, if we cannot trust a particular politician to
represent our interest, then we will not vote for the person,
regardless of whether he or she is a good person.
However, politics is said to be the art of the possible and
politicians do make strange bedfellows. Thus, anything is
possible in PNG’s fluid political environment.
Our governments have always comprised a concoction of several
parties of odd players in political marriages of convenience.
These players show no long-term loyalty and commitment to each
other except during their parliamentary term.
Over time, many coalition partners have played political games
synonymous to being polygamists, or serial monogamists as
described by Dr Unage.
They justify their party-hopping dalliance later by saying it is
in accordance with their people’s wishes. They delude themselves
in thinking the public will buy into this time-old lie.
Parliament in recent years has unfortunately had its share of
estranged, separated or divorced and or single independent MPs
sitting forlornly in the middle benches.
This may happen after falling out with former partners in
government or opposition ranks for some reason or another. They
are caught between a “rock and a hard place”.
This happens when their initial basic objective as to what they
hope to achieve in Parliament during a fixed term is perhaps not
even clear to themselves.
They may perceive a bipartisan vision of a united Parliament
somehow do not closely align with their own political
aspirations as an MP.
Although these MPs could very well contribute much to
parliamentary decision-making, both sides tend to view them as a
belligerent group that could not be counted upon for their
support in facilitating certain controversial Bills.
Whilst in Parliament, they are somewhat uncertain as to how best
to fit in the overall political scheme of things.
Their contributions to parliamentary debates are either
non-existent or is limited. Many while away the hours napping at
taxpayer’s expense.
Some, if compelled to make a stand of some sort, will nearly
always not steadfastly maintain any strong principled-position
on key issues of national importance.
Many others when allowed to speak, will show a veiled
belligerency hinting of their own uncertainty and some slight
resentment of their perceived limited status.
In more recent times, a kind of open-marriage arrangement is
also seen in Parliament.
The Government’s warped reasoning allows certain opposition
party members to hold ministerial portfolios. This is an
inducement for something that lacks transparency, and needs
clarifying by law.
When it does this, the Government is only propagating political
instability, which it constantly says it is trying to stem.
In fact, the Government is only deluding itself by creating some
false sense of security in trying to reduce opposition
membership.
This bizarre political practice is not what we want to see in
our parliamentary democratic model here.
However, this divide-and-rule tactic over time does have a
serious drawback.
As politics is a guessing game, let them figure it out. By the
time anyone realises this, it will be too late for the prime
minister to rectify it by then.
Now a brief look at Dr Unage’s four hopefuls and how they may
stack up as perceived by the public.
One thing which I agree with Dr Unage is that not all political
party leaders today have the qualities to be prime minister.
Dr Unage selects just four MPs from our four regions – Sir
Rabbie Namaliu, Sir Mekere Morauta, Bart Philemon and Bire
Kimisopa.
As Dr Unage stated earlier, these four men have all contributed
to the development of the country in their various capacities.
However, this also applies to every MP in their own way, whether
big or small as elected representatives of their electorate.
Whether a prime minister, front or a back-bencher, I regard all
MPs as equal in their net-value as elected leaders of their
people.
So far, I rate the performance of all former prime ministers as
average.
All lacked any real vision for the future.
They failed to manage the country effectively and to get the
economic fundamentals right. They have collectively put PNG into
a debt trap.
They increased taxes and spending policies that took more money
from our pockets and into non cost-effective programmes.
There was no trickle-down effect.
We got taxed and government spending skyrocketed with no
long-term debt-consolidation strategy to reduce debt.
Consequently, they have mortgaged the future generation who will
have great pains repaying the national debt.
The international economic order is designed to control
governments through debt.
The world’s monetary system ensures that a country’s debt must
increase regardless of what governments do in future.
As there is always more debt than there is money to repay it, it
can never be fully paid off.
Nevertheless, it is time we ask some tough questions about our
former prime ministers.
Did they really measure up to the national expectations?
How well did their governments manage our economy?
Were national interests protected (or compromised) against
constant shifting priorities, and competing demands of domestic
and foreign policy pressures?
Has special interests played any part and by how much to
influence or corrupt our leader’s decision-making capacity?
Are core issues of good governance being competently addressed?
What must future leaders do to lift their game?
It does not really matter where the next prime minister comes
from – it a non-issue.
We are more concerned as to whether he can do a very tough job.
The person must be a very competent strategic manager with
strong leadership qualities and good experience to juggle the
many priorities and competing demands.
The person must be a good all-round politician, with strong
knowledge on key issues relating to domestic and foreign
policies, and importantly, has Parliament’s majority support.
The next prime minister must be someone with a varied depth of
political, public policy and administration experience,
including good business acumen.
The person must be a good communicator, able to clearly
articulate to his government, Parliament and the nation as a
whole on what our future vision and direction is, how we are
going to achieve it.
The new leadership must be inspiring in Parliament and give
confidence to all citizens with fresh, creative new ideas
to mould PNG into a prosperous and competitive nation of
tomorrow.
The next prime minister must be a politician who can see the big
picture and decisively act on it.
The person must be a visionary and transformational leader who
can systematically facilitate future reforms and motivate the
people to play their part.
Secondly, our political system is not working.
The prime minister must have the strength of conviction to get
both the government and Parliament to support a bipartisan
action in completely overhauling our politics through sound
policy reforms.
I see the new prime minister making it his long-term commitment
to propose new policy options among other trade-off strategies
to enact good and fair laws, and above all, does what is right
for the greater good of our people and country.
He must be prepared to make a big difference by breaking out of
the political mould and forego the bad political precedents set
and habits of past leaders, who have ignored the people’s
demands for change for a better government and an improved
quality of life for all.
He must rise above the political mediocrity and strive for
excellence to improve PNG’s political system, without fear or
favour.
 
|
