How to choose the leaders we need

The National Editorial

THE next three to five years will be a challenging period for Papua New Guinea.
As a nation, it is not a question of if but when the crunch will hit and be felt across the wider sections of society – if it has not been felt already – despite the generally positive outlook those in authority have predicted.
With the country’s national election set to start in 18 days, voters have in their hands an extremely important choice to make about what kind of leader they want to see them through difficult times as well as someone who can lay a long-lasting foundation for future generations to benefit from.
The question remains about the kind of person who should be given that privilege and honour.
Yes, we do need people capable of managing the wealth of resources and opportunities that abound in PNG. We also need the political leadership that can work in tandem with the public service to improve its ability to serve the people.
We do not lack resources or the potential to be greater then what we are now. We only seem to lack the means of getting there.
Having the right leadership is doubly important in this regard. So we must ask ourselves whether the leadership that has taken us this far has done well enough to merit another term in office or not.
The 111 seats being contested at the polls have attracted more than 3000 individuals who think and believe they have what it takes to sit in the house, make decisions and debate issues.
Kairuku-Hiri MP Peter Isoiamo made a point worth considering at a campaign rally last month. He said there were many candidates vying for seats in each electorate and the people must choose carefully. Of course, one must also take into account where a candidate is seen to have the good moral and ethical foundations. Although one should not judge a person only on the number of wives he has, or whether he has a criminal record or a sullied reputation because of some past misdeed or is semi-literate or just lacks the experience to be effective as an MP and leader, these factors need to be taken into account when voting.  Isoaimo said it was not so much about the plans and vision of the leader but how likely it was for that man or woman to make the changes they spoke of once they entered parliament.
Isoaimo, a first-term MP, opined that the best way to pick a leaders was along party lines. It sounds a simple enough plan. Rather than voting for candidates based primarily on their charisma, oratory skills, or good deeds and standing in the community or their educational qualifications and perhaps their business acumen – all of which one can argue are crucial elements of the archetypal parliamentarian – Isoaimo advocated for a more sensible approach in voting for the political parties that had the same aims and ideals that the individual and the masses desired.
These are actually universal wants and needs:

  • quality, affordable and if possible tuition-free education;
  • a safe and secure environment in which to live in (including a  police force and justice system which are competent and efficient);
  • better and wide-ranging health care that is subsidized to a great extent and importantly accessible and available to all Papua New Guineans regardless of where they live or what strata of society they occupy;
  • infrastructure that is built and maintained thereby allowing more parts of the country to receive the benefits of the natural resources that many claim the PNG is endowed with;
  • a real and tangible effort to fight one of the biggest scourges in any modern societies – corruption; and,
  • opportunities for the people to prosper and develop as individuals, communities, districts, provinces and a nation.

These are areas that basically every campaign platform covers in one form or another. The question is who is best suited to make these goals a reality? Who can achieve them? Would one be better served choosing an independent candidate or voting based on a party that has similar aims and possibly the numbers to influence how parliament is formed?  These are points for voters to ponder in the next 18 days before ticking the boxes of their choice on the ballot papers in the polling booth.