Gold refinery initiative still premature

THE proposed Gold Refinery Bill by Prime Minister James Marape and Finance Minister Rainbo Paita has sparked significant controversy, and debate across various media platforms, including social media forums.
The more I read into this controversy, I soon realise that there are already many red flags contained in the Bill that will require further due diligence, and in-depth debate within Parliament for a final agreed bi-partisan policy for the sake of our country’s national interest.
The Bill, sponsored by two senior politicians (a bad choice of MPs for obvious reasons), seemed to be hastily written without being properly, and thoroughly debated by all 118 elected representatives of our 22 provinces in Parliament.
In addition, the drafted Gold Bill lacked the professional advice from the country’s own industry watch dog, investment and corporate sector, civil society and relevant stakeholders; including our valued general public policy opinions of ordinary citizens.
A major discrepancy of why this highly-controversial Gold Bill document cannot be even further entertained for discussion, and/or decision by Parliament is it has already been highly compromised.
Hence, without a formal debate and being properly endorsed by the PNG Parliament, two senior MPs in an illegal and unconstitutional manner decided to unilaterally frame a private business deal with foreign business partners.
In short, if I was an MP, I would strongly recommend to all MPs right now to reject this highly-compromised Gold Bill, as it is not clearly in our national interest.
Notwithstanding this, for a simplified situation analysis by every elected representative in the PNG Parliament and for the benefit of the understanding of their individual constituents, and every Papua New Guineans, they must fully know the following: Who are the Key Players? Prime Minister James Marape and Finance Minister Rainbo Paita are leading the initiative with a Singapore company.
Benefits to PNG and its people: The full benefits of the draft bill to PNG and its people need to be clearly outlined. This includes economic, social, and environmental considerations.
Negotiated arrangements: Transparency regarding the negotiated arrangements between PNG and the Singapore company is essential for public trust and accountability.
Comparison with existing deals: It’s crucial to assess whether the proposed Gold Refinery Bill offers the best deal for PNG compared with existing agreements in the gold industry.
Primary beneficiaries: Understanding who stands to benefit the most from PNG’s gold resources and the establishment of a refinery within the country is vital.
Unresolved red flags: Any unexplained red flags or unresolved issues concerning the draft bill need to be addressed transparently by all concerned parties.
Parliamentary policy position: There should be a bi-partisan policy position established by the PNG Parliament, based on a comprehensive analysis, and consultation with all relevant stakeholders.
Desired actions for MPs: MPs are encouraged to thoroughly scrutinise the proposed bill and consider the interests of their constituents before debating it in Parliament.
Additional considerations: Civil society and Opposition groups should actively engage in the debate, and advocate for transparency, accountability, and the best interests of Papua New Guineans.
By addressing these questions and considerations, Papua New Guineans can provide informed guidance to their MPs ahead of the parliamentary debate on the Gold Refinery Bill in May 2024. Transparency, accountability, and the long-term interests of our country should be at the forefront of any subsequent decision-making by Parliament and government in future.
Last but not the least, the draft Gold Refinery Bill must be rejected by all MPs as it is clearly not in PNG’s national interest.

Reginald Renagi
Pngpapuatauna