Medication to deal with power, money

By SIR JOHN R KAPUTIN
The views expressed in this article emanate from my expe­rience as a member of parliament for 30 years (1972-2002) and, subsequently, as secretary-general of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of states (2005-10), based in Brussels, Belgium. 
As a legislator, I was also a member of the Constitutional Planning Committee (CPC) of 15 MPs who were charged with the responsibility of drafting the CPC report, which formed the basis for the Constitution of the Independent State of Papua New Guinea. The CPC’s important contribution to the constitution-making process took the best part of two years. 
In my various capacities, both as a member of cabinet and as secretary-general of the ACP res­ponsible for significant aspects of the affairs of 79 member-states, I observed many practices which changed over time and lacked compliance with good gover­nance.  This experience has made me feel very concerned and appalled by what has been going on in Port Moresby. 
Most other commentators appear to be bogged down in legalistic arguments and technicalities, without any reference to the real issues which are the main focus of this presentation. The most annoying aspect of the continuing
debate over the pros and cons regarding the current political saga is that media, lawyers, and journalists in PNG and Australia, are almost all regurgitating the same poisonous stuff in support of one faction or another without offering a proper diagnosis of the disease that is suffocating the nation. 
It is now time that we prescribe the proper medication to deal with the cancer attacking our democracy, which is the struggle for power and money, and the misuse of the state apparatus, including the National Parliament and the Supreme Court, to satisfy particular ambitions and greed.
During my years in parliament,
many parliamentary and ministerial practices began to change, supposedly in the name of political stability and progress. But, as the proliferation of political parties increased, and party platforms became meaningless documents without any commitment and loyalty, leaders of successive governments-of-the-day (prime ministers) realised that they could
never count on their followers, whether as party members or members of a coalition. 
This si­tuation led to the introduction of innovations by the various leaders during my 30 years of parliamentary duties.  Having served under all prime ministers to date in one capaci­ty or another,  I have been well-placed to observe how the pro­cesses began to deteriorate. Let me, therefore, begin by outlining my various responsibilities.
(1)    Under Sir Michael Somare,
I served as a member of the Constitutional Planning Committee (CPC), 1972-75; minister for justice, 1973-74; deputy speaker, 1975-77; and minister for national planning and development, 1978-79.
(2)    Following the first successful vote of no-confidence in March 1980, I served under Sir Julius Chan as minister for finance until the 1982 general election.
(3)    When Paias Wingti unseated Sir Michael as prime minister in November 1985, I became minister for minerals and energy until  1988. 
(4)    When Wingti was successfully challenged by Sir Rabbie Namaliu in 1988 to become prime minister, I was appointed chairman of the bipartisan special committee on the crisis in the North Solomons province until 1990. The committee’s report was tabled in the National Parliament in 1991.
(5)    Following the 1992 election, I served again under Wingti as foreign minister until 1994 and minister for mining and petroleum in 1994.
(6)    During his term as prime minister between 1997 and 1999, Sir Bill Skate appointed me special state negotiator for Bougainville in 1998. With the prime minister’s support, I went before the United Nations (UN) Security Council to appeal for a UN presence on Bougainville. I signed the Lincoln Agreement in Lincoln, New Zealand, and the Ceasefire Agreement on board the Australian naval vessel Tobruk at Loloho, Bougainville, in 1998.
(7)    Under Sir Mekere Morauta’s prime ministership, I served briefly as mining minister in 1999 and then as foreign minister. I was later appointed as special ministerial envoy for international financial institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Union Commission, and the Asian Development Bank.
(8)    Following my defeat in the 2002 national election, I was appointed in 2004 as secretary-general of the 79-member ACP group to be based in Brussels, Belgium, between 2005 and 2010. Pacific ACP leaders supported my nomination by a vote of 11-3.  The formal appointment was made by the ACP council of ministers in December 2004.
It was against the background of my experience in the various positions mentioned above that I
have been exposed to the idiosyn­crasies of national politics and the national executive council.  My long association with ACP-EU institutions since 1978, including a term as co-president of the ACP-EU joint parliamentary assembly (1995-97), and as ACP secretary-general (2005-10), added to my experience and provided a unique opportunity to observe many aspects of politics both from within Papua New Guinea and overseas, particularly in Europe, Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
In PNG, I saw the emergence of vote-trading and how it became an expensive business, which allowed the foreign exploiters of our timber, fisheries and other natural resources to start imposing their influence in national politics, and, in turn, reduce our leaders to financial slaves. 
In order to keep members together, one requires a lot of money – which our leaders do not have in the bank legally but as a result of corruption. Political horse-trading has become so competitive that, unless one is connected to those who have the financial resources, and especially exploiters of our natural resources, becoming prime mi­nister is a no-go zone for anyone without a great deal of money. 
Thus, in terms of power and money, Papua New Guineans are now dancing to the music composed by foreign businessmen who have taken up so much land in Port Moresby for themselves and their businesses. Yet in places such as Malaysia and Singapore, outsiders cannot acquire land so easily.  So why do our leaders turn a blind eye to this unacceptable situation in Papua New Guinea? The answer is:  money!
Even the procedures and pro­cesses of the national executive council have been affected by the same money-men who have been cleverly exploiting this country’s natural resources and buying off our leaders in order to control the politics of the nation. 
Thus, cabinet submissions no longer mean anything when so many of them are prepared by people from outside the proper and normal government agencies. This has been a growing practice during the past three decades, over which the new boys on the block are fighting so that they too can benefit from the spoils. Unfortunately, things are likely to get a lot worse before we will see any real improvement, if improvement will still be possible then.

Tomorrow: Learn from the lessons of history and others