Peter O'Neill Pledged To Fight To The Last Breath - And he Is Fighting The Courts

This was a commentary from June 2014 when Peter O'Neill's integrity as the prime minister of Papua New Guinea was tested. Anti corruption task force's decision to arrest him and his reactions would go down in history. I was glad to have recorded the political events of June 2014. 

Here is a brief of what happened four weeks into the saga: the issuing of warrant of arrest, PO's evading the arrest, appointment of new police commissioner, actions of the PC and reactions from other national leaders.

CHRISTIAN LEADERS: We heard leaders from main-line churches appealing for O’Neill to submit to police request. Thank God and pioneer missionaries, PNG are blessed with established churches (Anglican, Lutheran, Catholic, SDA) with strong leaders who have wisdom to correct and suggest to political leaders what to do. Listen to words of men of God. Make no mistake, these leaders speak with wisdom. They represent mass of PNG’s population.

POLICE: Court has made it clear that policemen who are at the forefront of this political turmoil (caused by PM) are not rogue officers. Their reputations, experiences and dedication to the force are exemplary. Their commitment to stand firm at this time is a testament to their courage and determination. These men are trained (at police institution/s) to be strong, commissioned (on oath) to serve and moulded (by experience) to be fearless. They are discipline officers, for goodness sake, trust them to do the right thing.

Police hierarchy had been thrown in disarray with by one man, Peter O’Neill. Is it too late for Vaki to fix this vital institution? He was defeated at District Court but not late for Vaki to make the right call. Both National and District Courts have given Geoffrey Vaki’s no option but to arrest O’Neill. He MUST effect the WoA in haste to save face.

Vaki is rendered to nothing but USELESS in Peter O’Neill’s eyes if not for the policemen protecting the PM. Section of police who took Vaki’s commands can be seen to be the last baton of hope to remain police commissioner. We also see Police Association giving strong signal to politicians (like PM and Housing Minister) who called police ‘rogue cops’ to shut up. 

There are strong views within the Constabulary for Vaki to perform his constitutional duties without siding with Peter O’Neill. This was evident from reports in mainstream media and social network.

Mr Geoffrey Vaki can restore pride and comradeship in police force by taking a step out of PO’s shadow and listen to what courts, church leaders, senior citizens, students and public are saying about PO’s actions.

There needs to be neutral and impartial stand taken by Vaki now. This will not only save his reputation, but also protect the office of the Police Commissioner.

WARNING: 3 things the Police Commissioner, Geoffrey Vaki, should take note:

1. Task Force Sweep was reinstated. The investigation, its finding (Sam Koim and Miviri’s affidavits) and Warrant of Arrest of Peter O’Neill are valid and current. He does not have an option. He must commission the right officers to arrest and question Peter O’Neill.

2. Police have what’s called the ‘Institution Muscle’. When commenting on political plots and strategies to protect one man the Police Association general secretary used the word ‘muscle’ – such word must not be taken lightly by the Police Commissioner, especially when it comes from the Police Association, made by senior police representative. 

Here, he is implying that the police commissioner has to do what is best to protect the integrity of the Police Force. Anything seems contrary can result in the police union taking a tough stand against it.

3. Politicians do flip sides on impulse. PO said he will ‘fight to the last breath’. He was on the back foot again the other day withdrawing all court proceedings. Vaki, has to put his thinking hat on. He is a learnt person. He will not want to be PO’s toilet tissue (to wipe his stinky poo and flush it down the toilet).

PO had his chance to fight the WoA. He has made his case. He waved his rights about. He chose Waigani to be his battle field and lost (and surrendered). All along he created factions within the police, he disbanded TSF, he dismissed Sam Koim, he (through Vaki) suspended Lawyer Miviri and senior officers Eluh and Kauba.

Vaki’s Right Call: Now it is time to move the battle field to Konedobu. Vaki must lift the suspension on Miviri, Kauba and Eluh. Let these men, including Koim and TFS, carry on from where they left: Arrest Peter O’Neill and bring him in for questioning. LET THE LAW TAKE ITS COURSE

Quotations From Senior Citizens About Peter Oneill

1. HEAD OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH 

"If the Prime Minister, Peter O’Neill had submitted to the rule of law, his innocence would have been proven three weeks ago. But instead he had engaged his lawyers – to stay the warrant of arrest,’’[Archbishop Clyde Igara]

2. POLICE ASSOCIATION GENERAL SECRETARY

"It is politicians that have created this unnecessary misdemeanour. They are cherry pickers who are here today and gone tomorrow. The police force is here to stay and police officers will give a lifetime upholding the rule of law and the constitution." [Clemence Kanau]

3. POLICE ASSOCIATION GENERAL SECRETARY 

"He should shut his mouth and swallow his temporary pride," Mr Kanau said of Mr Isikiel when he referred to officers investigating O’Neill as ‘rogue cops’.

4. SACKED ATTORNEY GENERAL 

Police Commissioner Geoffrey Vaki now has no legal discretion but to arrest Prime Minister Peter O’Neill. [Kerenga Kua]

5. NATIONAL COURT JUDGE 

"I find this submission to be speculative and without proper evidentiary basis,” Judge Ere Kariko said when refusing submissions by the prime minister’s lawyer regarding a "rift" in the ranks of the police force.

6. CHIEF MAGISTRATE - DISTRICT COURT 

"Courts can only interfere when there is a clear case of abuse," [Nerrie Eliakim explanation on Vaki’s application to discontinue warrant of arrest on Peter O’Neill]

7. CHAIRMAN – TASK FORCE SWEEP "When our leaders raised wild allegations and branded us as politically compromised, I did not respond because that would be seen as self preservation. I waited for the competent authority to vindicate us which the court had done." [Sam Koim ]

Members of Parliament Implicated on Corruption Charges - Stats: 3 Convicted, 7 Referred by OC, 8 Arrested and 1 Evaded Arrest

Leadership Tribunals will test evidence submitted by OC
[Google Images]

UPDATED 13.04.2015

MP's AT COURT
- Nearly 30% of all Ministers (& Vice Ministers) running PNG are at court
- Nearly 20% of all MP's in PNG's 9th parliament are at court

List of MPs (20/108 or 19%) in 9th parliament at court:

So far the following Members of Parliament have been refereed by OC:

1. Hon. Prime Minister Peter O'Neill - Ialibu Pangia (NEC) [PNC]
2. Hon. Ben Micah - Kavieng (NEC) [PPP]
3. Hon. Deliha Gore - Soho (NEC) [PNC]
4. Hon. Boka Kondra - North Fly (NEC) [PNC]
5. Hon. Ronny Knight - Manus [N.G]
6. Hon. Sir Puka Temu - Abau (NEC) [O.D]
7. Hon. James Lagea - Kagua Erave (Vice Minister)
8. Hon. Patrick Pruaitch - Aitape-Lumi (NEC) [NA]
9. Hon. Francis Awesa - Imbonngu (NEC) [PNC]
10. Hon. Belden Namah - Vanimo Green [PNG]

Several MPs have been implicated in corruption/bribery cases (apart from Peter O'Neill-listed above, where no arrest was made) include the following:

11. Paul Tiensten - Pomio, jailed, new elections being held
12. Hon. Francis Potape-Komo-Margarima, jailed, pend appeal [PNC]
13. Hon. Havila Kavo - Gulf, bailed, pend appeal [PUA]
14. Hon. John Simon - Maprick, bailed, case pending [NA]
15. Hon. Gordon Wesley - Samarai, (bribery), sacked, pend appeal [PNC]
16. Hon. Ati Wobiro - Western, bailed, case pending [PNC]
17. Hon. John Hickey - Bogia, bailed, case pending [NA]
18. Hon. Don Poyle-Kandep, parakagate pending (NEC at time) [THE]
19. Hon. Jame Marape-Tari, parakagate pending (NEC) [PNC]
20. Hon. Anton Yagama-Usino (contempt), bailed, pend appeal [URP]

Election petition cases pending court determination:

# Hon. Don Poyle - Kandep, election petition pending
# Hon. Nixon Duban-Madang, election petition pending
# Hon. Paias Wingti - WHP, election petition pending
# Hon. Amkat Mai, WSP, ousted, new elections
# Hon. Powes Parkop, election petition pending
# Hon. David Arore, Ijivitari, election petition pending

Note:111 total seats less Goilala Open, West Sepik Open & Pomio makes 108

This was the earlier post...

17% (19/111) of all MPs in 9th parliament implicated in corruption charges

So far the following Members of Parliament have been refereed by OC:

 1. Hon. Prime Minister Peter O'Neill - Ialibu Pangia

 2. Hon. Ben Micah - Kavieng

 3. Hon. Deliha Gore - Soho

 4. Hon. Boka Kondra - North Fly

 5. Hon. Ronny Knight - Manus 

 6. Hon. Sir Puka Temu - Abau 

 7. Hon. James Lagea - Kagua Erave

 8. Hon. Patrick Pruaitch - Aitape-Lumi

 9. Hon. Francis Awesa - Imbonngu

3 MPs have been convicted of corruption:

 10. Paul Tiensten - Pomio, convicted & jailed, new elections being held

 11. Hon. Francis Potape - Komo-Margarima, convicted and jailed, appeal pending

 12. Hon. Havila Kavo - Gulf, convicted, jailed and bailed, appeal pending

7 MPs have been implicated in corruption/bribery cases (apart from Peter O'Neill, where no arrest was made) include the following:

 13. Hon. John Simon - Maprick, bailed, case pending

 14. Hon. Gordon Wesley - Samarai, (bribery), sacked, appeal pending

 15. Hon. Ati Wobiro - Western, bailed, case pending

 16. Hon. John Hickey - Bogia, bailed, case pending

 17. Hon. Don Poyle - Kandep, paraka gate, case stalled

 18. Hon. Jame Marape, Tari, paraka gate, case stalled

 19. Hon. Anton Yagama - Usino, (contempt), bailed, pending appeal

5 Election petition cases pending:

 1. Hon. Don Poyle - Kandep, election petition pending 

 2. Hon. Nixon Duban-Madang, election petition pending 

 3. Hon. Paias Wingti - WHP, election petition pending

 4. Hon. Amkat Mai, WSP, Ousted, election petition appeal pending

 5. Hon. Powes Parkop, election petition pending

By Anna Gerato Suckling on PNG New Page

PNG Govt Cash Strapped Government Sell State Owned Assets

O'Neill's government borrowed heavily thinking that the LNG price would be steady at US$50,000,000 per shipment. 

Apparently, LNG can not and will not rescue the country at this trying time when the Oil Price is at a low of $45US (from a high of $100US 10 months ago). 

Signs of cash shortfall in the government's coffers were obvious since the last quarter of the financial year 2014. Chief Secretary, Sir Manase Zurenouc, circular to department heads was indicative of a government running on flat tyres. 

He said

''As you [department heads] may be aware there has been a tightening of the Government's fiscal situation in 2014. There are several factors involved including a decline in tax revenues due to falls in some key commodity prices [of which oil price is one].

Owing to these pressures on the national budget, some adjustments to the agency budgets will be necessary to bring down aggregate government expenditure to a level that maintains the 2014 Budget deficit at or below 5.9% of GDP and ensures that the total debt to GDP ratio does not exceed 35%.''

He continued, reiterating the urgency:

''As we are at the late stage of the year [2014] actions to curtail spending needs to be immediate if it is to be effective. Effectively, I have directed the Secretary for Treasury to cease all warrant releases (except for personal emoluments) effective immediately.''

The fact is that the PNG government has made commitments to host international events like the South Pacific Games and APEC Summit. Preparations are worth millions of US dollars.

Internally, there are urgent spending needed to be made to ensure schools do not close. Government has pending cases worth millions of Kina at national and supreme courts. 

So, here we are - where else can the govt get its revenue to fund a K1.5 billion SP game or K506 million free education policy or fight every case that is pending in the national and supreme courts? 

Take a look at this post by Bryan Kramer on PNG's favourite social media discussion site, Sharp Talk 

IS PNG GOVERNMENT RUNNING OUT OF CASH??

I have been tracking this issue for some time since September 2014 when a number of service providers made known their Government Cheques were bouncing. 

I started to make inquiries with my contacts in the Treasury and Finance Departments to confirm whether there was any truth in it.

Sadly the feedback was the Government had no funds and the Department officials were given instructions to go out and look for money. While many have been praising our Government for achieving so many people failed to put thought to where all this money was coming from or whether we could afford to be spending it all. 

In December 2014 the Government failed to pay for the teachers' leave pay. Opposition Leader Don Polye published it was because the Government had mismanaged the Country's funds. 

Polye challenged Prime Minister to admit to the nation that the Government has run out of cash.

“There’s no money in the system, the private sector is under stress, there’s liquidity in PNG’s small domestic economy,” he said in Port Moresby yesterday.

“The Government cannot easily raise funds for its securities like the Treasury inscribed stock and the Treasury Bills.

“No wonder I see the public service and other important and fundamental systems of service now running out of money.” (extract pngfacts)

One would expect the former Treasurer to know what he is talking about if anyone would know he would, having full knowledge of the department's workings and contacts within the system. 

My own sources also confirmed the Government is literally broke. International lenders are no longer prepared to give PNG any more loans. What money coming in is committed to South Pacific Games K30m a week and free education policy. Other than that there is no money, Provincial governments and Districts are yet to receive their grants for 2015 because there is nothing to give. Not until company tax receipts start coming after 31st March 2015. 

So one is left to ask what happens when an organisation runs out of money, closed off from securing borrowed funds? The answer is it starts selling off its assets at fire-sale (cheap) prices.

It seems the PNG Power state of emergency was all about priming it for sale. Prime Minister recently announced it planned to sell off half of Air Niugini. How many more of PNG people's assets will be sold no one knows. The last time PNC held government the countries' economy spiralled out of control we were forced to sell off PNGBC to BSP and Oregon Minerals to Oil Search. The country lost 100's of millions in assets that are now probably worth billions. 

When Queensland Liberal Government took over from Labour it proposed to sell of its State assets (utilities, power, ports etc) to reduce its debt and deficit. This didn't go down well with the Queensland voting public who weren't prepared to sell off their future to foreign nationals. At the last State election, the State Premier including his entire Government were voted out for even proposing it. 

Will PNG allow our state assets to be sold off to compensate for the Government's reckless spending on inflated contracts all while politicians get filthy rich and everybody else ends up poorer for it.

One must understand every time million kina state assets are sold the middle man makes a bag of money all while hard-working Papua New Guineans lose their job, are kicked out of their accommodation and 30 years of service amounting to nothing all at the expense of overweight politicians.

 The net effect of selling off the people's assets are prices go up people pay more. Makes one wander whether K1.5b spent on our games was such a smart idea maybe such funds should have been expended to fix our state enterprises and health system.

Papua New Guinea National Education Act 1983 Review, Education System Fit For The Country And Its People

Commentary

Papua New Guinea National Education Act 1983 review cannot come at the right time. The education department has to be complimented for reviewing the Act. 

Sections of the Act needed thorough scrutiny and update. Take a look at one example here - Section 4 on Objects of the National Education System:

'(1) (b) to develop and encourage the development of a system of education fitted to the requirements of the country and its people'  

In fact the country's requirements are different after 40 years. Population was not over 7 million in the years leading up to 1983. Government policies on national and local education provisions were not the same compared to yester-years. Many policies have changed like tuition free fee policy and education reforms. Economy is expanding. Literacy rate is low. Skills shortage is a concern. 

Inevitably, how can NDoE and National Education Board strike a balance in this Review? How can NDoE and NEB make sure this Act of parliament meets country's requirements and the needs of its people?

The Act is a legal framework that gives substance to the whole education system - it holds every sections within the education system like a skeleton is to the body. There is urgent need to update the National Education Act 1983. It must be done promptly and thoroughly.

Perhaps it is important this review takes into account changes that are taking (have taken) place since education reforms of the early 1990s. This includes considering the high number of dropouts, curriculum changes, structural changes, increasing population, changing government policies and everything that would make education fit for all.

Another point worth mentioning is correlation between Ganim Report and Review of Education Act. The report's 12 recommendations have direct bearing on Functions of National Department of Education and Teachers Service Commission (Section 29 of the Act).

It is only proper that the National Education Board considers this review urgent. NEB must analyse draft by May. NDoE, NEB and Education Minister must aim to see the act passed by Parliament before the year ends. This review has to take precedence among other changes. 

BY SHIRLYN BELDEN [Post Courier 26/02/2015]

THE Education Department expects to have the first draft of the Education Act review handed over to the national education board by May this year, Secretary Michael Tapo has confirmed.

"The review will be given to the board after we’ve checked all pros and cons.

"The full process to obtain complete legal status for the reviewed Education Act before it’s a law, or before it can be debated in Parliament, is not yet clear," Mr Tapo said.

The legislation was created in 1983 and had been used by the department since.

Works on the review started last year with four regional consultations already carried out with assistance from the Law Reform Commission and various government departments.

Mr Tapo said the Education Department was working with partners and stakeholders to complete consultations and draft documentations.

The reviewed act will then go to the national education board, which is the agency in charge of education system.

He said the department has planned to complete all works on the review draft by the end of this year so it can be presented to Parliament.

Mr Tapo said review of the 1983 Act has been a long standing issue, which the department has been contemplating on carrying out to provide a well challenged, quality and improved education system and structure for Papua New Guinea.

"We have to review the Act as the country is maturing, we need to develop education laws to the current demand and context of our society and circumstances. We need more qualified teachers.

"The school system has changed, a lot of people and organisations now want to build new schools, therefore, in order to administer and manage education efficiently, we need to understand that," he said.

Mr Tapo said the review was timely because the demand, expectations and context on how to administer education in the country have changed, giving the need to cater for these changes.

5 Educational Strategies Needed Urgent Attention In Papua New Guinea - Where Are The Details?

The academic year 2015 started. Talks about change in Education structure and curriculum have taken a back seat. So, what is the latest development? Well nothing much is happening: there is no news on National Education Plan 2015 – 2024 yet; not much has been said about 2-6-6 structural change; Education Department has not released weekly update on Standard Based Curriculum it promised. Everything seemed to have come to a standstill.

Ideally, NEP 2015 – 2024 would have come out by now. But this plan remains to be seen. Is there anything done about it? No one knows yet.

Education Minister responded to questions in the first parliament sitting 2015 that structural change (2-6-6) will take effect next year. There is very little information about how the change will take place. No doubt this change will require adjustment to ‘transitional stages’. By this I mean, transition from 2 to 6 (Grade 2 – 3) and 6 to 6 (Grade 8 – 9).

Adjustment to the current structure must take place for 2-6-6 structural change to work. It sounds too good: 2 years of elementary, 6 years of primary and 6 years of secondary. But, wait a minute?

What would become of the current elementary schools? What would happen to primary schools with their Grades 7 and 8? How would secondary schools cope with Grades 7,8,9,10,11 and 12?

Where does Standard Based Education factor in all these changes? At what stage do students sit examinations? What are the examination subjects? What key learning objectives are tested? What is needed now is DETAIL. Where is the detail?

There are more questions to ask then answers. Papua New Guinean schools are halfway into term 1 and yet rest of the year is shrouded in anticipation – anticipation for a clear plan for a better education system.

Someone, somewhere has to take the lead. Unfortunately, the onus is on leaders in Education Department. They should try harder to get the changes right the first time. NDoE secretary and Education Minister have to take a proactive role. They must address these issues urgently, today.

1: Publish national education plan for the next 10 years

2: Give details of the structural changes

3: Give details of the Standard Based Curriculum

4: Identify examination years and give details of examined subjects

5: Clearly explain what would happen to National High Schools (Schools of Excellence) and at Primary and Secondary schools.

Papua New Guinea Education System: A System Battered Since Tuition Free Policy, No Plan Of Action

The National Department of Education has seen many changes. Dr Joseph Pagalio, Dr Musawe Sinebare and Dr Michael Tapo were at the helm and saw the changes through. They can attest to the fact changes are not bad.

But it is ominous PNG’s education system is undergoing four changes since Tuition Free Fee policy was introduced without clear guidelines. This is a recipe for disaster. It is better to avoid repeating mistakes encountered when implementing Outcome Based Education (OBE). This is a generational change. It must be thought through properly.

Lack of planning was obvious before school started. First, Papua New Guinea did not have a 10 year education plan to date. National Education Plan 2005 – 2014 (NEP 2005 – 2014) lapsed last year. If there was a committee working on it, why was it not out?

A 10-year plan is crucial. It puts in perspective a working plan for all stakeholders to follow. It would be better if NEP 2015 – 2024 was made available to everyone sooner rather than later.

The second change is the change is structure, Two-Six-Six: two years of elementary school, six years of primary school and six years of secondary school. I highlighted differences between new and old structures in an earlier post.

The education system is expecting a structural readjustment – just how this will happen is as important as when it will happen. The education minister mentioned that structural change will take effect next year, 2016. However, it would be better if he stated how NDoE would roll it out nationwide.

The third change is the change is curriculum. Make no mistake, reverting to Standard Based Curriculum (from Outcome Based Curriculum) is change in educational curriculum. It is about changing educational instruction – the way works is done. So, what kind of instruction is changing? What unit (or topic, or objective, etc.) is changing? What makes it different to OBE? How can stakeholders, including teachers, compare and contrast OBE to SBE? It is better to give answers to those questions to clarify misunderstanding, is it not?

The final change that needs taking place is implementation of 12 recommendations made by Parliamentary Referral Committee on Education (PRCE) on teachers’ welfare.  Ganim report cannot be left to gather dust. The education minister has to table this report. Parliament must deliberate on it findings. There is never a better time to hear our teachers’ cries than now.

All in all, since the government’s Tuition Free Fee policy started, the education system has got its fair share of battering. It is time to put in motion a clear plan of action and reward our teachers properly.

Education Minister Table Ganim Report, Parliament Must Act on the 12 Recommendations: Why Neglecting Teachers?

Hon Robert Ganim Chariman PRCE | Inset Education Minister Hon Nick Kuman

The Ganim report is what teachers have been waiting for. It has been completed by a committee sanctioned by the national government called the parliamentary referral committed on Education (PRCE). The working committee (WC) was headed my member for Wabag Robert Ganim, a long time educationist. This report was conducted between March-April 2014. It is gathering dust for 10 MONTHS. His frustration is obvious: why hadn’t the education minister table the report in Parliament?

Here is the report from Post Courier newspaper: ''The WC undertook the recommendations of Parliament which resulted in a detail Report that is ready to be presented to PRCE Chairman Ganim who then will present to Parliament for adaptation when it resumes on February 10, 2015 at 2:30 pm.

The WC Report provides specific policy directions, identifies strategic outcomes, provides general guidelines in implementing these policy directions, set out the monitoring and evaluation framework, and provides costing – about K26 million - for its implementation over a five (5) year period (2015-2019). 

According to the WC, the Government has work to do - in the long term - in addressing the teachers’ problems in these key areas:  

1. Review functions of Teaching Service Commission (TSC) and Department of Education (DoE);  
2. Review and define teachers’ salaries and allowances;  
3. Review the teacher appointment process;  
4. Review the tenure appointment process;  
5. Review salaries and entitlements of teachers;  
6. Decentralize ALESCO pay system to provincial education authorities;  
7. Adopt an effective and efficient teacher leave fare management;  
8. Create a leave fare data base;  
9. Make TSC assumes financial autonomy as a separate entity of State;   
10. Review process of retrenchment, retirement and resignation of teachers;  
11. Establish a centralised teachers’ information database; and 
12. Provide manpower and capacity development for teachers.''

Hon Robert Ganim expected the education minister Hon Nick Kuman to table this report in parliament during February sitting. No attempt was made to deliberate on the 12 recommendations by the WC.

Many teachers will see this as a 'slap in the face' as far as their remuneration and welfare is concerned. Right now, the education department is pushing forward with many changes in both structure and curriculum.

These changes are mounting pressure on teachers to not only implement, but also perform under trying conditions. The report cannot come at a better time than now. So, why are the 'very' people who are supposed to implement the policy neglected for a long time? Why are their welfare ignored? 

Education 'Two-Six-Six' Reform to be Implemented in 2016

Education Minister, Nick Kuman today told parliament that the ‘two-six-six’ reform will be fully implemented next year.

The two-six-six reform decrees two years in elementary, six years in primary, and six years in secondary education.

Once the reform is in effect, a child entering the education system will leave the system after 18 years. However, parliament house was told that the department does not have any plans to change the curriculum.

The matter was brought up, in answer to a question raised by Central Province Governor, Kila Haoda.

Governor Haoda wanted to know the status of national high schools; seeing that the introduction of the 'two-six-six' reform would eventuate in national high schools in Papua New Guinea, becoming obsolete. 

Minister Kuman responded, saying that the status of national high schools are to be reviewed, prior to the two-six-six reform being fully implemented in 2016. Before this policy is implemented, all national high schools will retain their school of excellence statuses.

A supplementary question was raised by the member for Anglimp South Waghi, Komun Joe Koim, on whether the government had any plans to introduce a new curriculum, to accompany the reform.

In response, Minister Kuman asked members of parliament to partner with the department to deliver quality education. He said the new policy is to address the increasing number of dropouts each year.

The minister said, this year there were 19,000 grade 12 dropouts, who did not secure places at tertiary institutions.

EMTV report Wednesday, 18 Feb 2015 by Michelle Amba, Port Moresby

Upskill Grades 8, 10 and 12 Dropouts: Apprenticeship Training in PNG 2024

The recent opposition statement about developing a skilled workforce in Papua New Guinea is a timely one, given that over 80% of Grade 12 students are unable to secure a place in tertiary institutions.

The opposition prior to the 2022 national election planned to invest K3.7 billion in skill development, with a focus on apprenticeship programs. This would be a welcome move, as apprenticeship schemes are the best way for students to learn from experts and gain practical experience.

Unfortunately, this is all a talk and no action has taken place.

Click here to find out more about the latest Apprenticeship Schemes and Graduate Development Programs in PNG.

Apprenticeship Scheme for Dropouts 

There are a number of ways that the government could create incentives for companies to take on apprentices. For example, the government could provide subsidies to companies that hire apprentices, or offer tax breaks. The government could also work with companies to develop apprenticeship programs that are tailored to the needs of the industry.

An apprenticeship scheme for dropouts would be a particularly valuable initiative. Many dropouts have the potential to be skilled workers, but they lack the opportunities and support they need to reach their full potential. An apprenticeship scheme would give dropouts the chance to learn a trade and earn a good living.

PNG Government-Private Partnership - Apprenticeship Training in PNG 2024

Any government-private partnership that aims to develop skills in those age groups would be a step in the right direction. The opposition's plan is a good starting point, and the government should work with the private sector to develop a workable platform for companies to take on dropouts.

The opposition's plan to develop skills in PNG is a welcome one. By investing in apprenticeship programs and creating incentives for companies to take on apprentices, the government can help to create a more skilled workforce and provide opportunities for dropouts.

You can find out about the SANTOS Apprenticeship Scheme here. 

2015 Tuition Fee Free: Is K605 Million Enough To Complete the Academic Year?

I thought I should clarify some points following my previous post on conflicting information from National Department of Education (NDoE) and schools about project fees for this year. The minister for education and secretary has given a ministerial directive to parents NOT to pay any project fee:

''Schools that impose projects fees on students will not receive their component of the ‘Tuition Free Fee’ (TFF) from the Government.

That was the message from Education Minister Nick Kuman at a media conference today in Port Moresby.

Kuman said project fees should not be imposed as the government was paying the fees of students to attend schools.

He said a circular will be issued  by the Department Secretary to all the schools around the country not to collect project fees.

“Every child is supported by the Government and schools have no choice but to allow them into the classroom.

“Any school that imposes project fees will not be given TFF,” said Kuman.

Education Secretary Michael Tapo said the first component of school fees will be made available in the first two weeks when schools resume this year.

K605 million has been allocated for TFF around the country, with half of that to be paid first.

PNG Loop [19/01/2025]

However, some schools in the country fearing Tuition Fees delay have gone ahead and charged project fees to get started. Local media reports revealed that schools in Bougainville and Morobe have decided to do that. This has resulted is stern warning from NDoE’s recent circular:

''To all Parents and Citizens in Papua New Guinea whom your children are attending Elementary, Primary, Secondary, National High Schools, Vocational centres, Flexible Open and Distance Education and Special Education schools : 

You MUST REPORT IMMEDIATELY to your Regional Directors if you are charged any PROJECT FEES in 2015 academic year, below are the names and contacts of the Regional Directors and their Digicel hotline:

SOUTHERN Paul Ainui 72228304. 

HIGHLANDS. Aloysius Rema 72228266. 

MOMASE Joseph Moide 72228273. 

NGI Henry Vainak 72228280.

National Newspaper. [12/02/2015]

It is ominous that schools will have to refrain from charging any fee. Schools that have incomplete projects or are planning projects are going to have to face the reality. The big question now is whether K605 million is enough to get every school through the end of the year. 

Is this money (K605 million) enough? Take a look at this conservative estimate: if the students’ population is 1 million, that would mean that the government is paying only K605 school fee for every child. If the population is 500 000, then the government is paying K1210 per child. This estimate gives you a perception of what a child would have paid this year, though the fees are different in every school.  

School principals and head teachers - especially those that have incomplete projects (or are planning one) - will have to either beg their provincial governments for funding or use portion of TFF to realise fruit of their project. I am being sceptical but are parents likely to see schools closing prematurely before the year ends?

I am of the view that project fee is an 'access fee' that schools add on to annual school fee and passed onto parents to pay. This is only done when there is need for a school project: for example building new teachers' house, running agricultural or practical skills project, etc.

If NDoE is serious about this directive why don't they make it clear in 2012 when TFF policy started? Many schools collected project fees in 2012, 2013 and 2014. Why the change this year? Does this mean the government has allocation takes into consideration project fees? How did they work that out? What is the actual student population? How much is the government paying per child attending Elementary, Primary, Secondary, NHS, Vocational centres, FODE and Special Education schools?

Another point worth mentioning is the decentralised education system. Provinces like the Autonomous region of Bougainville and Morobe have some powers over internal affairs of their education system. This means that Provincial Education Authorities are in control over teachers' salary, leave fares and Project Fees among others.

Perhaps it is important to note that most of the funding comes from the national government. In regard to project fee directive, the national department for education stand is clear. Every stakeholder must obey.

Yes, schools must obey the directive. But, NDoE is not clear on the composition of the tuition fee. Everybody presumes that the fee covers everything. I would be convinced if the education officials and minister give a break-down of a student's school fee for this year. 

Instead of sending out one circular after another, they would do well if they had indicated how much the government was paying per child and what percentage of the school's fee was meant for project.

Misunderstanding Clarified: Project Fees, By Definition, Not Covered Under Tuition Fee Free Policy

There is complete chaos because of misunderstanding. Senior education officials at Waigani and the minister do not know what the word mean or what Tuition Fee Free (TFF) policy was meant for. 

Tuition is often used in connection with 'instruction'. TFF policy would rightly refer to fee the government pays to school to provide a comfortable student learning experience. Tuition Fee  is for funding of staff and up-kept of facilities, including maintaining day to day running of school. 

For example, ancillary staff members are needed to keep schools running. Therefore their wages/salaries are covered in TFF policy. 

However, project fee does not fall under this policy. Project Fee is to be agreed by school board and approved by Provincial Education Board. The NDoE secretary and education minister do not have much say whether it should be either charged or not. 

In order words, school would continue if a project isn't carried out. But, test would be affected if the typist didn't turn up or A4 papers ran out. Whatever is necessary for daily/weekly/monthly up-kept of school is catered for under TFF. Whatever is not remains the prerogative of the school, school board, parents and PEB. 

Education secretary and the minister can talk about 'not' charging project fee if they are running a school. They are not running schools. In fact, both are running a department  - the National Department of Education. They must refrain from (or withdraw) the directive given about non-payment of Project Fees and let schools decide.

Vote of No Confidence: Is Papua New Guinea Likely to See a Change of Government?

The stability of political parties in Papua New Guinea has been a topic of discussion lately, with many people believing that it would translate to stability for the government. 

However, the breakdown of the party membership has caused a complete breakdown of the party system, especially among the three major political parties that came in after the 2012 election. 

This situation has led to talks of a potential Vote of No Confidence (VoNC) against Prime Minister Peter O’Neill.

Check out the analysis on the latest on VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE HERE

Showing Original Party Membership

Members Deserting Party Leaders

More than half of Triumph Heritage Empowerment (THE) party, National Alliance (NA) party, and Papua New Guinea (PNG) party members have deserted their party leaders, with their members scattered throughout Parliament, from high-ranking government ministers to the opposition and from middle benchers to backbenchers.

Recent Developments

A report by the Post Courier revealed that 65 Members of Parliament (MPs) showed support for the Prime Minister at Paddy’s Bar on 9th February 2015. 

The report also indicated that three coalition parties had renewed their support for the Prime Minister and his People’s National Congress (27) amidst speculation of a VoNC. 

These parties were the People’s Progress Party (8), United Resources Party (7), and National Alliance (8).

Questions Arise

The leader of the People’s Party, Peter Ipatas, has not yet indicated his commitment. It is clear that his party has been with the Prime Minister all along, so there is no need to declare his support publicly. 

However, it would be right for the Enga governor to declare his party’s support for Peter O’Neill publicly like others have done.

The second biggest party, THE, whose deputy leader is Deputy Prime Minister, did not indicate its support for the Prime Minister. 

Obviously, Don Polye and Peter O’Neill are not on good terms, so there is no need for him to declare his support. This situation raises the question of where this places DPM, Leo Dion, who is still a THE party member.

Another question that arises is why the founder of the National Alliance party, Sir Michael Somare, was sitting on the middle bench during the recent parliament sitting. 

It is obvious that despite his reassurance, Hon Patrick Pruaitch does not have backing from Sir Michael Somare and Hon Kerenga Kua.

Independent MPs and Small Political Parties

There are 14 independent MPs who can move about at whim. Some have held ministerial portfolios, others joined larger political parties, but most were ‘scattered’ about with no party affiliation. 

Similarly, there are 14 political parties with less than 3 MPs. Those who have held ministerial portfolios are bound to stay foot, while others who have joined the government to collect Services Improvement Program funds are likely to be the first ones to jump ships if the tide turns.

The Unknown 46 MPs

A significant point to note is that 46 MPs were not with the group that pledged support for the Prime Minister. 

It is unclear who they are, and any insider will not put names to numbers, making the ‘number game’ shrouded in secrecy. Parties supporting the Prime Minister, including his own PNC party, have 54 members. Most of them would have turned up. 

It is worth noting that Peter Ipatas’ People’s Party has not publicly reaffirmed its support for the Prime Minister.

Conclusion: Peter O’Neill's Future

It is clear that Peter O’Neill cannot relax, as his 30 months of comfort and safety have expired. His greatest enemies may be his closest friends, as some MPs are with him just because of the