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.