THE NATIONAL’S EDITORIAL WAS BIASED


by NEMO YALO*

 The National (19.10.15) in its editorial labelled the Opposition’s move to bring a motion of no confidence against the Government as “premature”. Referring to the speculated motion of no confidence it opened with the line:

“Has Papua New Guinea gone to the dogs?” This is a seriously preposterous and bias characterization of a healthy process of democracy. Whether a motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister is tabled or not and what the outcome will be if it is voted is a matter for Parliament. What must not go unchallenged is The National’s lopsided and politically biased editorial.

The editorial attempted to demonstrate balance by quoting what the Opposition and its members said in a recent press conference and then quoted the Prime Minister’s response to the Supreme Court ruling on 4 September 2015 which nullified the so-called “grace period” Constitutional amendment. The invalidated constitutional amendment granted a government 30 months immunity (calculated from the date of taking office) from being dismissed from office by a successful motion of no confidence no matter how corrupt and unfit the government may turn out to be 3 months, or 6 months or 12 months or 18 months into taking office.
The paper quoted the Opposition: “The current Government is doing all kinds of things damaging and detrimental to the country’s economy because they have done the wrong thing in the first place.” Of the Prime Minister it quoted: “We do not want the country to revert back to decades past when governments could be changed every few months. When governments used to change often, growth was undermined and investors stayed away. Political stability is vital for growth and development.” The editorial expressed its own views as follows: “Whilst the Opposition and the prophets of doom will always be skeptical about the O’Neill Government’s performance and achievements, there is little or no doubt that since the current coalition came into power after the 2012 elections, it has gone in leaps and bounds with innovative initiatives and policies such as free education and free healthcare. The Government’s list of achievements during its relatively short term in office is astounding, to say the least. And as the Prime Minister rightly said, Papua New Guinea’s impressive economic growth and progressive developments could not have been achieved without political stability.

The Government meant well in its pursuit for strong economic growth when it convinced Parliament to extend the grace period to 30 months to give itself the buffer to govern without distractions. Whilst its critics and distractors have argued otherwise, the Government has been able to move the country farther ahead than anyone could have imagined in 2012. So why is the Opposition hell-bent on ousting O’Neill and changing the government? Do Polye and company really believe that they can rescue the country from the “economic mess” caused by the O’Neill Government? And will the alternate government proposed by the Opposition perform above and beyond O’Neill’s achievements? Whilst we agree the Opposition’s threat can be destablising among the government ranks, we believe the proposed motion of no confidence is premature. Despite Polye’s claim that they have the numbers to topple the Government, we understand that O’Neill will be able to comfortably defeat their motion. Key members of the ruling coalition have reaffirmed their support for the Prime Minister amid unsubstantiated reports of a potential split within the Government…”

With respect one can easily discern from reading the editorial in totality that the paper is sadly not independent. Whilst I cannot speak for the Government nor the Opposition one can take notice that there is massive infrastructure development centered in Port Moresby and Lae. It is a different story once one ventures beyond these cities to the rest of PNG. Nonetheless credit is due to the Government for these unprecedented changes. Has The National’s assessment of the Government taken into account all other sectors including the social indicators? Or is it simply using infrastructure developments in the two cities and free health and tuition free policy as the yardstick? The editorial does not say whether these education and health policies are fully funded and are implemented effectively and that these are improving the previous records. The UNDP’s 2014 National Human Development Report on PNG which reviewed the state of human development in terms of three pillars of sustainable development namely, economic, social and environmental, and which specifically examined the ways in which the extractive industries have contributed both positively and negatively to these related but distinct pillars reads: “While there have been some measurable achievements in terms of improvements in human development (increases in life expectancy, per capita income and educational achievement), many of the indicators are less positive. Despite 14 consecutive years of economic growth, there has been little change in poverty levels in the country. In fact the level of inequality in the country has increased”. It would have been fair for The National to research and offer a well-rounded balanced editorial. Otherwise a sweeping editorial demonstrates political bias.

When the Government and The National are directing the nation to look only in a single direction and focus on, unprecedented infrastructure development, economic growth, free health and fee-free education and nothing else, they are telling us that it is all right if the Government cannot account for inflated public contracts running into millions of public funds on an unprecedented scale; and it is all right that the Government which promised to wage war against corruption is now at the forefront of fostering and defending the corrupt and corruption and waging war against those who stand up against corruption; and it is all right that the Prime Minister can flout the Constitution, usurp the Parliament’s powers and obtain a K3b loan that breaches the Constitution, the Appropriation Act, the Loans (Overseas Borrowings) (No 2) Act 1976, the Public Finances (Management ) Act; and it is all right to lie about the proceeds of the LNG sales being held in trust in Singapore when they are in fact mortgaged to service the UBS loan; it is all right with scandals such as the purchase of generators from an Israeli company under dubious circumstances and the failed public service housing scheme and the list goes on. Did The National not report on its front page titled “Venue Costs High” referring to the inflated 2015 Pacific Games contract controversy and followed up the same with another front page last week? Oops, it forgot! Controversies have been the Hallmark of this Government all year long in the last three years. The National could have covered these in its editorial if it was truly balanced and independent.

In 2012 the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index placed PNG at 150 out of 175 countries, in 2013 PNG was 144 out of 175 and in 2014, 145 out of 175. Transparency International’s website reads: “Corruption Perceptions Index sends a powerful message and governments have been forced to take notice and act. Behind these numbers is the daily reality for people living in these countries. The index cannot capture the individual frustration of this reality, but it does capture the informed views of analysts, businesspeople and experts in countries around the world”. The Government which promised war on corruption as one of its priority policy pillars and enact ICAC legislation and establish the office to arrest corruption is itself too busy entangled in alleged high profile corruption scandals.

Whilst The National observes that the Government’s achievements in a short time is “astounding” it conveniently pretends that the instances of embarrassing controversies and crisis created by this government, the instances where it has demonstrated careless attitude toward the integrity of government and the rule of law is more than astounding! Here we have The National telling the nation that what is healthy for a democracy to keep her government accountable either through rule of law or by motion of no confidence in government is premature. So is The National saying that the Opposition has gone to the dogs and so we treat them and their move as canine-like, or is it saying a healthy democratic process of keeping the government accountable is canine-like behaviour? One ponders whether the editorial was drafted along Waigani Drive. Has The National moved office to Konedobu? I reiterate, whether the Opposition will move a motion of no confidence in government or not and whether there will be a change of government is a matter for Parliament. The nation deserves an independent media, nothing less.

NEMA YALO is the Principal of Nemo Lawyers former a  Acting National Court Judge and former Chief Legal Counsel for Ombudsman Commission 

Popular posts from this blog

Connect PNG Unveiled: A Tale of Ambition, Scandal, and the Quest for Accountability

James Marape's Missteps Openly Exposed at Australian Forum

PNG GOVERNMENT MINISTER IN PORN VIDEO

PNC CANDIDATE & FORMER NHC CEO FILMED WIFE HAVING SEX WITH COUSIN IN NHC CEO'S OFFICE

MARAPE'S K10.2 MILLION KINA "SNAKE OIL" SALESMAN

Marape's Connect PNG is a conduit for money laundering

IS THE PM'S WIFE INVOLVED IN LAND GRABBING?