Forest Minister looking to block SABL report?

From Thomas Imal on Facebook

From reliable sources, the Forest Minister has sought legal advice from two Queens Counsel in Australia and he will be pushing to stop the Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Special Purpose Agriculture & Business Leases from being tabled and made public, on a number of legal grounds.

One of their main arguments for seeking to nullify the report is that the COI final report was not completed and tabled within the time set and there was no valid extension of time granted.

This is a similar situation with the NPF Inquiry, but the situation can be rectified by the government passing a short piece of legislation to validate the Report.

It will be interesting, as it unfolds and we have to make noise about it so the pollies know that we are watching…

Dept of Lands still issuing SABL leases

Despite a government Moratorium and a Commission of Inquiry the Department of Lands is still issuing Special Purpose Agricultural and Business Leases (SABL) over customary land.

Two of the latest were announced in the National Gazette on 27 July. Covering an area of 21,520 hectares and  16,830 respectively, the two leases in the Tufi area of Oro Province have been granted for a term of 50 years and rent free.

The Commission of Inquiry, which has yet to present its final report, found widespread illegality in the granting of SABLs covering a total land area of more than 5 million hectares.

Clearly the new government’s promises of effective action on corruption will be seen to be meaningless unless they do something immediately to stop this FRAUD.

Namah at the centre of alleged Bewani oil palm fraud

PNG Blogs

“Namah heavily implicated in the saga and received substantial cash benefits totalling almost half a million in US$ dollars.”

Malaysian investor is now demanding 80 percent of shares in the Bewani Palm Oil Development Limited, a landowner company from Vanimo or be reimbursed for all the expenses incurred totalling US$10 million.

Maxland (PNG) Limited whose sole shareholder Andrew Lim is the Managing Director of Pricewood Products Berhad of Sandakan, Sabah Malaysia was misled into spending more than US$10 million dollars between 2007 up until 2009.

Maxland (PNG) Limited was approached by the member for Vanimo/Green Belden Namah in his capacity as Minister for Forest in the previous Somare government. Mr Namah expressed the desire for Lim’s company to finance and develop the Bewani agro forestry palm oil project in the Sandaun Province. Mr Lim was interested and undertook to be involved in every aspect of the project including funding and management.

Mr Lim and his company Maxland (PNG) Limited were led to believe that they will manage and operate the Bewani palm oil project through the landowner company Bewani Palm Oil Development Limited (BPODL).

At the request of Minister Namah and his business partner Jimmy Tse, Lim and his company remitted a substantial amount of money to the tune of US$10 million to various accounts in PNG, Fiji, American Samoa and Hong Kong.

While Maxland (PNG) Limited was seriously committing itself to funding and managing the Bewani Oil Palm Project, Jimmy Tse secretly committed another company, Bewani Palms Management Limited (BPLM) to manage the project. Lim was not made aware of this and yet Jimmy Tse and Minister Namah were receiving funds from his company some of which were transferred to BPODL to finance the management agreement.

According to documents, Bewani Palms Management Limited was incorporated on the 06th of March 2008. It described itself as a company rendering expertise and technical support in management and corporate governance. At the time of its incorporation, a Papua New Guinean known as Philip Eledume an accountant by profession was the company secretary and sole director.

The Joint Venture (JV) Agreement between BPODL and Maxland (PNG) Limited dated 08th of September 2008 provided for the transfer of 80% shares on BPODL to Maxland. Other parties in the JV Agreement were BPML as the proposer and three landowner companies namely Palms 21 Limited, Bulaulai Limited and Ossima Yalamaki Limited. Maxland is identified in the JV Agreement as the developer.

In the JV Agreement, the developer Maxland (PNG) Limited will acquire 80% interest, the three landowner companies 15% and Bewani Palms Management Limited as the proposer will hold five percent interest.

Despite being signatories to the JV Agreement, none of them actual have shares in Bewani Palm Oil Development Limited. Jimmy Tse appears to be the sole shareholder and Director of BPODL. Maxland through Andrew Lim was not made aware of the shareholding composition.

The share transfer instruments dated 10th September 2008 executed by Jimmy Tse through his lawyers Fairfax Legal were never lodged with Investment Promotion Authority (IPA) nor were they entered into the share register of the company as required under the Companies Act.

Mr Lim was actually misled into signing the JV of BPODL and another entity Octopus Resource Limited that landowners approval were secured, the landowners from the project area signed a petition on the 01st of October 2008 stating they were neither consulted nor did they give their approval for the acquisition of the subject land in the project area.

The project area of land is described as Allotment/Portion 1600 Section/Millinch Oenake (SW) and (SE), Bewani (NW) and (NE) Town/Fourmil Vanimo, Aitape in the West Sepik Province, an area 139,509 hectares of customary land. The land area was acquired under the Special Agriculture and Business Lease which the subject of the SBAL inquiry in progress.

On the 04th of November 2008, shares in BPODL were discreetly increased from 100 to one million shares and Jimmy Tse secretly allotted himself 999,990 shares which effectively reduced Maxland’s interested to 0.1 percent in BPODL.

He falsely executed share transfer instruments for the transfer of 800,000 (80%) share in BPODL to Maxland on the 19th of March for the second time. The next day without Mr Lim’s knowledge Jimmy Tse executed share transfer instruments for the purported transfer of the same 800,000 (80%) shares in BPDOL to another company identified as Million Miles Group Limited.

On March 26th 2009, Andrew Lim met Minister Namah and Jimmy Tse wherein the Minister urged Mr. Lim to enter into a joint venture with Peter Hii of Million Miles Group Limited to develop the project. Mr. Lim was surprised and disappointed and rejected the suggestion. At no time during the meeting did Minister Namah or Jimmy Tse inform Mr. Lim that share transfer instruments purporting to transfer 80% of shares in BPODL to Mr. Hii’s company have been executed. The information was kept secret.

It’s seems Mr. Andrew Lim and his company Maxland (PNG) Limited has been taken for a long ride all along for the purpose of getting money out of him and under the pretence that it was for the Bewani Oil Palm project.

According to the list of all expenses incurred between 2007 to 2009, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Forest Belden Namah received cash to the tune of US$449,153.85 posted through banks in PNG, Fiji and Singapore.

Mr Lim and his company wants 80% of the shares in BPODL or to be reimbursed for all the expenses they have incurred and only on the basis of the latter will they walk away from the project. It is understood Mr Lim and his company has initiated a litigation process to recoup their lost money.

New interactive website tracks villages suffering SABL land grab

Via ACT NOW!

A new interactive website shows exactly which areas of PNG have been stolen under the guise of Special Agriculture and Business Leases and which villages have lost their right to their land for at least the next THREE generations. You can check out whether your wantoks are affected here – www.pngsdf.com/sabl

Foreigners false promises dressed up as economic development are destroying us

Gary Juffa via ACT NOW!

The warning bells signaling the end of life as we have known it, can be heard.

International organizations [are] created by the wealthy nations to enhance their coffers even further whilst posing as concerned benefactors for resource rich developing nation.

Elected leaders happily dance to [their] tunes as the vultures that hover over our Pacific nation calculate how best to enter, rape and pillage an economy, an ancient land, to suck its natural resources dry and displace maim and kill its people. Whatever it takes, “agree upon our terms or prepare for war, economic or military.”

The elected leaders of the soon to be victims, the people nations such as Papua New Guinea, whose leaders, eagerly and ecstatically pointing out where our riches are, having abandoned their people along with their hopes, dreams and aspirations in their hope for crumbs and perhaps access to the prestigious realm of the “rich ruling classes”.

The riches beneath our earth, becoming curses rather then the blessings they could be, spelling destruction of Our Melanesian Way of life. Now the bells toll louder.

Our only true form of security, land, about to be snatched from under us in elaborate schemes and scams designed by the tools of the oppressors. The international organizations cleverly designed by the most powerful economies who fund and ensure their very existence, wolves parading in their sheepskin, clear the path for the scavengers that teem and writhe and surge driven by insatiable greed.

Globalization has modernized piracy and resurrected the age of the Lord and the serf.

Enter Corporatedom…prepare Papua New Guinea to serve your new masters, sell your future and abandon your dreams. This is but reality. Our oceans, valleys, rivers and plains packaged and prepared for sale. The receipts received by liars who claim authority through ignorant ballot and have now but to deliver

Rice monopoly is not good says ICCC

THE proposed Central Rice project has come to the attention of the Independent Consumer and Competition Commission, reports the Post Courier. The Commission is aware of since it is a member of the National Planning Steering Committee (NPSC) of the rice project which consists of relevant government departments headed by the Department of Agriculture and Livestock, the lead agency and proponent of the project.

The Commission opposes certain concessions in the project deed of agreement, particularly granting exclusivity rights to the developer, Naima Agro-Industry Ltd (Naima), for a 20-year period which will grant monopoly power to Naima. The possible negative implications as identified by the Commission for granting exclusivity to the developer will be:

• Likely to have the effect of substantially lessening competition in the market, leading to developer gaining monopoly power over the rice industry in the country. The PNG economy has had bad experiences with business operating with monopoly power in delivery of particular products or services in the past and present, and rice now being the staple food for all PNG citizen, it is obviously too risky to allow a monopoly in the rice industry as the welfare of all rice consumers in the country will be at stake.
• Undermines at one stroke the long-standing policy of successive governments to encourage and create income-earning opportunities for Papua New Guineans who are not part of the formal economy, and to create additional such opportunities in small scale rice farming. This will remove income-earning opportunities for many Papua New Guinean small-holders growing rice, particularly the rural population, who are already under financial and economic pressure which is causing ‘urban drift’, which is putting additional pressure on our towns and cities.
• Rice will be produced considerably in excess of domestic demand, as per the estimated rice production projected by the developer, of which about 90% will be exported. Around 10% of the rice produced will meet the annual domestic rice demand for the country. This will mean the entire rice market requirement in the country will be taken up by the Naima and rice supplied by the current players will no longer be purchased, milled and sold, thus putting them out of business and there will not be possibilities for any new players to invest in rice production in competition with Naima, because of the exclusivity to be granted to it.
• The Commission is also against the concession requested by Naima to impose 60% – 100% levy on other rice importers for at least 24 months. The Commission assumed that this is a strategy whereby the developer is anticipating to utilize onerous concessions to capture 100% rice market share in the country. Major negative economic implications the Commission believe will prevail in the economy should other rice importers be penalized with high levy includes;
• Drive all existing major players out of rice market, including growers, millers and importers. This will mean employment loss for people being employed by the exiting rice suppliers in the country. This is unfair for some players who had been investing in PNG for a long period of time;
• A most definite outcome of huge rice price inflation, which will result in consumers paying up to 100% more than the current market prevailing price. From the Commission’s vast experience on pricing in the retail and wholesale industry especially on the declared goods and services which the Commission monitors, prices at retail and wholesale level do not follow what is expected or projected in such proposals since most players in the these markets seek to exploit all available opportunities to maximize profits. Once tariff protection is granted by State agreement, it cannot be reversed for the agreed period. The incentive for the beneficiary, therefore, is to exploit the opportunity by pricing to the ‘import parity price limit’ which would include any agreed tariff increase on imported rice. A rational economic approach is needed here to prevent the grant of such concessions stifling existing competition within Papua New Guinea, and to safeguard the interests of all rice consumers in the country.
• There is no incentive at all for Naima to actually produce any rice because if it fails to do so it is protected from financial penalty for such failure by the project agreement, and it can import rice under a 60-100% tariff, and price up to import parity price. This will lead to;
• Up to a 100% rise in the price of rice; and
• A windfall gain to the monopoly holder, Naima

As the leading economic regulator with vast experience in the pricing of declared goods and service in the country, the Commission is of the view that these two concessions alone (and there are more in the Project Agreement) will have severe implications on the country as these concessions will grant monopoly power to the developer.

Department of Lands “incompetent” and “dishonest”

While the Commission of Inquiry into Special Agriculture and Business Leases continues, revealing the layers of corruption and incompetence in the allocation of 99-year leases, it is worth remembering the findings of an earlier Commission of Inquiry which reported in 2009 but whose recommendations have been ignored….

The Finance Department Commission of Inquiry findings on the theft of K870m have never been acted on

The Department of Lands and Physical Planning is riddled with “gross incompetence”, a state of affairs that is compounded by  “extremely irresponsible and dishonest State officers” says the Commission of Inquiry into the Department of Finance.

The Commission has recommended a separate inquiry be set up to into the management of the Department of Lands to “identify and rectify the systematic failings and misconduct”.

The Commissioners, Justices Sheehan and Davani and businessman Dan Manua, identified the following long list of serious failings in the Department of Lands:

1)                 Acquisition of customary land by the State-

• Lack of proper records as to original acquisition;
• Lack of instructions to the State Solicitor and Solicitor General to
  protect the interests of the State;
• Gross disregard of Schedule 2 of the National Land Registration Act on assessment of claims;

2)                 Mismanagement of State land -

• Operations of the PNG Land Board;
• Non-compliance with requirements of Land Act and related
  legislation and lease covenants (UDL and all other leases);
• Abuse and misapplication of the laws;
• Missing land files;
• Missing documents;
• Ad-hoc creation of supplementary files;
• Unreliable filing system;
• Unreliable Registers;
• Lack of co-ordination within department;
• Fraudulent creation of files and documents;
• Forgery of signatures of officers;
• Failure to notify interested persons;
• Uncertainty with appointments for meetings generally;
• Lack of supervision of all staff;
• Failure to observe business opening hours;
• Inefficient service;
• Unreliable recording of information on files;
• Unreliable custody and movement of files;
• Incompetence;
• Lack of effective communication with Solicitor General, State
  Solicitor and related state agencies in protecting State’s interests;

No more PNG police at logging sites

AAP

PAPUA New Guinea’s police commissioner says his officers will no longer provide protection for logging companies like Rimbunan Hijau (RH) at logging sites around the nation, following reports of police misconduct.

Commissioner Tom Kulunga today issued the directive, which includes reservists and auxiliary police personnel deployed at logging camps throughout the country.

“I have made this decision to protect and preserve the professional integrity of the organisation and to minimise and manage complaints against police”.

“The constabulary is supposed to be providing policing services to everyone in Papua New Guinea, regardless of social status, race, religion or sex.

“Unfortunately, as we have experienced in the recent past, when a private organisation takes over what are primarily responsibilities of the state such as the provision of transportation, board and lodging, then there are bound to be instances of bias or favouritism towards the sponsor.”

Commissioner Kulunga added that any future deployment to logging sites would be strictly sanctioned by the police command.

In October, landowners in PNG’s New Britain province accused police of undertaking a violent raid on villagers at the behest of logging company RH.

The officers, flown in at RH’s request from Rabaul on the island’s east, attacked villagers with fanbelts and sticks during a midnight raid before locking up some people in shipping containers.

“They raided the village, they burst on all the elderly men in the village and they bashed them up,” said local landowner Paul Palosualrea at the time.

“They used sticks and branches. They were under the influence of alcohol.”

Not in our Conservation areas say Madang landowners

Frustrated Landowners of the Mavundi, Inasi and Wasu areas of Joseph Staal in Madang Province say they will not tolerate Government interference and activities that they’re not aware of on their Conservation land areas.  These men, women and youths were very angry upon hearing that Forest Officers had sent surveyors to survey areas, that they have restricted use to be preserved to sustain them.

These people say no awareness of any kind was carried out in their areas before this surveying, as there was hardly a visit by anyone from the government on what the government is planning and why it is planning to touch the very areas that every men, women and children in their areas have agreed to preserve and have participated in conserving.

“We were not consulted so they don’t have our consent as the owners to touch these areas, “ said the leaders.

The village leaders after getting word that these surveyors have been around their areas since last month, asked these officers why and what they are surveying the area for and the surveyors replied, “We don’t know because we were only instructed to survey and were not told why.”

Those who are aware of the surveyors being in their areas are currently spreading the word to others to be on the look out.

Arrogance of the dominant 1% must be kept in check

Criticism: something which is encouraged by the dominant class as long as you are not criticizing the dominant class – The Overt Dictionary

 

By Martyn Namorong

The best way I can define the dominant class is to use what the Occupy Movement refers to as the 1% – the owners of Capital and their agents.

The rest of us belong to the 99%.

The dominant classes, being the psychopaths that they are, are very good at twisting words and stories to shift the blame back to the 99%. They will only want to take credit when things go right but will not bear responsibility for their flaws.

I have had to debate these psychopaths on Facebook and have become familiar with their tactics.

One of the lessons I’ve learnt is that the dominant class – the 1%, don’t mind if the 99% criticize and hold each other accountable yet they frown when attention is focused on them.

Proceeds of Corruption in Australia

Let’s take a look at recent blogs from PNG Exposed BLOG regarding money that was transferred to a Commonwealth Bank account in Lismore, New South Wales, Australian. Basically, the articles called on the Australian Authorities to help PNG recover these funds.

Predictably the psychopaths decided to shift the argument towards blaming PNG Authorities for failing to prevent the money from leaving the country. They decided to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that these same ‘Authorities’ were facilitating these deals and the least the Australians could do was to decline such transfers.

Someone went on to defend Australian Banks by saying they do due diligence checks. This person was clearly distracting attention from the fact the IPBC is currently trying to recover money from the Commonwealth Bank in Lismore. Obviously Bankers at Lismore didn’t do proper due diligence checks. Yet this fact was blatantly ignored.

Transparency International’s failure to speak out

The folks at PNG Exposed Blog also accused Transparency International of being biased and racist towards Papua New Guinea because the Organization failed to highlight Australia’s involvement in laundering proceeds of corruption in Papua New Guinea.

Not surprisingly the psychopaths decided to divert attention from Transparency International back to the Government’s failures. The point that they wished to gloss over is that if Transparency International is to be fair and balanced about criticizing corrupt practices it must criticize the recipients of the proceeds of corruption.

Sadly, Transparency International’s PNG Chapter is supported by the Australian Government via AusAID. One does not bite the hand that feeds you. And that is something the psychopaths don’t want the sheeple to know.

Suppression of Freedom of Expression

The Post Courier Newspaper has been taken to court for defamation, by Malaysian logging giant Rimbunan Hijau aka RH for reporting on RH’s antics in Pomio, East New Britain Province.

The Pomio fiasco was a major Public Relations disaster for RH and it (RH) scored several own goals while pathetically trying to defend itself.

The attacks on the Post Courier including referrals to the Media Council are attacks on freedom of speech and Media freedom.

Had the Post Courier not reported on the Pomio fiasco newspaper readers in PNG would have received biased reports from RH-owned National Newspaper.

And remember how Nasfund once used to be all about good governance and fighting corruption until someone leaked its dirty secrets on PNG Blogs. The administrators of PNG Blogs had to pull down the information after Nasfund threatened to sue them and offered K50 000 to anyone providing information leading to apprehending the source of the leak.

Ken Mondiai from the Eco-Forestry Forum writes to the 1% stating;

“Don’t be like the politicians trying to suppress media and freedom of speech in this country when their bad decisions and weaknesses are exposed and in reaction for their guilt they go to the media issuing all kinds of threats about controlling and regulating NGOs and the media.”

And that’s the thing about the 1%, politicians may come and go but the 1% belong to undemocratic capitalist cartels that continue to wield enormous influence behind the curtains even when politicians like Sir Micheal Somare are out of Office.

Nautilus Experimental Deep Sea Mining

A recent scientific report on Deep Sea Mining highlighted that there is insufficient knowledge about this activity to allow it to proceed.

The debate on the issue is best summarized by the exchange on Facebook between Tiffany Twivvey and Richard Kassman:

Notice above how Mr. Kassman shifts the problem from the 1% to the 99%. He states:

“Tiffany, my point is that Alup and her people must set about putting a plan of action together. Get information and engage with Nautilus as part of this plan. Be proactive and not stuck in too much talk.”

But of course what Mr. Kassman does not say is that it’s actually pointless in trying to engage with Miners. Just look at the Ramu Nickel case and what happened on Bougainville. To explain why it is pointless, I’ll use Mr. Kassman’s own words:

“Sharpies I work for a foreign petroleum coy exploring for gas primarily in the Western Province. I am part of management and have some influence. I am an employee, I am a citizen and I consider myself a Nation builder. Yes I have a responsibility to my shareholders, I also am fully aware of the obligations that the corporation has signed up for as a convention and its values talk about the environment, treatment of indigenous people etc. As a senior officer I am compelled to raise these issues and up to the Board Chairman if required. At the end of the day if I feel my personal principles and values are compromised I will have no hesitation in tendering my resignation.” [Emphasis mine]

The 1% and their agents have to make a profit from their investments. That’s what Mr. Kassman refers to as “a responsibility to my shareholders.” Shareholders make money from shares they own in companies. This is a legitimate business practice.

But what happens if you were opposed to Experimental Deep Sea Mining and decided to do what Mr. Kassman suggested:

“Get information and engage with Nautilus as part of this plan. Be proactive and not stuck in too much talk.”

Would the miner listen to you if it had spent tens of millions and would make a loss by pulling out? Would its shareholders be happy? The manager of the mining company would be reluctant to stop the project because as Mr. Kassman puts it, he would say “I have a responsibility to my shareholders”.

To be fair to Mr. Kassman, he did say he would resign if he felt his values were being compromised. But if a good manager like Mr. Kassman resigns, the company can always employ a demon to create havoc.

One other interesting point that pops up in the exchange above is this statement by Mr. Kassman:

“Judith your assertion that Mel is betraying Pngeans is harsh and does little to help Alup do something constructive.”

Here Mr. Kassman makes reference to Mr. Mel Togolo who works for the Experimental Deep Sea Miner, Nautilus. When defending Nautilus, Mr. Kassman was open about being employed by Talisman Energy he did not publicly disclose that he and Mr. Togolo were both Board Members of Transparency International (PNG) Inc.

For resource exploiters the word “constructive” which was used by Mr. Kassman takes up a more literal form in terms of construction of the project as opposed to constructive dialogues. What this implies is that anyone totally or partially opposed to the 1% is deemed unconstructive.

And that is why Ms Twivvey who is the lawyer representing Madang Landowners fighting against proposed Deep Sea Tailings Placement, replied;

“Richard – sorry but I agree with Judith – she was not being harsh. It is pointless for individuals to engage with Mining companies. They are here – they have all the permissions – they are full steam ahead – what do we do say “oh please Mr. togolo could you tell your bosses, who are bankrolled by the chinese as they are, to not do any mining until we have proof it is safe ? Which will take a very long time and a lot of researrch – which will only prove that it is not safe ?”No we need to stop it before it is too late.” (sic)

PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS SPIN

One thing the 1% are good at is to make themselves look good. As I was looking up links for this article I came across what I saw as a good example of PR SPIN on Mine Watch Blog: My responses are in italics.

Tindi Apa (@oripng) November 25, 2011 at 12:12 pm

Congratulations Mine Watch… The miners have certainly developed jaundiced eyes after reading your ‘jaundiced’ reports.

Reply

§ Wesely November 25, 2011 at 4:31 pm

Tinda,
You are pulling your own leg!
Sad to say it is typical of the unwashed to trivialize the issues here.

[Notice above how Wesley deliberately misspells Tindi’s name and refers to him as ‘unwashed’. That’s because the 1% know that the 99% who are mostly sheeple are most likely to react to such personal attacks and in the process discredit themselves. By discrediting themselves, the 99% make themselves look evil while the 1% start claiming to be victims of the 99%. Thank goodness Tindi didn’t fall for this trick by the psychopaths]

Actually, the Mining Industry is not at all concerned with what gets posted on this blog.
The Mining Industry, far more so that the citizens of PNG and its government, have a vested interest in a properly regulated industry.

[I’ll use Tindi’s response to that: “I actually believe what Wesley rightfully pointed out: “the Mining Industry is not at all concerned with what gets posted on this blog”. Probably explains why Wesley spends too much time here while I’m on Twitter with my ‘jingoistic CROWD’. Wesley should be awarded for ITS regular contributions to RAMU MIND WASH _ perhaps a blog post to commemorate ITS 1000th comment on RAMU MIND WASH”]

But look what they have to work with, TAKE A GOOD LOOK!
A bunch of corrupt ministers and PNG cowboys who are, with a couple of exceptions, are clearly JUST INCAPABLE of understanding and implementing any transparent policy with regard to regulatory practice.

Yes, in the past there has been a tragic legacy of incompetent administration of Mining Act matters by the government of PNG itself.

You obviously simply side step this compelling and abundantly obvious fact.
All the RAMU MIND WASH has done in the last 18 months is to distract people in PNG from the real issues, namely, that the organs of state are largely responsible for the problems in PNG.
I don’t suppose you would appreciate this, how could you when you clearly treat this like a rugby match where you support your favorite team.

[Same old, same old... shift the Blame to the Government. But when Byron Chan the Mining Minister decides give mineral ownership to the 99%, Guess what? the 1% Cry Wolf and say it will split the country. Well I suppose what they mean is that the resources will be taken from their hands and given to the 99% so the 1% gets split out. You see folks what the 1% believe is that the Government isn’t right unless it listens to them. Unfortunately Prime Minister O’Neil bought into their bluff and over-ruled the Mining Minister. If you look at Panguna and Ok Tedi you realize that the State listened to the 1% but when the miners messed up we the 99% paid the price and the State got blamed for the troubles. The 1% just conveniently vanished – BHP in Ok Tedi and Rio Tinto in Panguna]

But its not a Rugby match and RAMU MIND WASH has done the community a great disservice by promoting a perception that it is the Mining Industry at fault.
That’s why PNG just flounders in every respect, politically, socially at all.

RAMU MIND WASH has done nothing to support a proper approach to regulatory process.
Most if not all of what has been said and done by RAMU MIND WASH has floundered in a sea of ineptitude, emotion and silly partisan barracking with no focus and apparently no knowledge of the real issues, but worse, a complete incapacity to work productively toward a properly regulated process for the management of mining matters.

How can you expect the industry to respond to this sort of a rubbish other than to raise their eyes with incredulity and near total frustration.

[Oh so now they wanna sound like the victims... typical. The 1% will lobby regulators and Ministers to get what they want, yet when they screw-up, they pass the blame to the Government. It’s hypocritical because the Government’s actions had been influenced largely by the 1%]

Conclusion

In the minds of the psychopathic 1%: raping your resources, plundering the state coffers, exploiting workers and destroying the environment and the livelihoods of indigenous communities are legitimate forms of doing business. They do not want to be held accountable for these acts of violence. They don’t want to be criticized for their wrongs.

Yet when the 99% react to their injustices, the 1% immediately bring in thugs in Police Uniform to suppress the resistance against their violent acts. They treat people who seek justice as if they are criminals.

There is one major weakness that the 1% have and that is they only care about MONEY. So the sheeple of Papua New Guinea can resist with their wallets and their labour. They lose money when you don’t do business with them and that’s what hurts the most. For a large corporation, a strike by workers costs millions per day.

The shareholders wouldn’t be too pleased with the company if this was to happen and mangers who say “I have a responsibility to my shareholders” will realize that they have a responsibility to the 99% as well.

Now folks I don’t want to exonerate corrupt Politicians and Public Servants nor do I wish to absolve the State from its fiduciary duties. But when one is presented with the basket case that this nation has become, one would expect that so called Development Partners, Civil Society Organizations and Good Corporate Citizens would step up to meet the challenges faced. Instead they fail to do so and by their failures enable the Dominant Class -  psychopathic 1% to run amuck.