An Exercise In Magnanimity

In Png's House Of Assembly

From PERCY CHATTERTON, in Port Moresby

Looking back at the first meeting of Papua New Guinea’s third House of Assembly in April, and its after math, one is impressed by the generosity displayed by the Pangu-led National Coalition towards its United Party opponents.

This attitude is all the more notable in view of the fact that when the boot was on the other foot it was used for kicking, and for kicking hard. The majority group in the second House, first as the so-called Independent Group, then as the Compass Party, and finally as the United Party, lost no opportunity of humiliating the small Pangu Party opposition.

Perhaps its crowning feat of in tolerance was to prevent Thomas Kavali, now Minister for Works but then the sole representative in parliament of the New Guinea National Party, from joining the parliamentary delegation to Indonesia led by Dr. John Guise.

It would not have been a matter for surprise if a triumphant Pangu Party had been eager for revenge.

In fact it showed itself magnanimous.

Not only did it support a proposal from its ally, the Peoples’ Progress Party, to give status and perquisites to the leader of the Opposition, but it secured the inclusion of the United Party’s controversial secretary, Anton Parao, in the delegation to the UN Trusteeship Council meeting in New York.

The United Party’s response to these generous gestures has in the main been less than gracious. Anton Parao used the occasion of this ap pearance before the council to engage in a bit of political tub thumping on behalf of his party, or more correctly perhaps on behalf of the Highlands, thus arousing the anger of the leaders of the National Coalition.

As a matter of fact, the three-man PNG delegation gave the UN a very good cross-section of local opinion.

With Anton Parao were Pangu’s Gavera Rea, trade union leader and Minister for Labour in the coalition, and Simon Kaumi, Chief Electoral Officer and cautious public servant.

Members of the Trusteeship Council were able to watch the political traffic lights switch from red to amber to green and back again.

There have been angry reactions to the formation of the coalition in some parts of the country, notably in the

Gazelle Peninsula and in the High lands.

In the Gazelle the reaction has no doubt arisen from the local political situation. The Mataungan MHAs being members of the coalition, anti- Mataungans are in honour bound to oppose it with the virulence which seems to be endemic among the Tolai.

In the Highlands, however, the opposition may be suspected of being a demonstration of Highlands nationalism, of which Anton Parao is such an outspoken apostle. Fair enough, if acknowledged as such.

Personally I prefer Anton Parao, who makes no bones about his High lands regionalism, to those High landers who prate of national unity and urge us to love one another and hun g wantaim, when what they are really after is Highlands domination of the whole country.

The National Coalition has had one notable victory in the Highlands, however. lambakey Okuk, Minister for Agriculture and member for Chimbu Regional, returned home to face what had been billed as a hostile demonstration, and converted it into a demonstration of support for the coalition and himself. In a hard-hitting speech he nailed home responsibility for a previous anti-coalition demon stration at Kainantu to defeated candidates in the recent elections and to the interference in Chimbu affairs of an Eastern Highlands MHA. He named them, one by one.

Proceedings during the 2\ sitting days which made up the first week of the June meeting of the House of Assembly were in low key. Perhaps the most important topic dealt with was that of what is commonly called “free education”.

Actually, of course, there is no such thing as free education. Education is expensive and is getting more and more expensive. The real question is: Who pays for it?

During the last few years parents in Papua New Guinea have been called on to make a contribution to the cost of their children’s education, though the fees charged represent little more than a token payment in relation to the total cost.

Southern Highlands MHA Matiabe Yuwi wants education to be “free” in undeveloped areas. He points out that areas which have had schools for a long time had enjoyed the advantages of free education until fees were introduced a few years back, and it seems to him only fair that in areas where schools are only now being established there should be a period of free education prior to the introduction of fees. He sug gested a period of five years.

Education Minister Ebia Olewale was quick to point out that if fees were remitted in this way there would be less money available and con sequently fewer new schools estab lished.

The member for Central Regional, Miss Josephine Abaijah, suggested that the kind of education currently being given often created more problems than it solved. What was needed, she said, was more adapta tion of schooling to local conditions and requirements rather than more and more schools turning out more and more misfits.

The government compromised by fixing a ceiling for fees chargeable by primary schools, and by agreeing that in cases of hardship fees might be paid in kind instead of in cash.

So if Mary’s little pig follows her to school one day he may find himself impounded as an instalment of Mary’s school fees.

For the rest, a bill was agreed to regularising the nomenclature to be used to prevent confusion between Papua New Guinea ministers and Australian Commonwealth ministers, and creating and defining a position of “leader of the opposition”.