Letters
pp. 4-6 · Read in the full issue
French getting
off too ‘cheep’
CHICKENS come home to roost! Deja vu! The news on television on November 26 that the Swiss government have arrested Gerald Andries, who was one of the men involved in bringing explos ives into New Zealand to blow up the Rainbow War rior which eventuated in the death of Fernando Pereira, comes like a bolt out of the blue! The fact that the New Zealand Police will endeavour to extradite him to New Zealand to face justice must now put the present “non-interventionist' Na tional government on to the horns of a dilemma.
Assuming that due process of law takes place and he is found guilty will thev suc cumb to French political pres sure and release him to Ho Ho. er Hao or w ill they allow justice to take precedence over trade? Faking on the gallic goliath and standing up for justice would mean the loss of considerable trade for New Zealand and under the heavy breath of La Belle France the New Zealand gov ernment once having wilted, will will again.
Will Prime Minister Jim Bolger and his laissez-faire
government merely let things take their natural course?
Oui, Oui! France will nat urally get her own way, the course of justice will expire and the New Zealand police in the process of extraditing Gerald Andries from Switzer land to stand trial in New Zealand will teeter on the verge of extreme frustration!
Why bother going through the motions of pursuing a suspected French terrorist when the New Zealand gov ernment will only end up releasing the man to France should he be found guilty?
History repeats itself and behind the scenes New Zea land and French diplomacy will be at work ironing out a
public scenario.
Justice falls by the wavside, but what is justice when sheepbrains are at stake?
Martin Leo Auckland
At that time, in addition to a general lack of interest on the potential, I was also facing a ferocious antagonism by Japanese who were fearful of losing their pearl industry (as detailed in “The Torres Strait Pearl Conspiracy”, PIM, August 1982).
As result of PI M’s con structive articles and by SP Bulletin (4th quarters 1968 & 1969); processing/exports from Sydney (“Pearls, Pearls, Pearls”; PIM , February 1966); village-level pearl farmers in PNG; volume of developmental publicity and of technical papers; market ing of pearls produced and processed in PNG; Pacific people were becoming aw r are and by 1970 this culminated to the epoch-making policy of French Polynesia to develop the pearl cultivation for themselves (Polynesia had the advantage of previous rel evant research).
Gradually more Pacific governments were motivated and 25 years after PlM’s pioneering article, pearl farms mushroomed in the Pacific and the “prognostication” for a major economic benefit from “Pacific’s White Gold”, was fulfilled to the letter.
As fundamental factors contributing to development, PIM is instrumental in pres enting it and myself for motiv ating and supporting it in
Editor’s note: New Zealand an nounced on December 17 It would not pursue the extradition.
It’s proved a pearler!
In September 1965, PIM published the article “Pearl Expert Sees Rich Future for Pacific's ‘While Gold' aim ing to motivate Pacific Islanders to major economic potential readily available at their doorstep of which they were unaware: cultivation of pearls.
various ways. PI M's article; “There is Gold for Islander’s in a Neglected Industry” (Sept. 1971), remains a blue print of development and of the direction to stabilise it as an integral part of the Pa cific’s people economy.
PI M's articles are monu mental for promoting the highly complex development in an accurate and positive manner. However, while to day’s consensus on the indus try is a rosy one by the persons involved, evaluation of over all performance on pearl ex pertise points to alarming drawbacks which will affect detrimentally the industry’s prospects and the people’s economic benefit.
If these are not rectified urgently, the Pacific will re main a cheap source of pearls for Japanese and the real benefit will be lost, as already the case is with all other pearl-farmers dependent on Japanese. Australia is a classi cal example of dependence.
I would suggest that you take again the initiative should you consider a merit in my evaluation. Someone from the persons involved in the industry admits the existence of drawbacks but the enthusi astic majority, more or less, remains ignorant and/or in different.
C. Denis George Queensland
Samoa phone story
out of order
ATTENTION is called to an article in your August 1991 edition, “America’s Wasted Millions” and particularly the insert entitled “The Sam oan Telephone with the right connections” by David North.
I find the content of your insert totally false and slan derous. It is a clear case of character assassination in a slanted fashion. Fortunately, your magazine is printed out side of the United States.
Obviously, the author did not research the subject mat ter to get both sides of the story before printing. He did, however, ask the question why the director was not fired for not following the IG Inspector’s recommenda tions. The following, there fore, will answer some of the questions he has in mind ...
The Office of Communica tions is a branch of the American Samoa Govern ment charged with the re sponsibility of providing the people of American Samoa with telecommunications cir cuits and facilities for the conduct of their daily affairs.
The Office of Communica tions handles both local and overseas telephone as well as other telecommunications services commonly found in industrialised countries. Pres ent assets of the office of communications amounted to 20 million dollars in tangible holdings.
Annual Revenues collected from telecommunications ser vices amounted to 9.5 million dollars in Fiscal Year 1991.
Approximately 20 per cent of this amount is given to the local Government to pay for their debt services and other expenses. The office of com munications does not receive any money or grant from the Federal Government nor the local government. It has no debts and all of its tangible assets are paid for and owned by the office of communica tions. The office of communi cations operates as a business and generates its own funds for capital improvements and equipment modernisation projects.
The American Samoa tele phone network is fully digital and all telephone instruments
are of tone-dial type. It oper ates a Cellular Telephone System with four cell sites and over 500 subscribers profit ably, in spite (of) harsh criti cisms from outsiders that a cellular system is not viable in American Samoa. Specifi cally, your article quoted that cellular phones arc only afforded by people earning SUS3O,OOO to $50,000 annu ally. It also quoted that American Samoa has only 15 miles of roads and 212 famil ies earning $25,000 per year.
The fact of the matter is that there arc twice as many miles of roads in American Samoa and 10 times as many families earning $25,000 per year. We have many families owning cellular phones with income less than $lO,OOO per annum.
Portable cellular tele phones used to cost $2,000 per unit five years ago are now costing $5OO or less. This is the trend that the office of
communications projected
five years ago that the author of the IG Report was very ignorant of. In fact he was totally unqualified to write or even express an opinion in an area foreign to him. To put it bluntly, he was very jealous that the native Samoans may
someday own cellular phones
and he tried unsuccessfully to stop this inevitable course of events. Fortunately, both elected Governors saw this and ignored the report.
When the author of the IG Report failed to stop the Cellular Project, he went on to link the Director of Com munications to a conflict of interest issue. This was
prompted by a disgruntled
vendor who went to the IG to complain when he lost the bid because his equipment did
not meet published equip
ment specifications ...
I appreciate the fact that you mentioned in your clos ing sentence that American Samoa Cellular system
played a major role during
and after Hurricane Ofa, a fact the IG Report did not foresee.
I trust that your readers can best be served by giving them the other side of the story in a factual manner. As a point of information, the Director of Communications has served continuously in this capacity since 1967 and (is) partly responsible for the development of telecommuni
cations in American Samoa.
Aleki Sene
Director of Communications American Samoa Government Basic human right I HAVE a few comments about Michael Anderson’s letter in the November edition of PIM. It does not deserve more.
The basic argument ad vanced by Anderson is that Pacific island countries should be grateful that they were colonised and hence arrived at their present devel opment status solely because of this undignified and de grading act. We must never lose sight of the fact that the right of self-determination is a basic human right. No one race has the right to decide what is right or wrong for another. In the end, one can never honestly justify col onialism.
Anderson forgets that sys tems and structures which were inherited by Pacific na tions were those imposed by the colonial powers. In many cases these were not geared towards meeting the needs of locals but to satisfy those of expatriates. That they did not endure is therefore not sur prising. It seems illogical to talk about “handing back free” assets which were
wrongfully possessed by the
colonial powers. The assets were not theirs in the first place. This is typical colonial
mentality.
The Pacific will remember its colonial experience al though we still have to rid ourselves totally of this bar baric violation of basic hu man dignity. There is no need for Anderson to remind us Pacific islanders of it.
Dr Pa’o Luteru Western Samoa
Unsporting comments
MY goodness, hasn’t Paul Wallwork got a big ego, and doesn’t it get in the way of his judgement!
The newly elected President of the South Pacific Games council gives Papua New Guinea 10 out of 10 for facilities, for food and accom modation, for friendship [PIM Oct 91) but only three out of 10 to the organisers becuase they showed neglect, almost disregard, for the in terest not only of athletes and
officials, but sports adminis trators of the various? countries.
Apparently too few Papua/
New Guineans fell on the tarmac to kiss the hem of Mr Wallwork’s tunic when he arrived in Port Moresby.
Many of the organisers, al most all of us volunteers Tor the Games Oranising Gom mittecj, were disgusted at Mr Wallwork’s bleating about chauffeur-driven cars, VIP' tickets etc etc for himself and his wife. If he’s such an egalitarian, so sports minded,
why didn’t he just jump on
the shuttle bus with the ath letes and most of the other visiting officials.
All the leaders of national
teams, speaking directly for
their athletes, were fullsome in their praise of the way sportsmen and women, and sport in the Pacific, were treated by Papua New Guinea. We all met, officially every morning of the Games, specifically to discuss any
problems that might arise.
There were few, and they were dealt with as the highest priority each day.
Apart from your esteemed self of course, Paul, specifically which athletes, officials and sports administrators were treated with neglect and dis regard? Certainly not your fellow-Western Samoa Gisa Gaupa, speaking on behalf of all team managers on depar ture, who said: “We have been well looked after, and we will be doing injustice to our South Pacific ancestors if we do not sing your praises. The food and venues have been superb. We were given every assistance.
You even had transport or ganised for each team man ager to go out whenever we needed to. We thank your from the bottom of our hearts, and we leave with the spirit of brotherhood.”
Papua New Guinea's Games have, quite simply, set a new standard to which future events can aspire. But organ isers of future Games would be advised to keep Mr W ail work well away from the
good-hearted, sports-minded
sponsors and volunteers whose generosity of spirit, and selflessness, will always be needed to stage this wonderfully successful re gional event.
Frank Mills Port Moresby