Wantoks,
What I am about to put down here is one of the factors why our country, so blessed with everything, yet cannot move forward.
Firstly, I am not into politics so I may be lacking a bit on the current policies regarding politics at present but all I know is that when it comes to the National Elections, anyone that has money becomes an intending candidate. It does not matter whether you are educated or not, that does not count, as long as you have the money you are in. In contrast, the Malaysian way of becoming and intending candidate is not easy, the intending candidate has to have a doctorate in some kind of field and will have all his personal businesses checked carefully to determine how much profit his business makes yearly, monthly etc.. prior to being sworn into parliament.
When these candidates won at the elections, if he came from a medical background he will be given a portfolio that suits him so he knows exactly what to do. That is the malaysian way.

Tasol long PNG, some uneducated minister can head a department so long as the Secretary is educated. How can this minister who has limited knowledge about this ministry be given this portfolio? The only reason I know is that this minister was chosen because he is in someone else's good books. No wonder there is so much instability in the government and we are not moving forward at all.

I personally think there should be some kind of policy in place so that the nobodys do not just get into parliament and drag this country down with them.

What do you all think?

Rishika

vortexPNGhttp://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1157366164.GIF

I do agree, although don't see it a necesity for a doctorate. A Masters degree is probably suitable, however, how long does it take to get a Masters and the what is the content of the Masters study?
Example 1. In Medicine, it takes a minimum total of 8 years before one can get the Masters, however this masters is in a very specialised field eg. surgery. So this surgeon probably can not see the big picture of health structure, programs and problems facing the nation.
Example 2. A legal student completes LLB and takes up tutorship for one year after completing one year post undergraduate studies training. After the tutorship period, goes on to do a 2 years masters degree and onto a PhD for 2 more years. Q. How much is this person aware of the many other legal problems and issues facing the nation other than the Research paper or Thesis produced?

I personally feel that one has to have academic competence (a Masters/PhD) coupled with not less than 5 years in a managerial/supervisory role in the public service to enter politics. This gives that person insight (I hope) and the functions, problems, issues and good aspects of the particular department and the networks to be able to make informed decisions together with the Departmental Head (2 heads is better than 1).

OOOOPPPSSSS.....Did I say, doctorate? Pardon me. It was supposed to be a higher level of education(Bachelors,Masters,doctorates, etc etc)
My apologies to the degree holders(wannabe politicians).

Rishika

Just a thought... they should have an entry test for potential condidates with no higher qualification(Bach., Master or PhD). This is for those who have experience and laboured really hard to become good mangers/manageress. Typical examples are the likes of Enny Moaitz, Lady Kidu and Peter Yama. If i'm wrong about please correct.

the way the current politicians are going..the primary criteria should "common sense" rather than a degree.

Common sense? What about a grass root that wants to get into parliament for his own personal gain? He has bad motives so I do not think common sense will prevail anymore.

Just my biased thought.

Rishika

Definitely wrongly motivated grassroots will fail the common sense test. Public debate should be encourage between candidates, it should be requirement for elections.

kolwan
(not a terrorist)

Good idea, why isn't there any debates when there are elections.
Even the grassroots people can decipher the con men from the genuine aspiring politicians when the tokples or pidgin is used.

I agree with kolwan and kedz on the debate before the National Elections. There should be a public debate aired so that the general public can decide who to vote for depending on how convincing each speaker is. I suggest that the pidgin speakers challenge each other and the english speakers also challenge each other. If a fluent pidgin speaker challenges an english speaker, it might not be fair since I have a funny thought that pidgin speakers will always have the upper hand.

Over to the floor


Rishika

Rishika, your initial posting is very interesting for PNG politics. I think that is the way PNG should be heading. The problem now is do we have the political will among our current crop of useless politicians who can push for such changes. The thing here is that they will be legislating for their own demise and they will never do that. But I definitely agree with you that a person must have a decent level of education and work or business experience first before becomming a politician.

I agree chief...that is the biggest problem in PNG, self interest. Politicians will definitely go against such a move to introduce minimum level qualification. However, if there is an establish organisation to make aware such issues to the people directly, there will be a definite chance of success.

I would suggest a draft memo to TI PNG to look into minimum level criteria for politians is a way to go.

cheers
kolwan

AUSTRALIA’s Centre for Democratic Institution recently sent a delegation to Port Moresby for an audience with Parliamentarians and other Government authorities. CDI Deputy Director, Quinton Clements, visited PNG from October 1 to 8. The primary purpose of Mr Clements’ visit was to discuss the possibility of CDI supporting a comprehensive induction program for Members of Parliament after the PNG national elections in June, 2007. Accompanied by CDI program manager Daniela Capaccio, Mr Clements met with a range of constitutional office holders, institutions, political parties and MPs, including the newly sworn-in Clerk of the National Parliament of Papua New Guinea, Mr Don Pandan, and his staff.

They also met with the Registrar of Political Parties, Mr Paul Bengo, and his deputy, Mr John Bishop; and the secretary general of the governing National Alliance Party, Mr Stephen Pokawin, and the party secretary, Ms Joyce Grant. The proposal for a CDI-sponsored MP induction program received enthusiastic support from all those Mr Clements spoke with. Mr Clements also held discussions on current and future CDI sponsored research projects with Transparency International PNG, the National Research Institute (NRI), and a number of academics at the University of Papua New Guinea. Mr Clements discussed with NRI Director, Dr Thomas Webster the possibility of holding a joint CDI-NRI symposium on the state of politics in Papua New Guinea in early 2007. The event is to cover politics five years on from the introduction of major political reforms, the Organic Law on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates and Limited Preferential Voting.