7 Responses

  1. PNG Education News
    PNG Education News January 15, 2017 at 8:16 pm

    PNG Government is spending more on school fees. Most likely they will scrap it off.

  2. Richard
    Richard January 14, 2017 at 7:47 am

    The fallacy with free education and free health care is that those programs are not free – the tax payer is the one burdened with funding this government policy. The government has never felt accountable to the tax payer and therefore does not feel obliged to ensure that these programs are devlivered in the most transparent and cost efficient manner to justify why the tax payer should continue funding those policies.
    Furthermore, the government has not clearly identified and developed through investment other sources of revenue in the econony to fund such programs.
    Lastly there is one view that free education and free health care have severe consequences on the budget as people become careless about proper family planning and also fail to practise proper personal hygene that the public education system does not have enough classrooms to fit the number of children such that the teacher-student ratio is greatly imbalanced such that the children do not receive the quality supervision and assistance from the teacher and this also contributes to the poor quality of spoken and written english. Free health care causes people to not take personal hygene seriously and this results in outbreak of TB and other preventable diseases which compounds the pressure on the public hospital system where there is accute shortage of drugs and other important but basic medical equipment and facilities.

    1. Camilla Burkot
      Camilla Burkot January 16, 2017 at 9:40 am

      Hi Richard, thanks for leaving a comment. Education is not my area so I will leave that to others to respond to. I have to disagree with your comment on the relationship between free health care and the outbreak of disease, though — there is evidence that suggests that making health care free of charge makes it more likely for people to take up services, especially among those at the lowest end of the socioeconomic spectrum. When it comes to communicable diseases (such as TB), if people are able to access services more easily then they are more likely to get treated quickly, and so the disease is actually less likely to spread. Of course cost is just one factor among many when it comes to access to health care, but it’s often an important one.

    2. John Domyal
      John Domyal January 16, 2017 at 11:48 am

      You are correct in your comment. Not a government minister would really identify what should be free in a school for students and what drug or treatment would be free at the rural aid post for patients. (You ask a current minister and she/he will not give you the answer, simple because they don’t understand their own policy). The fallacy of “free education or health services” is the burden faced by tax payers like us the ordinary who becomes the beneficieries anywhere at the end results. The current free education and health care policy lacked transparency and accountability as well as unsustainability in the long run and ita tantamount to political gimmick of the current government.

  3. John Karani
    John Karani January 12, 2017 at 11:10 am

    “I’m of the view that this initiative – TFF – is not a political gimmick. And these include vast investment in Health, Law & Order and Infrastructure. These to me are economic enablers! Such investments in these critical areas should be maintained and improved. Any one country should have an educated and healthy citizen who have access to essential services and are safe. Only then, the economy will be sound and development will be evident! Issues raised and are of concern are more operational / procedural.”

    1. Anthony Swan
      Anthony Swan January 12, 2017 at 12:37 pm

      Hi John

      Any good policy can be brought down by poor implementation and so, as you pointed out, these latest developments will be a concern to many. The issue here is that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. The PNG government’s fiscal crunch means that trade offs will need to be made between competing expenditure priorities. Why is it that certain expenditure items that are highly discretionary or subjected to few accountability mechanisms are prioratised ahead of TFF payments (or, more importantly, activities that strengthen education and health systems more broadly)? At the end of the day it is unfair on children, families, schools and the nation to miss out on education because basic service delivery is not funded as intended and other opportunities to raise funds at the school level are banned.


    2. John Domyal
      John Domyal January 16, 2017 at 12:22 pm

      Hi John

      TFF was a pure political gimmick of PNC led coalition adopted from a current governor’s political agenda. You can not say its an investment in education or health when there is no sustainability plan working along side it but only bending to the cash flow ability of the public accounts. We call a policy good investment when it can sustain itself and generate the intended outcome over time, what about one that work on had hoc basis depending on cash flow situation of the country (good or bad), TFF released school opened, TFF not released school closed, is it a viable investment? Educated population is the ultimate option right down the line under this TFF policy, but a viable investment that sustain the TFFpolicy is what the country needs.

Leave a Reply