Comments

Thank you Ellen, although DSIP per head is disparate across electorates, each province still receives an overall budget proportionate to its size, which means the largest electorates do get larger funding for specific services. Although population isn't the only factor in determining political boundaries, from a services and management perspective, it is still be very important. Simply redrawing and/or splitting electorates reduces population per electorate, means smaller populations are easier to reach and manage, higher DSIP per head, and each voter casts an equal vote (at present a vote in Rabaul is worth 6 in Laigap-Porgera). This will occur regardless of geography.

While I agree with your recommendation for the reviewing and redrawing of the district boundaries since PNG's population is constantly growing every year, to define the size of the districts solely on population and redrawing boundaries based on that criterion could also lead to inequality as well. Since the land mass, especially in the highlands region where it is highly populated, won't get any bigger, what are other options aside from redrawing boundaries and what options are there for the sparsely populated but geographically larger districts? Equality should be based on access to services not just on the DSIP kina per head factor.

Thank you Michael -- that's a very interesting point. My thinking is that -- ideally -- the issue of geography's impact on service delivery should not prevent PNG from aiming for more equal district sizes. The issue of geographical challenges is real. But (again ideally) I think geography would be best dealt with by including geography as a factor when the amount of funding to different provinces and districts is calculated. I admit, my approach, which seems ideal to me, might not be practically possible: political settlements are always complicated. If my approach isn't realistic, then the issue you identified stands, and needs to be included in considerations. Thank you for a thought-provoking comment. Terence

Thank you Billy

Valid points. I totally agree with your points.

One of the issues with the current method based on population is that it doesn’t account for provinces with large land masses and scattered populations even if its less than the number required for a new district. For instance, Western Province has vast landmass, which makes service delivery challenging. The same can be said of Manus, with Islands people scattered on the many islands. New district boundaries should also consider provinces with vast boundaries even if population is relatively small.

Hi all, thanks for the comments and corrections (Francis, Amanda, and Bernard) on Kua’s party - PNG National Party, and Richard Maru’s portfolio - National Planning. A correction will be provided at the end of the blog. Thanks again.

Thank you Mr Michael Kabuni for this very interesting, insightful piece. As others have said, Hon. Richard Maru was Minister for Planning before the recent changes. He had been in the role for some time, having survived the change of Prime Minister. You mentioned the PNG Update conference held at UPNG this year, as the Prime Minister James Marape spoke on the first morning. Hon. Richard Maru spoke as then Minister for Planning on the second morning, and his well-received address is available at the same link you provided (https://devpolicy.crawford.anu.edu.au/png-and-pacific-updates/png-update). Thanks again for the helpful write-up.

Great question Matt! I also think when it comes to health security, we need to be increasing our investments to multilateral programs such as Global Fund, Global Polio Eradication Initiative and Gavi the Vaccine Alliance. I hope Australia really steps up over the coming months as these key replenishments take place. Gavi's replenishment due in June next year provides us an opportunity to show our regional leadership in ensuring every last child receives a vaccine. These programs are critical in delivering life-saving vaccines and in tacking infectious diseases: a threat that knows no border.

Good read. As pointed out by Francis, Maru was Minister for National Planning. Kua is the leader of the National Party.

Yes, that's a good point. I thought we had but didn't have the dates or amounts to hand. Was it in support of an IMF or Bank program? That was my main point: that we wouldn't lend without WB/IMF lending, and currently PNG is off-track with its World Bank program.

Mate, excellent take. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this piece.