Apr 18 2016

Bougainville /PNG Government News: Benefits to reap in mutual relationships and working together

“What an opportunity it is that Bougainville has two Ministers in Government. What an opportunity missed it will be if the Ministers do not work in consultation and in tandem with ABG in the remaining months of to the next elections mid next year.

May be the newly appointed Minister for Bougainville Affairs will work around the clock to stitch up the loose ties and ends, mend the fractures and pick up the broken pieces to get a meaningful working relationship established with Bougainville Members of the House .

“Our four national MPs and 40 MHRs must come together and walk along the same path, in the same direction, with the same purpose, bearing the same cross on a journey towards a common Good, welfare and wellbeing of the People.

In a nutshell, have we a leader or a group of leaders that can deliver on the vision for everyone? “

A commentary by – Simon Pentanu

“It will also be something close to political deceit if together our combined political leadership does not deliver on the political promises and pledges that candidates swear to at elections that, if elected, they would do their utmost to rebuild and resurrect Bougainville.

This is the unequivocal challenge the Third House of Representatives faces head on through the referendum preparations and the myriad challenges from now to 2020.

Opportunities missed are opportunities lost and gone.”

Leadership Challenges of Autonomous Government The Hon Patrick Nisira MP, Vice President of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea see below Canberra Australia event 28 April

It has taken a very determined and audacious Prime Minister and his government to give real and long overdue facelift to Port Moresby, the nation’s capital. Mt Hagen has also benefited, so also will Lae city when the new wharf and Nadzab Terminal upgrades are completed.

This in stark reality has meant someone biting the political bullet and defraying all manners of politically loaded invectives and the courage of one’s convictions to do something that others have only played lip service to.

The PM and the Government’s decision has led to renovations and recovery of the decaying and decadent concrete monolith called the Pineapple Building and the adjacent time-ravaged Central Government Offices complex. The offices will save any Government in the future hugely exorbitant outlays in private rentals that real estate owners and operators have been thriving on handsomely for years.

Some of the Provinces and their provincial centres are also benefiting from this. Milne Bay is an example. Alotau, a peaceful town is welcoming an onset of national business travellers. The upgrade of Gurney airport for international flights will be good for the local economy with tourists and business travellers a good sales and marketing pitch for the province and the country. Similarly, if they walk the talk other provinces with business potential and cultural pull will reap benefits in a similar way.

The New Guinea Islands region has always attracted visitors. After the devastation of Rabaul by the volcanic eruption in September 1994, the growth of Kokopo has been an astonishing success in planning, funding, managing and implementing a resurgence through a combined effort of the ENB Provincial Government and the Gazelle Restoration Authority. I mention this because the PM and his Government’s support and delivery of any infrastructural development is being done on the back of what the province already has.

If Bougainville’s leaders also put their foot where their mouth is in demanding basic infrastructural development and upgrades by holding the PM to his repeated remarks that his main concern in rebuilding B’ville is through development. Time and again the PM has said openly that his main concern is to deliver development on Bougainville.

What an opportunity it is that Bougainville has two Ministers in Government. What an opportunity missed it will be if the Ministers do not work in consultation and in tandem with ABG in the remaining months of to the next elections mid next year.

Our four national MPs and 40 MHRs must come together and walk along the same path, in the same direction, with the same purpose, bearing the same cross on a journey towards a common Good, welfare and wellbeing of the People.

Bougainville has the natural resources and untapped wealth to do it. It has a relatively small population that can share the resources more than adequately and equally for everyone’s benefit .Have we got the collective minds, the sobriety and the goodwill to do it?

In a nutshell, have we a leader or a group of leaders that can deliver on the vision for everyone?

It will be a disappointment if elected leaders in the National Parliament and the Bougainville House of Representatives do not find the common chord and the core values that the people expect leaders to be bound by and if they do not rise above individual preoccupations toward a political precept that confers a duty of service to and care for all citizens.

Leadership Challenges of Autonomous Government

The Hon Patrick Nisira MP, Vice President of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea Thursday 28 April 2016 11:00 – 12:00pm Acton Theatre, JG Crawford Building (132) Lennox Crossing, ANU

Papua New Guinea’s Autonomous Region of Bougainville is at a critical juncture. Still dealing with the debilitating effects of an at times brutal civil conflict from 1988 to 1997, the Autonomous Bougainville Government is working to rebuild its economy and governance structures while navigating the final stages of a peace process, including a referendum on its political future due to take place by 2020. Vice President Patrick Nisira, a key member of the Autonomous Bougainville Government elected to lead Bougainville through to 2020, will offer some first-hand perspectives about the unique leadership challenges facing his government over the next few years.

About the speaker

The Hon Patrick Nisira MP is the Vice President of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. Mr Nisira also holds the position of Minister for Peace, the Referendum and Veterans Affairs. Mr Nisira was first elected to Parliament in 2007 in the seat of Halia (Buka Island, North Bougainville) as an independent. He served as Minister for Works, Transport and Civil Aviation from 2007-2010 in the government led by Presidents James Tanis and Joseph Kabui. Re-elected in the 2010 general elections, Mr Nisira was appointed Vice President in the Autonomous Bougainville Government led by President John Momis. Nisira held his seat in the 2015 general elections and was reappointed Vice President in the second Momis government.

Apr 17 2016

Bougainville Referendum News : Developing a ‘Whole-of-ABG’ Rolling Plan for Referendum Preparations”

Bougainville Vice-President and Minister responsible for the Referendum Patrick Nisira,

In connection with Referendum preparations, there is to be a significant meeting held in Port Moresby on Tuesday 19 and Wednesday 20 April. Its a meeting of the Joint Bougainville Referendum Committee (joint between the National Government and the ABG) which will be discussing key issues about referendum preparations, including:

a. the process for establishing the agency for conducting the Referendum;

b. the process for determining the date for the referendum (and in particular, whether determinations on weapons disposal and good governance are just matters to be taken into account when the two governments consult on setting a date within the five year period between mid-2015 and mid-2020 within which the Referendum MUST be held, or, alternatively, whether they are conditions precedent that must be met, with failure to meet them permitting the National Government to refuse to the referendum being held;

c. Development of an overall plan for preparations for the referendum, inclusive of steps, timelines, budget, and funding.

The ABG is proposing that the meeting be opened by statements given by the new Minister for Bougainville Affairs (Joe Lera) and Bougainville Vice-President and Minister responsible for the Referendum (Patrick Nisira), and that the outcomes of the subsequent discussions between the officials will be reported back to those two, as well as President Momis, at the end of the discussions.

Background

A 2 day workshop that the Autonomous Bougainville Government (ABG) held in early March for its ministers and senior officials around the theme of “Developing a ‘Whole-of-ABG’ Rolling Plan for Referendum Preparations”.

SEE PAPER HERE : Referendum Overview 2016 – 32 Pages

Pictured above the Father of PNG Grand Chief Sir Michael Thomas Somare GCL GCMG CH CF SSI KSG PC MP (born 9 April 1936), who celebrated his 80 th birthday last week with the Father of the Bougainville referendum James Tanis

THE BOUGAINVILLE REFERENDUM

AN OVERVIEW OF THE ARRANGEMENTS

Referendum Overview 2016 – 32 Pages

by Anthony Regan

3^rd Draft – 21 March 2016

INTRODUCTORY ISSUES

This paper provides an overview of origins, intentions, sources, and main features of the constitutional arrangements for the ‘Referendum on the future political status of Bougainville’ (the Bougainville Referendum). It must include a ‘choice of separate independence for Bougainville’, and must be held before mid-2020. The paper also outlines work done so far to prepare for the Referendum, and identifies and discusses major steps required to prepare, conduct, and deal with the outcomes of, the Referendum.

A referendum is a process for making decisions, mainly about issues of great importance. The categories of issues dealt with in referendums (or referenda) is extensive. They include: approving new constitutions (as in Kenya in 2010), or amendments to existing constitutions (as under Australia’s Constitution); proposing or even making new laws (as in Switzerland and with citizens initiative referenda in some states of the United States); or resolving major divisive issues (as in Britain’s planned June 2016 referendum on exiting the European Union).

Since 1990 over 50 referenda have been held on independence for a country or part of a country. Usually such referenda are conducted as part of efforts to resolve disputes, often (though not always) violent conflicts. Examples include referenda on: Eritrea’s independence from Ethiopia, 1993; Quebec’s independence from Canada in 1995; East Timor’s independence from Indonesia, 1999; Scotland’s Independence from the United Kingdom, in 2014. Of course, issues about sovereignty can be particularly sensitive and divisive, and are often difficult to prepare for and manage.

Very few countries have ever included in a national constitution provision for a deferred referendum on separation of part of the country, required to be held within a specified period. The only examples we know of are: France (in relation to New Caledonia, where a referendum must be held by 2018); and Sudan (in relation to South Sudan, where a referendum was held in 2011, about six years after the Sudan Constitution was amended to provide for it). So Bougainvilleans are a privileged people to have achieved the opportunity to make a decision about their future in this way. In all three cases such provision was included in the national constitution as part of a broader package intended to find ways of ending bitter and violent conflict. Autonomy was intended to operate in the period before the deferred referendum, in the hope (for some parties in both New Caledonia and Sudan) that it would help resolve divisions before the referendum was held, perhaps leading to a situation where the referendum might not be necessary, or might be deferred, or perhaps contributing to a referenda outcome in favour of continued unity.

Although referenda can help resolve difficult conflicts, they can also carry risks. They can be complex and expensive to run. They can be divisive, in preparation, in conduct, and in implementation of results. Problems often arise from misleading and divisive campaigns by political leaders on the question in the referendum. Leaders can be under great pressure to attempt to influence the result through manipulation of the process, and intimidation of voters.

Although usually intended to resolve conflict, holding a referendum can contribute to conflict, especially in a country where there are pre-existing ethnic, religious, or other kinds of divisions. One particular danger is that the outcome of a referendum on a divisive matter leaves a significant minority feeling strongly that the majority vote causes them serious disadvantage. Violent conflict has occurred in the process of implementation of outcomes of referenda in the past 25 years, including in relation to independence referenda – for example, in East Timor and in South Sudan.

A difficulty associated with an independence referendum is that it involves a major decision on long-term arrangements being made at a particular time, often without adequate information about future circumstances. For example, Scotland relies heavily on revenue from petroleum resources, which it would have needed to rely upon if its 2014 referendum had resulted in independence. But little more than a year after the referendum, oil prices were about 25 per cent of what they had been at the time of the vote. A vote in favour of independence where voters had assumed the prosperity of Scotland was assured could have been ill-founded.

So in preparing for the Bougainville referendum, it will be important to consider both the advantages and disadvantages that can flow from them, learn from experience of referenda held elsewhere, and do everything possible to minimise the chance of serious problems occurring.

A starting point is to develop a clear understanding of the Referendum arrangements, so that in planning for and managing it, everything possible is done to ensure arrangements work as intended, potential problems are anticipated and contingencies provided for. As yet, however, the Referendum arrangements are not widely known and understood. Important aspects are often the subject of confusion, uncertainty and misunderstanding.

For example, it has been widely believed in Bougainville that the BPA required the referendum be held in 2015, rather than in the five year window beginning in 2015 as is actually provided. Further, some Bougainvilleans have asked whether, in the absence of a decision by the PNG Parliament on the referendum outcome by 2020, the BPA and the PNG Constitutional Laws implementing it will cease to have effect, resulting in autonomy ceasing to operate, the immunity from prosecution for former combatants and other aspects of the BPA ceasing to have effect. In fact, there is no basis at all for such concern.

Perhaps the greatest confusion and uncertainty involves two sets of questions of great importance to continuing peace in Bougainville:

whether PNG has the authority to defer the referendum beyond 2020 – in particular, should it be determined that requirements as to weapons disposal and good governance have not been met; and
whether a vote in favour of independence requires PNG to implement the outcome, Bougainville then having an immediate right to independence.

Both sets of questions are discussed elsewhere in this paper.

Reasons for such confusion etc., include: most people involved having had no experience of referenda; the history of the arrangements for the Bougainville Referendum is complex; almost 15 years have elapsed since the BPA was signed, and few people other than some who were deeply involved in the negotiations have a clear memory and understanding of what was agreed; and the arrangement are set out in several documents, the details and relationships of which are little known.

This overview aims to provide information needed for improved understanding of the arrangements.[1] The history and intention of relevant parts of the BPA and the Constitutional Laws is a particular focus, for that is often little known, and when clarified often provides a good basis for improved understanding of the arrangements. Where relevant, the paper also examines the links between the referendum arrangements and other aspects of the BPA. It also:

identifies some risks involved in the Referendum in respect of which avoidance or management action may be needed, and
outlines issues to be taken into account when considering whether the Referendum outcome will be credible, an issue likely to be of importance when consulting with the National Government (and the international community) about the results of the Referendum.

[1] To assist readers to locate information, section numbers and pages of relevant laws and reports are included.

Download Full 32 pages here :

Apr 17 2016

Bougainville NEWS : Attacks over mining moratorium : ” nonsense and lies ” says Momis

” I have made those facts clear in several statements, including one to the ABG parliament on 4^th April on Rio Tinto’s responsibility to carry out a full clean-up should it decide to withdraw from BCL. Is Mr.Kauona deaf? How on earth can he say I am only concerned to protect BCL and Rio Tinto? What nonsense and lies!

“There is no conspiracy between the ABG, Rio Tinto, BCL and Australia. Mr. Kauona and his few supporters, like Mathias Salas, must stop signing the nonsense and lies his Australian/Canadian partner, Mr. Lindsay Semple, writes for them. Whenever Semple and Kauona don’t get the access to minerals that they want, they make false claims about a conspiracy – nonsense and lies! Their statements are nothing more than desperate attempts to build support for their own economic interests by creating fears about BCL. It’s shameful.”

Bougainville President, Chief John Momis Pictured above

He was responding to statements made by former BRA leader, Sam Kauona and some of his supporters. They include claims that the President is controlling the process to lift the moratorium, and is doing that solely for the benefit of Bougainville Copper Ltd (BCL) and its majority shareholder, Rio Tinto, in order to prevent Bougainvilleans benefiting from mining.

Read petition letter here Kauona-Semple-Petition Letter Scan – April 2016

The claims are made in a ‘petition letter’ sent to the BCL chairman, in a letter to the President from a few Bougainville Ex-combatants from Arawa, and in a paid advertisement in a PNG daily newspaper on 14 April 2016.

The moratorium was imposed in 1971 at the request of Bougainville leaders aiming to protect Bougainville from unlimited large mines. They were concerned that unlimited exploration licences could have seen many mines established all over Bougainville.

The moratorium was continued under the two mining laws passed by the Autonomous Bougainville Government (ABG) – a ‘transitional’ Mining Act in 2014, and the Bougainville Mining Act in March 2015. The 2015 Act allows the ABG Cabinet to lift the moratorium, wholly or partially. Before it makes a decision, Cabinet must receive advice from the Bougainville Mining Advisory Council, and allow a debate in the ABG parliament on its proposed decision.

The President said:

“I have no power to lift the moratorium. Cabinet has not even developed a position on the issue. So far the only thing we have done is opened public debate on whether the moratorium should be maintained, or lifted. Because we have no funds to conduct a public awareness and consultation, we have instead asked the Parliament to debate the issues involved. Then the Cabinet can take account of the views expressed when it does make a decision.

“In the parliamentary debate on 5^th April, I recommended lifting the moratorium partially. That gives the new Bougainville Mining Department time to build capacity to manage the new system for exploration licence applications. The Mining Department has not yet developed administrative arrangements needed for international tender of licences, and for a new system of community mining licences for small-scale miners. If exploration licences for large-scale mining were available for the whole of Bougainville, we could not implement those important aspects of the Mining Act.

“My recommendation debate did not decide the matter. Others contributed to the debate, which was then adjourned to the next sitting of the parliament. Members can now consult their constituents. The debate will continue when the parliament meets again, in May or June. This encourages wider public debate in Bougainville on this sensitive and important issue.

“I have to ask why Mr. Kauona is afraid of public debate about the lifting of the moratorium.

“I will continue to recommend partial lifting. I want to see exploration licences (for possible open-cut or underground mines) limited to just one or two areas, initially. That limit could be reviewed after international tender and community mining licence arrangements are in place.

“At the same time, if possible, I’d like to see a wider lifting of the moratorium now – for reconnaissance licences and artisanal licences (under our Act restricted to Bougainvilleans, for areas up to five hectares, but not involving open cut or underground mining). This approach would allow most Bougainville mining interests access to minerals. It would see continued protection against establishing many open cut and underground mines. That was the original aim of the moratorium. It continues to be an important aim.

“Mr. Kauona’s claim that my recommendation is intended to look after BCL and Rio is nonsense. Mr. Kauona knows it. BCL was not covered by the 1971 moratorium. At the request of the Panguna landowners, that continued under our law. But BCL got only a ‘first right of refusal’ to negotiate about Panguna, under an exploration licence over its former Special Mining Lease. Like any other exploration licence holder, BCL has no guarantee of getting a mining licence, because landowners have a right to say ‘no’ to grant of all such licences.

“But the Act also abolished all of BCL’s exploration licences adjacent to Panguna. BCL and, the mining giant Rio Tinto certainly don’t see the Mining Act as looking after them. In fact, the loss of their previous licences saw Rio Tinto launch its ongoing review of its investment in BCL. It now looks very likely that Rio Tinto will withdraw from BCL, and that there is little likelihood of BCL reopening the Panguna mine.

I have made those facts clear in several statements, including one to the ABG parliament on 4^th April on Rio Tinto’s responsibility to carry out a full clean-up should it decide to withdraw from BCL. Is Mr.Kauona deaf? How on earth can he say I am only concerned to protect BCL and Rio Tinto? What nonsense and lies!

Chief John L. Momis President Autonomous Region of Bougainville

Apr 12 2016

Bougainville expedition seeking rare species in ‘the Galapagos’ of the Western Pacific

Photo: Baby hornbill at the conservation site on Bougainville, PNG. (Supplied by Dr. Jeffrey Noro) Dr Jeff Noro, who will be in charge of the Bougainville leg of the expedition.

Dr Noro, a molecular scientist who did his PhD at the University of New South Wales, is director of The Kainake Project — a community cultural and conservation organisation based in his home village in prime giant rat habitat in virgin rainforest on Bougainville.

From The ABC

Contact Bougainville Experience Tours for all tour options

An expedition to find rare and new species of mammals in a region dubbed “the Galapagos” of the Western Pacific will be the first of a series of expeditions mounted by the Australian Museum in its new Trailblazer series.

Scientists are heading to Papua New Guinea’s island of Bougainville, as well as the Solomon Islands, to look for animals such as monkey-faced bats and giant rats.

Bougainvillean scientists say they are excited to have been put in charge of the expedition by Tim Flannery, in what has been seen as Professor Flannery working to build leaders in conservation.

Professor Flannery, who has just been appointed as “Trailblazer-in residence”, will work with indigenous biologists and communities.

“The flora and fauna of the Solomon Islands is very much underappreciated for its diversity and special nature,” Professor Flannery said.

“Giant rats and monkey-faced bats are the Solomons’ version of … charismatic megafauna.

“These rats are some of the most spectacular rodents on earth.

“They are incredible things … two kilograms in weight and the best part of a metre long.”

Professor Flannery said the monkey-faced bats were an ancient lineage of bats.

“They have such enormous teeth they are capable of cracking green coconuts,” he said.

“They evolved in the Solomons because there were no land mammals apart from the rats competing with them.”

The Bougainville giant rat has not been seen by scientists since 1937 and another species on the island of Malaita has never been recorded.

The expedition’s innovative partnership with indigenous biologists and communities is already paying dividends.

A skin of the Bougainville giant rat has been found by Dr Jeff Noro, who will be in charge of the Bougainville leg of the expedition.

The teams on the ground on each island will set camera traps, test mammal DNA, listen to local people’s experiences and stories of the animals, and examine their hunting trophies.

With feral cats and logging adding to the threats to the mammals, the expedition has been labelled timely.

Photo: Kim McKay sees the results being produced by the PNG and Solomon Island cultural and scientific partners as vindication of the decision to put indigenous people at the heart of the project. (Supplied by Dr. Jeffrey Noro)

Junior Novera, a Bougainvillean who is about to start a PhD in zoology at the University of Queensland, will be the onsite science manager on Bougainville.

After years of being part of gruelling field trips in other parts of Papua New Guinea, Mr Novera was delighted to be working at home where the civil war of the 1990s had kept loggers away and habitats relatively intact.

“It [this project] gives us this huge opportunity to go and rediscover, and hopefully discover species are still out there and unknown to science,” he said.

Australian Museum chief executive Kim McKay sees the results being produced by the PNG and Solomon Island cultural and scientific partners as vindication of the decision to put indigenous people at the heart of the project.

“We are actually learning from the local community and working with them, and that’s the point of them being here at the museum this week — to share that experience,” she said.

As one of the world’s leading experts on mammals of Melanesia, Professor Flannery’s decision to put the Bougainvillean scientists in charge is not being taken lightly.

“For him to actually trust us, to say ‘you guys go and take the lead’, I think that is huge for me,” said Dr Noro.

“I think he is really trying to build leaders in conservation.”

Photo: Tommy Essau examines early Solomon Island combs with other expeditioners, including Professor Tim Flannery. (ABC: Jemima Garrett)

Apr 11 2016

Bougainville News : President Momis statement ABG engagement with Rio Tinto about Rio’s plans for its shares in Bougainville Copper -BCL

” I want to brief you on recent developments concerning Rio’s review because it is obviously a matter of great importance to the future of Bougainville. So all of you, as the elected representatives of the people, have the right to be kept advised of developments on this subject.

Another important reason for me making this statement is that there are still many quite crazy – long long olgeta – stories being spread by a few Bougainvilleans, and by a few of our more crazy international critics, that the ABG is under the control of Rio Tinto and BCL, and is selling out the interests of Bougainvilleans to big mining interests. When such stories are still being spread, by either self-interested liars or deeply misguided people, it is important that accurate information is available that allows you, as the people’s representatives, to make your own judgments about what is happening.

We also emphasised again that the ABG and landowners remain willing to engage with BCL and Rio about jointly examining the possibilities of re-opening the Panguna mine.

However, I also said that if Rio does decide to end its investment, then the ABG remains completely opposed to any equity transfer to the National Government. Instead, there must be equity transfer to the ABG and landowners, without any payment.

I also stated firmly the ABG position that Rio must take full responsibility for an environmental clean-up, and for dealing with other major mine legacy issues.

I ask this House, and the people of Bougainville, to support my Government in its ongoing, life and death struggle, to protect the interests of the landowners, and of the wider Bougainville community.”

EDITED STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT JOHN. L. MOMIS, TO THE BOUGAINVILLE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 5 APRIL 2016

Mr. Speaker:

I rise to share with all members of this House the most recent developments in the ABG’s efforts of recent years in examining the options for the future of large-scale mining in Bougainville.

In particular, I am talking today about what is still the very uncertain future of the Panguna mine. Since the Bougainville Mining (Transitional Arrangements) Act in July 2014, the most immediate factor causing uncertainty has been Rio Tinto’s reaction to that Act doing away with BCL’s major mining tenements, replacing them with just an exploration licence over the former Special Mining Lease – the SML.

Rio Tinto is the London based giant mining company that since the early 1990s has been the 53.6 per cent majority shareholder in BCL. Rio announced in August 2014 that it would conduct a review into its investment in BCL. That announcement opened the real possibility that Rio Tinto would withdraw from any involvement in BCL.

Withdrawal of Rio would raise major uncertainties about the future of BCL, and what the ABG and landowner organisations had been doing for several years – that is, we had been engaging with BCL about the possible re-opening of Panguna.

Of course, the engagement process was still in its very early stages. No decisions had been made on the major issues of substance. Further, the Mining Act gave landowners a clear veto over re-opening.

But with the announcement of Rio Tinto’s review of its investment in BCL, most aspects of our engagement with BCL were put on hold. That is still the position today.

I want to brief you on recent developments concerning Rio’s review because it is obviously a matter of great importance to the future of Bougainville. So all of you, as the elected representatives of the people, have the right to be kept advised of developments on this subject.

Another important reason for me making this statement is that there are still many quite crazy – long long olgeta – stories being spread by a few Bougainvilleans, and by a few of our more crazy international critics, that the ABG is under the control of Rio Tinto and BCL, and is selling out the interests of Bougainvilleans to big mining interests. When such stories are still being spread, by either self-interested liars or deeply misguided people, it is important that accurate information is available that allows you, as the people’s representatives, to make your own judgments about what is happening.

Honourable Members may recall my statement to the House about the future of Panguna, made on 22^nd December 2012. I then advised of the latest in a series of attempts that the National Government has made since at least 2014 to purchase Rio Tinto’s 53.6 per cent equity in BCL. This latest attempt was made from late November.

The Member of the National Parliament for Central Bougainville, Hon. Jimmy Miringtoro met me to tell me that National Government Minister, Hon. Ben Micah, wanted to discuss with me and Panguna landowner representatives the urgent need for the National Government to purchase the Rio Tinto equity. I subsequently met Mr. Micah, and then Mr. Micah together with the Prime Minister, Hon. Peter O’Neill.

In brief, they said it was an urgent necessity for the National Government to purchase the equity as soon as possible. Initially we were told we had to give our agreement by 7 December. The reason given was that if PNG did not purchase the equity, there was a grave risk that Rio would sell the equity to an un-named third party. Mr. Micah emphasised how much that would be against the interests of both Bougainville and PNG.

A major concern for me was that Mr. Micah emphasised that it would be far too sensitive to even mention or discuss environmental clean-up of Panguna with Rio Tinto. The sale of the shares was the only issue that could be discussed, He said that issues had to be dealt with only as a commercial transaction, without any reference to environmental issues.

I made it clear to both Mr. Micah and Mr. O’Neill that the ABG could not support the National Government proposals. At the same time, I made contact with Rio Tinto to check their position. I was advised that the Rio process to review its investment was ongoing, and that there was no immediate proposal to sell the equity in BCL.

So I then wrote a letter to the Prime Minister in mid-December saying it was not acceptable to Bougainville that the National Government become the major shareholder in, and in control of, BCL. I made it clear that if Rio Tinto does decide to withdraw from BCL, its shares must come to the ABG and the landowners. In addition, I said, Rio cannot be permitted to escape its clear responsibilities for an environmental clean-up, and for other mining legacy issues.

I also decided that because of the ‘strange’ information about Rio received from Mr. Micah and Mr. O’Neill, and the high degree of uncertainty about Rio’s plans, that I should re-establish direct communication with Rio Tinto. I had begun that direct communication in July last year at a meeting I had with their senior representatives in Singapore.

The main issues I raised in that meeting concerned why the Rio review process was taking so long – it had then been ongoing for 11 months. I also communicated to Rio the continued ABG and landowner interest in engaging with Rio and BCL about jointly examining the possibilities of re-opening the Panguna mine.

We achieved no concrete progress at that July meeting. But the ABG did make clear our view that if Rio does decide to withdraw from BCL that the ABG strongly opposes transfer of the equity to the National Government. I also indicated that we would then seek transfer of the equity to the ABG, and an environmental clean-up. Rio indicated willingness to negotiate such issues, but otherwise did not specifically respond to what I raised.

Rio agreed to my December proposal for renewed direct engagement, and we met again in Singapore in February. I was accompanied by the Minister for Mining and the Minister for Public Service.

This time we put a much more specific Bougainville position. I expressed deep concern about both the very long time that the Rio review of its investment in BCL was taking, and Rio’s failure to communicate at all about its progress.

After all, the ABG and landowners are significant stakeholders, and Rio has duties, that it acknowledges in its own published policies about how they do business, to maintain open communication with stakeholders.

We also emphasised again that the ABG and landowners remain willing to engage with BCL and Rio about jointly examining the possibilities of re-opening the Panguna mine.

I also stated firmly the ABG position that Rio must take full responsibility for an environmental clean-up, and for dealing with other major mine legacy issues.

I emphasised the history of BCL in Bougainville. Although it may have operated legally, under colonial legislation, the basis for the Bougainville Copper Agreement was clearly deeply unjust. It was not based on anything like the informed consent of impacted landowners, and almost completely ignored the concerns and interests of those landowners, and of Bougainvilleans more generally.

It was the long-term impacts of the injustice that led to action, not just by Ona and Serero, but also Damien Dameng, young mine workers, leaders of the Arawa Mungkas Association and the Bana and Siwai Pressure Groups, and others. Their key goal was NOT the long-term closure of the mine, but instead forcing BCL and the National Government to stop ignoring them. Instead, they wanted to negotiate a new and fair agreement, taking account of the concerns of landowners and the rest of the Bougainville community. Long term mine closure was not their goal, but rather the result of the much wider violent conflict that resulted from the conduct of first Police mobile squads and then PNGDF units deployed to Bougainville.

We stated clearly the need for Rio to honour the lessons that it had learnt from its Bougainville experience, and which it has since applied to its operations world-wide. As a result, widely published and advertised Rio policies emphasise principles of corporate social responsibility, informed consent by impacted indigenous communities, and the need to operate on the basis of terms that are just for all stakeholders.

The Rio officials made no official response. Other than emphasising the complexity of the issues involved, no explanation was offered for the long delay in completing the investment review. When pressed on when it could be expected to be complete, they indicated probably before the end of 2016.

In relation to the issues I raised about transfer of equity and Rio being responsible for a clean-up etc., I can understand that they might have some difficulties with what we put to them. Rio might feel, for example, that its majority-owned subsidiary (BCL) operated legally – in accordance with the laws of the day. Yet it lost everything at Panguna as the result of what they might see as a small violent group opposed to mining.

But if that is Rio’s position, then quite apart from the fact that the mine did not close because of Bougainville opposition to mining, in addition Rio would be ignoring its gravely serious responsibilities.

Rio Tinto is a foundation signatory to the sustainable development, and other principles of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). Those principles are absolutely clear that the responsibilities of a mining company are not limited to its legal obligations alone – especially its legal obligations under deeply unjust colonial laws.

In today’s world, there is no doubt that Rio Tinto would be subject to intense international public criticism if it tried to walk away from its responsibilities for the environmental damage and other unjust legacies it created, or contributed to.

I presented Rio with a two page statement of the ABG position, and I seek leave of the House to table that document. I will arrange for copies to be provided to all members of the House.

The Rio officers indicated that they would consider the ABG position, and would respond within 2 to 3 months, probably at another meeting in Singapore. I am yet to hear more about such a meeting.

But I can assure this House, the Landowners from the former Panguna lease areas, and all other Bougainvilleans, that under my leadership, the ABG will continue to make it clear to both the National Government and Rio Tinto that Bougainville remains determined to protect its own interests.

It is not an option for the National Government to become majority shareholder of BCL.

If, as now seems highly likely, Rio decides to end its involvement in BCL, the equity must come to Bougainville, and Rio Tinto must accept its full historic responsibilities, and honour its obligations to Bougainvilleans. It cannot just walk away from Bougainville, and at the same time pretend to hold itself out to the world as a highly responsible company that learnt from its horrific experience in Bougainville by adopting new and appropriate modern standards of corporate responsibility.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Apr 11 2016

Bougainville News : Momis : Debate on the process for lifting the ” moratorium ” on Bougainville mining exploration

“It should be no surprise to Members here today that in participating in this debate on the future of the ‘moratorium’, I am deeply concerned to ensure that the issues involved are discussed thoroughly, with care, and with the most careful attention to the need to fully protect the interests of Bougainvilleans. After all, that ‘moratorium’ protected our interests over many years. We need to consider the issues involved most carefully before deciding what should be done.

I’d like to comment briefly on the main options for a decision on the ‘moratorium’. The options include:

Maintaining the moratorium;
Lifting it partially, for limited specific areas of Bougainville;
Lifting it fully, for all areas of Bougainville currently covered by it.”

These matters that I have outlined must be carefully considered by this House when debating the options for decision on the future of the ‘moratorium’. Because of these issues about international tender for exploration licences, and setting up the community mining licence system, I suggest that we should not yet consider the option of fully lifting.

I further suggests that instead we should either maintain the existing moratorium for at least a period of two or three years, or alternatively only partially lift it, for just one or two specific areas. In that way we would allow the time to organise for international tender and for community mining licences “

STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT JOHN. L. MOMIS, TO THE BOUGAINVILLE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 5 APRIL 2016

Mr. Speaker:

The BEC has recently agreed to a recommendation from the Mining Minister that it is vitally important that this House discuss the future of the ‘moratorium’ on mining exploration.

The ‘moratorium’ was originally imposed 45 years ago, in April 1971, by the colonial Administration. It prevented any mining exploration licences for areas of Bougainville other than those already covered by BCL leases. It was imposed in response to the deep concerns of Bougainvilleans communicated to the colonial Administration by their then leaders.

45 years ago, I was a young, recently ordained Catholic priest working in Kieta. I was being called upon by landowners to support them in their struggle with CRA and the colonial Administration. So I was one of those leaders whose request resulted in the moratorium being imposed. It was imposed to protect our people from the unlimited mining exploration and development that they feared might :

It should be no surprise to Members here today that in participating in this debate on the future of the ‘moratorium’, I am deeply concerned to ensure that the issues involved are discussed thoroughly, with care, and with the most careful attention to the need to fully protect the interests of Bougainvilleans. After all, that ‘moratorium’ protected our interests over many years. We need to consider the issues involved most carefully before deciding what should be done.

When the last ABG House proudly passed the two Bougainville mining laws – the Bouganville Mining (Transitional Arrangements) Act 2014, and the Bougainville Mining Act 2015 – both laws retained the ‘moratorium’. It was adopted as if it was a reservation of land from mining exploration made under the Bougainville Act.

Members need to be very clear about what the Bougainville Mining Act 2015 says about lifting such a reservation (or moratorium). It gives the power to the BEC. The BEC can lift it partially (just for particular parts of Bougainville), or fully (for the whole of Bougainville). But when the BEC considers lifting the reservation, either partially or wholly, it must first get advice about its proposed decision from the Bougainville Mining Advisory Council (the BMAC). It must also provide an opportunity for debate of the proposed decision by this House.

This procedure is very different from how a reservation under the National Government Mining Act is lifted –that needs just a decision from the National Government Minister, with no consultation or advice required. In developing the ABG’s law, we were determined that an issue of this importance had to be subject to careful scrutiny. That’s why the decision cannot be made just by the Minister – it requires a BEC decision, and only after receiving considered BMAC advice and hearing a debate on the issues involved held in this House.

As the Minister also emphasises, as yet the BEC has not made any decision about the future of the ‘moratorium’. We are not coming to you with a proposed decision. Instead, we are asking this House to debate what we should do about the ‘moratorium’. We are doing this to generate broad public discussion of the issues involved.

Members might ask for an explanation of the reasons why we need such a public debate about lifting the ‘moratorium’. There are several reasons.

First, lifting the ‘moratorium’ is still a highly sensitive issue for many – perhaps even most – Bougainvilleans.

Second, many of the same issues that led to the request for the moratorium in 1971 remain. Even people open to some mining in Bougainville want it very strictly limited.

Third, if we do lift the moratorium, and especially if we lift it fully (that is, for the whole of Bougainville), it is likely that a very large proportion of the land of Bougainville will soon be covered by exploration licences. That will have huge impacts for all of us. There will be great difficulty turning back from such a massive change if it produces results that we do not like.

So there is a clear need for the most careful deliberation on the issues involved.

Ideally we want to have a major Bougainville-wide public consultation and awareness campaign about issues of such great importance. But because of our serious financial difficulties, that is not an option for us at the moment. So instead, the BEC has agreed to an initial debate in this House. That must be a thorough, careful and well-informed debate.

I believe that it is also essential that we engage with our people as part of this debate. So I recommend, in the strongest terms, that this House debate the ‘moratorium’ issue in two separate sessions. One should be now. Then when the issues have been carefully considered, I recommend that all members go out and consult the people of their constituencies, and seek their views. They should then have a second round of debate at the next House session – a debate further informed by the views of our people.

I’d like to comment briefly on the main options for a decision on the ‘moratorium’. The options include:

Maintaining the moratorium;
Lifting it partially, for limited specific areas of Bougainville;
Lifting it fully, for all areas of Bougainville currently covered by it.

Before we consider options, we need to consider carefully how either partial or full lifting of the moratorium would interact with, or impact on, other major aspects of the Bouganville Mining Act 2015. There are at least two aspects of the Act where there could be major impacts.

The first is the provisions on putting exploration licence application for particular areas out for international tender. The aim of international tender is to see if the ABG can raise significant revenue from exploration licences – for international tender could perhaps bring offers of millions of kina instead of a usual small exploration licence fee.

To put areas out to international tender, the Mining Department must first identify areas that have a potentially high prospective value, and then get geological survey done for those areas. The resulting information would then be made available as part of the tender process, so those offering to pay for a licence have some real information on which to base competitive bids.

If the ABG were to lift the ‘moratorium’ fully, we would be shutting the door on the provisions on international tender, for many years to come. The reason is that lifting the moratorium will mean that most, if not all, highly prospective areas will very quickly be covered by exploration licences. There will be nothing left to deal with under international tender processes.

If we are to keep the door open to using the international tender process in the next few years, we need some time to identify prospective areas and find the funds needed to get the necessary geological survey work done. We need perhaps 2 or 3 years to get such things organised.

In our current serious situation of financial crisis, we would be very unwise to throw away the possibility of raising serious funds by tendering exploration licences.

The second aspect of the Mining Act where fully lifting the moratorium would have major impacts is the arrangements for small-scale mining. Under the Act, COEs or Community Governments have authority to request the ABG to reserve areas exclusively for small-scale mining. Once areas are reserved, then the COE or Community Government will have the authority to issue licences to Bougainvilleans who are landowners of the area they are mining, or have permission of the landowners. That will then be the only basis for small-scale mining to be legal.

The Act gave the Mining Department time to get the new system of community mining licences organised. It made existing small-scale mining (in the absence of the new licences) legal for just 18 months, ending in October 2016.

I am very concerned now because I’ve recently been advised that the Mining Department has done nothing at all to organise the community mining licence system.

The problem now is that if the ‘moratorium’ if lifted for the whole of Bougainville, before the community mining licence system is set up and operating, then it will probably be almost impossible to have land reserved for community mining licences. The reason is that exploration licences will almost certainly be granted for most areas where small-scale mining is occurring. Once an exploration licence is granted over land, there can be no reservation of land for community mining licences without agreement of the exploration licence holder. Experience elsewhere suggests that exploration licences will be very reluctant to agree to community mining reservations that will encourage small-scale miners.

So again, we need some time, perhaps 12 to 18 months more, to allow the Mining Department to do what it should actually have been doing over the past 12 months – that is, working with the Community Government Department and other departments to set up the community mining licence system.

If we do not allow the time for this, then most, if not all, small-scale mining in Bougainville will be illegal. It will become more or less impossible to establish the community mining licence system. But of course, that will not stop small-scale mining from continuing. So that will set up serious risks of tension, confrontation and conflict between small-scale miners and exploration licence holders.

There would also be other advantages in partial lifting, for just one or two areas. That would also allow the Mining Department the time it is likely to need to see how well it is able to administer the new tenement applications system established under our new Mining Act.

The Mining Department is a completely new and untried organisation, with no established experience of operating our new Act. Clearly the Mining Department must already be struggling to carry out its heavy responsibilities under the Act – for that would be the only acceptable explanation for its compete failure, so far, to do anything to establish the community mining licence system.

Once it has established that system, we could perhaps feel more confident that the Department is developing the kind of capacity it will be needing to effectively

My recommendations to the House to consider in this debate are:

To debate the issues and options for lifting the moratorium thoroughly during this session of the House, and when the issues have been covered fully, the House should adjourn that part of the debate to return to our constituencies to consult our people on the issues involved;
That there should then be a further debate on the issues at the next session of this House;
That in that second debate, the options for lifting should be carefully evaluated, taking full account of likely impacts of maintaining the moratorium, partial lifting, or full lifting on both:
Setting up the system of international tenders for exploration licences;
Setting up the Community Mining Licence system for small-scale mining.6
The House should consider the possible advantages of a partial lifting of the moratorium in just one or two areas, thereby allowing the Mining Department time to get the arrangements under the Act operating properly.

I must assure the members of this House that as President, I believe that this debate on the future of the moratorium is one of the most important debates we have ever held.

I assure you, Mr. Speaker, and all members, that I, and the BEC, will listen most carefully to the views expressed in this debate, and in the wider public debate, before we make any decision on lifting the moratorium.

I must also remind members that if we do later make a decision to lift it either partially or fully, then that decision too will have to be referred for advice of the BMAC, and the House will have to have the opportunity to debate the decision. So the future of the ‘moratorium’ could be a matter before this House for quite some time.

In my view, Mr. Speaker, it is entirely appropriate for the House to take an extended time to deal with such an important issue.

I look forward to hearing the contributions to the debate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Apr 10 2016

Bougainville’s Carteret Islanders home to the world’s first climate refugees to Benefit from US $30 Million

Good news for the people of Carteret Islands in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville.

The Carterets, home to the world’s first climate refugees, will benefit from US $30 million in development funding (approx. K88 million).

These funds have been made available through a partnership program between the PNG government, Asian Development Bank and Climate Investment Fund.

Carteret Islanders, as beneficiary to these funds, was made known, following series of questions from North Bougainville MP, Lauta Atoi, on the national government’s commitment to climate change affected island communities in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville.

While others have faced the challenges, Carteret Islanders, although being declared as first climate change refugees of the world, for far too long have silently suffered.

“Has the government got plans to address the specific needs of the Carteret Islanders and other atoll islands that are equally affected,” Atoi asked.

Minister responsible for Environment and Conservation and Climate Change, John Pundari, told parliament that the national government through the Climate Change Development Authority signed an agreement with the Asian Development Bank for funding support.

“I want to confirm to the member and the people of Carterets and other islands, that Bougainville has been identified as a pilot area. They will benefit from the funds,” he said.

Minister Pundari said funding has always been a challenge for the national government and thanked international partners such as the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) for their continued support.

“IOM are already at Carterets, working there, following a Memorandum of Agreement with the Climate Change Development Authority,” Pundari said.

Apr 7 2016

Bougainville Chocolate Festival- A boost for Bougainville’s Cocoa Industry

Bougainville’s cocoa industry will be expecting a huge boost following the recent announcement by the ABG Minister for Primary Industries Honorable Nicholas Darku, on the Inaugural Bougainville Chocolate Festival.

The event which is a first of its kind in the autonomous region will be held in Buin and Arawa from the 4th to the 8th of July this year.

Minister Darku says this project aims to encourage good cocoa farming practices, while at the same time, raise awareness of the efforts put in by the ABG and its stakeholders to develop this industry. It will also give Bougainville the chance to showcase its cocoa farmers to the international chocolate community and create opportunities to build better market links.

“The cocoa industry represents the economic sector with the greatest immediate growth potential in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville. It can, and will into the near future, provide for sustainable rural employment, generation of government revenue and contribute to household incomes and improved livelihoods”, he said.

One of the highlights of this event will be the Chocolate Competition which involves international judges tasting and providing feedback on chocolate made from Bougainville Cocoa.

“Growers from across Bougainville- twenty from each region, North, Central and South will be invited to submit twenty kilograms of dried cocoa beans, and each sample will be made into chocolate by Paradise Foods.

Chocolate samples will then be distributed to the judges well in advance of the festival to enable a thorough appraisal and judging”, explained Minister Darku.

There will also be agricultural showcases, business stall displays and entertainment during the three day festival. The opening of the Primary Industries Field Station in Buin will also coincide with this event.

This festival is an initiative of the Autonomous Bougainville Government, led by the Department of Primary Industries in partnership with the Australian government.

From 2014

A small New Zealand business is demonstrating how Bougainville can have a future without a return to large-scale mining and the reimposition of colonial-style dependence on foreign powers like Rio Tinto… (Mine Watch)

Source: PNG Mine Watch

The Wellington Chocolate Voyage

A voyage to make a unique artisan chocolate bar and a better tasting world. This is the new chocolate revolution.

Can you imagine the most beautiful tropical paradise on earth?

And the most mouthwatering, delicious chocolate you’ve ever tasted?

We’re going to bring them together and help make a better tasting world.

We are Gabe Davidson & Rochelle Harrison, co-founders of New Zealand’s Wellington Chocolate Factory, and international development worker Sera Price.

We are Kiwis with mad passions and big hearts.

We’re going to make a delectable artisan chocolate bar with rare cocoa beans from Bougainville, a South Pacific region devastated by civil war. The bar itself will be a unique taste experience of the highest quality: the voyage of making it will connect us and you with a cocoa-farming legend, a better way of doing business, and a sailboat journey across the mighty Pacific. Plus you can get chocolate!

We see this as part of a new chocolate revolution, and we want you with us on the adventure.

The Wellington Chocolate Voyage will:

1. Upgrade a South Pacific cocoa plantation– a farming community in Bougainville, led by legendary grower James Rutana, will be able to improve their drying sheds and grow a high-quality crop of unique Criollo varietal cocoa.

2. Buy a tonne of beans– literally. The Wellington Chocolate Factory will purchase 1 tonne of the resulting bean crop at a fair, premium price.

3. Sail the sparkling seas– in the tradition of legendary ocean voyages and historical trade routes, we will transport the beans from Bougainville to Wellington harbour ourselves via sailing ship!

4. Make amazing chocolate – once the beans arrive, we will use our master chocolate-making skills to produce the ‘Bougainville Bar’, a highest quality artisan treat with a unique flavour.

The Wellington Chocolate Voyage combines everything we’re passionate about: making great food, supporting ethical development and trade, connecting with people across the globe, and going on an adventure. We see this as part of the new revolution in artisan food, where mega-industrialised production takes a back seat to skill, care, and people.

By backing us you will be part of:

Supporting Bougainville and a local legend– recovering from a 10 year civil war, the Autonomous Region of Bougainville in Papua New Guinea is trying to develop its own economy and future. James Rutana helped build Bougainville’s cocoa industry only to see it get destroyed by war and neglect. He is committed to rebuilding and we want to help him.

Making truly great food– the Wellington Chocolate Factory are a values driven company who make highest quality bean-to-bar chocolate. You’ll be invited into our world and get to share the inside story of creating the Bougainville Bar. Then you’ll get your very own bar to try or share or hoard!

Nurturing unique cocoa varieties– rare and unique cocoa varieties are being lost to the dominance of lower value industrial strains. We’re encouraging farmers to grow higher quality crops and earn a premium price for their effort.

Doing it by sailboat!– Sailboats are fun and romantic in all the right ways, and there is a proud tradition of great Pacific sea voyages throughout history. Imagine being in Wellington Harbour as the first sail-driven shipment of cocoa beans in over fifty years arrives. If you’re super-keen, imagine coming on the boat with us!

Wouldn’t it feel good to be part of a better tasting world?

What’s the Wellington Chocolate Factory?

We’re snuggled in the heart of Wellington city in New Zealand. We have 11 staff and are open to the public. We make organic, ethically traded, bean-to-bar chocolate of the highest quality.

Why Bougainville?

Bougainville is a beautiful tropical island cluster just north of Australia, with a troubled history. Geographically part of the Solomon Islands but politically part of Papua New Guinea, Bougainville is now an Autonomous Region with its own government and economy.

In 1970 Bougainville had the world’s largest open pit copper mine. The mine contributed significantly to the development of the region, but also to its collapse. A civil war followed that lasted 10 years from 1989 – 1999 and killed 20,000 people.

The Bougainville people brought about peace with assistance from the New Zealand and Australian governments, and the new Autonomous Region hasn’t looked back! There are many challenges in rebuilding the economy and raising business confidence: cocoa growing, for which Bougainville was once internationally renowned, is a way forward.

We want to help put Bougainvllle cocoa back on the map! Making the world class artisan Bougainville Bar will help shine a positive light on the region’s potential, and demonstrate that this is a great place to work and do business.

Apr 5 2016

Bougainville Referendum NEWS : #Bougainville #PNG a State in Waiting but no ones paying attention

“Within a few years, the Pacific Islands region will likely become home to the newest states in the world. Each of these nations is emerging from a complex history of colonization and civil unrest, and the creation of new states in the region has significant political, social, and economic ramifications for the Asia-Pacific as a whole.

The Autonomous Region of Bougainville, currently a province of Papua New Guinea, will follow suit with a referendum in 2019. The decision to stage a referendum came out of the Bougainville Peace Agreement in 2001, following a long and bloody civil war from 1988-1998. The conflict was fought between Bougainvillean revolutionary forces and the Papua New Guinean military — assisted by the infamous private mercenary company Sandline International – and the ten years of fighting left as many as 20,000 dead.”

States-in-Waiting: Introducing Your Future Pacific Neighbors The world’s newest states are likely to emerge from the Pacific Islands. Why is no one paying attention?

By Sally Andrews for The Diplomat

Within a few years, the Pacific Islands region will likely become home to the newest states in the world. Each of these nations is emerging from a complex history of colonization and civil unrest, and the creation of new states in the region has significant political, social, and economic ramifications for the Asia-Pacific as a whole.

First up is the French overseas territory of New Caledonia, which must hold an independence referendum before the end of 2018. Following violent clashes in the 1980s between the indigenous Kanaks and the pro-French European settlers, the UN listed New Caledonia as a non-self-governing territory in 1986, effectively placing the territory on its “decolonization list.” After further killings, hostage crises, and assassinations in the 1990s, the French government signed the Noumea Accord in 1998, mandating that a vote on independence was to take place before 2019.

The outcome of the upcoming referendum is difficult to predict, and is causing heated debate in a nation that is already intensely polarized. Changes in 2015 to the electoral eligibility laws prescribed that only the indigenous population and persons who were already enrolled to vote in 1998 would be automatically eligible to vote in the referendum, causing protests among pro-French groups. The latest census results reveal that within a population of 260,000, 39 percent are indigenous Kanaks, whilst 27 percent are European. The remaining 34 percent comprises “mixed race” persons, migrants from other Pacific islands, and a handful of Asian minorities.

As the referendum approaches, pro-independence activists have some hard work ahead of them in order to broaden their appeal beyond the Kanak bloc and gain the majority vote necessary for independence. Little more can be said at this stage while the New Caledonia Congress continues to debate the question of electoral eligibility, but it seems likely that the results will be close.

Longstanding feelings of alienation toward Papua New Guinea among Bougainville’s estimated population of 250,000 suggests that a strong vote in favor of independence is the most likely outcome of the 2019 vote, meaning that Bougainville could become the world’s next new country.

In appreciating the necessity to establish diplomatic relations with what may well become the newest fragile state on Australia’s doorstep, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop announced that Canberra would be setting up a diplomatic post on Bougainville in May 2015. The government of Papua New Guinea responded by banning Australians from travelling there, with PNG Foreign Minister Rimbink Pato denouncing the plans as “outrageous.”

Despite the overwhelming support for independence among Bougainvilleans, Papua New Guinea’s frosty attitude toward the question of independence intimates that secession is not entirely guaranteed. Part of the peace agreement was that the PNG Parliament would have “final decision making authority” over the referendum results, meaning that Bougainville’s independence will theoretically require parliamentary consent. It is unclear how this will play out in 2019, and it is also unclear how the UN, regional leaders, and Bougainvilleans themselves would respond if Papua New Guinea refused to ratify a vote for independence.

The Pacific also holds a number of more long-term candidates for statehood. One of the key areas to watch over the next decade is French Polynesia, an island collectivity in the South Pacific that the UN* re-classified as a non-self-governing territory in 2013. As such, the French government was called upon by the UN General Assembly to take rapid steps toward effecting “a fair and effective self-determination process” in French Polynesia, a major win for the indigenous Maohi nationalists.

Similarly to New Caledonia, the French Polynesian parliament is split between the pro- and anti-independence political parties, and these sentiments broadly divide the population into the indigenous and European camps. The political situation is further complicated by the intertwining of the independence movement with the campaign for recognition and compensation from the French government for the 193** nuclear tests carried out in French Polynesia between 1960-1996, with anger and momentum in the latter movement fueling the independence campaign.

While a referendum is some way off in French Polynesia, the events in New Caledonia over the next few years are likely to provide significant impetus for the decolonization process. Aside from New Caledonia and French Polynesia, France has another overseas territory in the form of the islands of Wallis and Futuna. Whilst the islands’ indigenous populations have traditionally been strongly pro-French, Futuna chiefs recently hinted at a potential push for independence in the midst of concerns over French mineral exploitation.

The Pacific Islands of the future seem set for some radical changes. Some of the biggest questions will be those surrounding governance capacity, fiscal independence, and resource management. New Caledonia, home to 25 percent of the world’s nickel reserves, can be expected to undertake a dramatic renegotiation of its mining arrangements upon independence, while the fate of the Panguna copper mine in Bougainville — estimated at a value of $37 billion and an infamous flashpoint for bloody clashes and indigenous exploitation during the 1990s — remains at an impasse.

Sorely neglected within the field of IR analysis, the Pacific Islands region may yet emerge as as one of the geopolitical hotspots of the 21st century. With a number of other independence movements growing across the Pacific — including the Chilean territory of Rapa Nui (Easter Island), Chuuk State in the Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji’s Rotuma islands, Banaba Island in Kiribati, New Zealand’s Cook Islands, Australia’s Norfolk Island, and the Indonesian territories of West Papua, Aceh, Maluku, and Kalimantan, to name a just a few — it’s high time that we paid some attention to our Pacific neighbors.

*An earlier version of this article said that France had re-classified French Polynesia as a non-self governing territory.

**An earlier version of this article said that there had been 196 nuclear tests in French Polynesia.

Sally Andrews is a New Colombo Plan Scholar and the 2015-2016 New Colombo Plan Indonesia Fellow. She is a Director of the West Papuan Development Company and the 2016 Indo-Pacific Fellow for Young Australians in International Affairs.

This article was first published on the Young Australians in International Affairs blog. This article can be republished with attribution under a Creative Commons Licence.

Mar 28 2016

Bougainville Tourism News : President Momis discovers the tourism potential of PokPok Island

The people of Pokpok Island put on their best welcome at short notice to welcome the President of their Autonomous Region of Bougainville the Hon Dr Chief John Momis MHR and Mrs Momis during their visit to the Island on Monday 21 March 2016. It was the first visit for the President and Mrs Momis to the Island.

In his welcome Chief Peter Garuai of Pokpok Island told the President that his Island community was honoured and privileged by his visit, this being also his first to the Island.

It was an important visit, brief though it was, because it provided an opportunity for people in the community to see and meet their President face to face. Visits to communities by leaders are moments that people savour as they are occasions when people can hear from the Government as well as talk directly to the leaders like their President.

In a traditional welcome led by the village women elders the President and his main party were adorn with fresh herbal necklaces and anointed with fresh toronisi coconut oil. The President and his accompanying dignitaries took turns to help themselves to the local Nasioi delicacy tamatama that is offered to visitors.

A swarm of elementary and primary school children were also on hand to welcome the President and Mrs Momis as important guests on this occasion. Pokpok has two elementary schools and a primary school on the Island.

See website

Chief Peter Garuai told the President that any development in tourism on the islands and the benefits that accrue from tourism must be clean, lean and environmentally and people friendly with importance of conservation foremost in the minds of everyone involved. He said the islands are fragile and any tourist development must blend in with what the islands offer in terms of its pristine but fragile environment and must be always be in consultation with the population.

Chief Garuai said the potential for tourism must go hand in hand with the need and importance for conservation and said the local people are the expertise on protection and conservation on their islands. Everyone on the Island grows up knowing that they belong to the island and the sea. It is a fragile landscape but it is inextricable connection which the people here have always been a part of, not separate from it.

Chief Garuai also explained how Pokpok Island was recently granted its long time wish to have its own Village Assembly (VA) which comprised the main village of Pokpok and Sisirai and Uruna villages, a number of hamlets on the Island as well as a number of hamlets and settlements along Siipa bay on the mainland. The islanders settled on the name Metora Village Assembly for their VA, a name signifying communities dwelling along the coast and off the sea. The name Metora also behoves a sense of care and responsibility for an environment that is fragile and predisposed to the vagaries of open sea and unpredictable weather. It is the name that is also given to coral sand islands and shoal formations on the outer reefs which people use as resting places while out diving or fishing as well as for initiations of young girls and boys before they can venture out to the barrier reefs on their own.

The Chief, Peter Garuai also pointed out that what is beautiful requires a great deal of thought and responsibility to care for and maintain. In this regard the threat of global warming is real for all islands like Pokpok along the coast of mainland Bougainville as much as it is real for the outer atolls. He mentioned government help was needed with materials for the islanders to construct sea walls to protect the villages on Pokpok, the main village in particular. Some of this has been started but government input in providing materials was urgently needed.

The chairperson and president-elect of the Pokpok and Metora Women’s Association Ms Mary Gula also welcomed President Momis and Mrs Momis on behalf of the women on the Island. She said that Bougainville was blessed with women leaders taking on roles for the betterment of women in society through their involvement as equals in decision making at leadership level.

An Island where children find their place steeped in culture and tradition from a young age

With increased demands for care and responsibility in the village women are also involved in many roles like never before. For this year the women’s association on the Island has embarked on a self-help project to build a women’s resource centre. The men are already involved in helping the women to realize this project and the beginnings of the project has also been supported with preparatory funds and leadership by the Speaker of Bougainville Parliament who is from Pokpok Island.

Ms Gula said women play a critical role of providing a steadying influence on the rapidly increasing young population on the Island and generally throughout Bougainville. She told the President any help that might be forthcoming from the government for the completion of the resource centre will be welcome.

The visit by the President was planned as a sight-seeing detour from the mainland by boat ride to interesting areas in Kieta Harbour surroundings and around Pokpok and Tautsina islands and to the once resort Island of Arovo. The Kieta Peninsula’s jutting beaches and Assio Bay and the sacred site areas of Eberia from the sea all offer very interesting sight-seeing tours by boat. Boat ride farther north towards Kobuan Bay is also the site of Pidia Village where Mr Pip was made on location.

In his response and remarks President Momis thanked the Chief, the women and the community for the traditional welcome. He said the ABG recognises the huge potential for tourism in Bougainville but it has to be developed in consultation and with the participation of its communities. He was very happy that the original owners here continued to protect and care for beautiful Kieta harbour and for the environment around the islands which supports their livelihood. He said any development by prospective investors in tourism must be done through thorough consultations and is meaningful and beneficial to local communities and must respect their traditions, cultures and their natural environment.

SEE TOURISM WEBSITE for Pok Pok Tours

Bougainville News

We broadcast the latest Bougainville news around the world 24/7 to your phone or PC

Category Government of Bougainville