Moresby’s settlements: Protect the voiceless not the reckless

BUSA JEREMIAH WENOGO

FOR some time now I’ve been closely following developments regarding members of parliament promising to issue land titles and provide water to settlements in Port Moresby.

From the outset, I treated these announcements with caution and suspicion although, as someone deprived of such services, I earnestly hope to have access to them.

Regardless, I was concerned that these announcements lacked substance in the sense that they seemed to bypass normal processes involved in granting titles as well as access to water.

Coupled with this is the reality that politicians have always been associated with grandstanding where they make alot of noise but rarely deliver.

For instance, late last year in Erima, payments were made to Eda Ranu by Labi Amaiu MP to reconnect water to the settlements. However, three months have passed and so far nothing has been forthcoming.

Time and again it has been shown in PNG that it is illogical for the government or a politician to provide these services on a platter and expect the people to act responsibly.

Our people have been indulging in handouts for so long that it will take time for them to adapt to a user pays environment.

Where I am living in Port Moresby, water is provided through common taps and yet only a minority turns up to pay the rent while the majority is interested only in accessing “free water”.

The prevalence of a handout mentality among the majority of our people is a direct result of politicians dishing out cash and unrealistic programs and policies to advance their political ambitions.

This is where the government and MPs have to be careful. Their noble intention to protect a neglected segment of the population such as unemployed settlers should not go so far as to allow irresponsible citizens to propagate all manner of filth and reckless behaviour.

Of great importance is that these programs do not further promote a hand out mentality.

There are genuine but often voiceless Papua New Guineans, including public servants, who live in settlements, behave decently and want a better life for themselves and their families.

These are the very ones that the government should be doing seeking to protect.

They should be identified by the government and provided with the opportunity to own a decent home that has access to basic services such as electricity and water.They should not be suffering due to the ignorance and folly of a minority.

The government should not undertake a blanket exercise to cover everyone when it comes to the provision of essential public utilities such as water and electricity as there is no guarantee that recipients of these services will act responsibly.

Time and again politicians have insisted on the need to conduct surveys to identify houses and owners to enable issuing titles and connecting water. But this does not make sense when the majority of the landless settlers are unemployed.

While most of them are part of the informal economy, what they earn is not sufficient to pay land rates, water bills and related cost and at the same time put food on the table.

The cost of living in the city is rising at an exponential rate and it will always be difficult for these unemployed settlers to sustain the services rendered to them by the state.

Such a rights-based approach by government can only work if there is a social protection component attached to it where these people are provided with unemployment benefits and subsidies to support low-cost housing.

Yet our people’s lack of a savings culture means they will not have the capability to plan and budget their income streams. Also one must hope that social protection policies would not further encourage laziness and recklessness.

Regardless, the idea to formalize illegal settlements through property rights is a good solution. I have previously elaborated on the need for government to formalise squatter settlements.

As shown in many developed countries, effective and well managed property rights can bring immense benefit to a nation. Yet in PNG the cultural issue has to be addressed as a prerequisite to formalisation of settlements.

Most settlements are characterised by people living in their own ethnic groups. Some people argue that this minimises antagonism compared to a multicultural set-up where various groups are living together in one area.

Past experiences indicate that these normally led to ethnic tension, but this could be largely due to lack of community ownership and poor leadership in settlements and consequent law and order problems.

Integration and diversification supported by a strong government presence should be encouraged so different ethnic groups learn to live with one and other in harmony.

The government, for its part, should ensure that there is an equal distribution of different ethnic groups within a settlement. This could help neutralise flare-ups.

No doubt it is the role of any responsible government to provide the best for its citizens and initiatives like providing land titles and water are highly commended.

Yet these cannot be done in a vacuum. Culture and tradition in PNG are so diverse that it is very difficult to dissect the good from the bad and create a system based on a generic cultural norm.

This can only be done over an extended period of time and its success will depend on continuing government support.

Protecting the rights of its citizens especially the “voiceless” should be a government’s core responsibility but this has to be done in a carefully planned way so everyone benefits.

Otherwise, we will continue to support recklessness and irresponsibility at the expense of the interest of law abiding citizens.