Joe
Sungi’s blunt response to why MPs are not interested in toppling the O’Neill-Dion
Government[1]
gave us an insight into why DSIP, PSIP and LLGSIP grants are now seriously
undermining good governance in this country. It is no longer about MPs using
their conscience above all else to make decisions on the floor of parliament to
advance the nation’s interest. Instead it is really about securing the DSIP and
PSIP money to implement projects in their districts and provinces. While
service delivery is a primary responsibility of our elected leaders they are to
be reminded that they are foremost legislators tasked with the responsibility
to make and pass laws that are in the best interest of our country. The public
servants who they have unfairly criticized for not delivering are the “engine
of service delivery”. These are people whether one likes them or not employed by
the State to be “implementers” and not “brief case” carriers.
In
saying the above the introduction of DSIP was purposely to improve the delivery
of services in the districts. Yet systems and processes of accountability have
always been a teething problem. Administrative guidelines and financial
instructions are not being adhered to as per the Public Finance Management Act.
As such the current review on the Public Finance Management Act needs to “tie
the loose ends” to ensure that these “public funds” are properly utilized and
reported. Unlike the District Support Grants like the Discretionary and Non-Discretionary
funds which are constitutional grants as per the Organic Law on Provincial
& Local Level Government (OLPLLG); DSIP, PSIP and LLGSIP for that matter were
created by an NEC Directive. This means that the Prime Minister and his NEC colleagues
ultimately make decisions regarding its disbursement. In this regard Mr. Sungi’s
comment is a testament to this unfortunate reality.
Most
MPs don’t see the necessity or importance of providing acquittals on time
eventhough this is a key requirement to be eligible for the next lot of
funding. For most of them DSIP is a “political
money” given to them for their loyalty to the government of the day. Afterall it’s
a “numbers game”; a well-know adage in our parliamentary system of democracy. Governments
are made and broken by the movement of MPs on the floor of parliament. Subsequently
the ruling government is prepared to allow “rogue MPs” to continue accessing
their DSIP so long as they pledge allegiance to them. On the flipside; the
government is even prepared to suppress any opposition by withholding DSIP funds
from their opposing MPs (Opposition MPs). Subsequently, the government’s use of
the DSIP money to muster or bolster its numerical strength to hold onto power
is undermining the strength of the opposition and parliamentary democracy as a whole.
The MPs on their part know that the government needs their support to pass the
national budget or important bills. They are prepared to be “bought off” with those
DSIP funds. It is now becoming a common practice that the very first thing that
most MPs look out for in the budget book is the allocation of DSIP. Such practice
is becoming a norm that no wonder MPs don’t properly debate the details of the budget
and are prepared to vote for a budget they have never thoroughly analyzed. Now that
the government through its Finance Minister has announced that DSIP Funds for
all provinces have been slashed to K1 million[2]
it will be interesting to see the MPs response during the current parliament
session.
Another
interesting observation is that this statement from Mr. Sungi seemed to
indicate that MPs are “free riders” not willing to use their experience and
knowledge to explore alternative means to advance the delivery of services in
their districts. If this is so then this is a major slap on the face to their
constituency. For instance, MPs have the opportunity to explore counter-part
funding arrangement with donor partners to initiate community projects yet this
is hardly the case in most districts. It seems our political leaders are more interested
in putting up grand projects that can only be afforded by the DSIP Money and
can yield “kick backs”.
In
the past we had problems with money but the processes and systems of governance
governing the use of those funds were far more effective than today. The situation
today is a total contrast to those former years. A “golden decade” led
initially by the booming commodity prices and then the PNG LNG Projects have
created a pool of funds that can boost service delivery in all our districts. Regardless
most of the districts in the country are still the same prior to the
introduction of the DSIP. Makes you wonder why the government decided to
create PSIP for the provincial governors. This warrants the people of this
country to reconsider the impact of these “Service Improvement” grants. It’s obvious
that the people need to now demand the government to remove this program all
together and instead call for the government to channel money earmarked for
service delivery through the normal budgetary process. Through this funds can be
properly tracked and put to use for its intended purpose and not be at the
discretion of the ruling government to advance its own political agendas.
No comments:
Post a Comment