However, South Australia’s new law carries the harshest financial penalties in Australia.

Thirteen Upper House Labor and Liberal MPs voted for the Bill, opposed by two Green MPs and two SABest MPs. The government faced down the cross bench moves to hold an inquiry into the bill, to review it in a year, or add a defence of “reasonableness”.

The Summary Offences (Obstruction of Public Places) Amendment Bill 2023 was introduced into the House Assembly by Premier Peter Malinauskas the day after Extinction Rebellion protests were staged around the Australian Petroleum and  Exploration Association (APPEA) annual conference on May 17.

The most dramatic of these protests was staged by 69-year-old Meme Thorne who abseiled off a city bridge causing delays and traffic to be diverted.

Meanwhile, the gas lobby APPEA which is financed by foreign fossil fuel companies has stopped publishing its (public) financial statements. Questions put for this story were ignored but we will append a response should one be available.

The APPEA conference is a major gathering of oil and gas companies that was bound to attract protests. Its membership covers 95 pecent of Australia’s oil and gas industry and many other companies who supply goods and services to fossil fuel industries.

The dramatic climate protest staged by 69-year-old Meme Thorne who abseiled off an Adelaide bridge last month. Video: The Independent

The principal sponsors of this year’s conference were corporate giants Exxon-Mobil and Woodside.

Since March, Extinction Rebellion South Australia has been openly planning protests to draw attention to scientific evidence showing that any expansion of fossil fuel industries risks massive global disruption and millions of deaths.

The new laws will not apply to those arrested last week, several of whom have already been sentenced under existing laws.

In fact, when SA Attorney-General Kyam Maher was asked about the protests on May 17 shortly after the abseiling incident, he told the Upper House that “there are substantial penalties for doing things that can impede or restrict things like emergency services. I know that (police) . . .  have in the past and will continue to do, enforce the laws that we have.”

Sensing that something was in the wind, he said he would be open to suggestions from the opposition.

Fines up 66 times, prison sentence introduced
That afternoon, SA Opposition Leader and Liberal David Speirs handed the government a draft bill. This was finalised by parliamentary counsel overnight and whipped through the Lower House on May 18, without debate or scrutiny.

It took 20 minutes from start to finish: as one Upper House MP said, it would take “longer to do a load of washing”.

While Malinauskas and Speirs thanked each other for their cooperation, some MPs had not seen the unpublished bill before they passed it.

The new law introduces maximum penalties of A$50,000 (66 times the previous maximum fine) or a prison sentence of three months.

The maximum fine was previously $750, and there was no prison penalty.

If emergency services (police, fire, ambulance) are called to a protest, those convicted can also be required to pay emergency service costs. The scope of the law has also been widened to include “indirect” obstruction of a public place.

This means that if you stage a protest and the police use 20 emergency vehicles to divert traffic, you could be found guilty under the new section and be liable for the costs.

Even people handing out pamphlets about vaping harm in front of a shop, or workers gathering on a footpath to demand better pay, could fall foul of the laws.

An SABest amendment to the original bill removing the word “reckless” restricts its scope to intentional acts.

Peter Malinauskus told Radio Fiveaa on Friday that the new laws aimed to deter “extremists” who protested “with impunity” by crowd sourcing funds to pay their fines.

In speaking about the laws, Malinaukas, Maher and their right-wing media supporters have made constant references to emergency services, and ambulances. But no evidence has emerged that ambulances were delayed.

The author contacted SA Ambulances to ask if any ambulances were held up on May 17, and if they were delayed, whether Thorne was told. SA Ambulance Services acknowledged the question but have not yet answered.

The old ambulance excuse
Significantly, the SA Ambulance Employees Union has complained about the “alarming breadth” of  the laws and reminded the Malinauskas government that in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor joined Greens, SABest and others in protests about ambulance ramping, which caused significant traffic delays.

The constant references to emergencies are reminiscent of similar references in NSW. When protesters Violet Coco and firefighter Alan Glover were arrested on the Sydney Harbour Bridge last year, police included a reference to an ambulance in a statement of facts.

The ambulance did not exist and the false statement was withdrawn but this did not stop then Labor Opposition leader, now NSW Premier Chris Minns repeating the allegation when continuing to support harsh penalties even after a judge had released Coco from prison.

It later emerged that the protesters had agreed to move if it was necessary to make way for an ambulance.

The new SA law places a lot of discretion in the hands of the SA police to decide how to use resources and assess costs. The SA Police Commissioner Grant Stevens left no doubt about his hostility to disruptive protests when he said in reference to last week’s abseiling incident, “The ropes are fully extended across the street. So we can’t, as much as we might like to, cut the rope and let them drop.”

In Parliament, Green MP Robert Simms condemned this statement, noting that it had not been withdrawn.

In court, the police prosecutor (as NSW prosecutors have often done)  argued that Thorne, who has been arrested in previous protests, should be refused bail.

Her lawyer Claire O’Connor SC reminded that courts around the country had ruled bail could not be denied to protesters as a form of punishment.

Shock jocks, News Corp, back new laws
She said that, at worst, her client faced a maximum fine of $1250 and three-month prison term if convicted — but added she intended to plead not guilty.

“You cannot isolate a particular group of offenders because of their motivation and treat them differently because of their beliefs,” she said. The magistrate granted Thorne bail until July.

For now the South Australian government has satisfied the radio shock jocks, Newscorp’s Adelaide Advertiser (which applauded the tough penalties), authoritarian elements in the SA police, and the Opposition.

But it has been well and truly wedged. After a fairly smooth first year in power, it now finds itself offside with a massive coalition of civil society, environmental groups, South Australian unions, the SA Law Society and the Council for Social Services, the Greens and SA Best.

In less than two weeks, Premier Malinkauskas’s new law was condemned by a full page advertisement in the Adelaide Advertiser that was signed by human rights, legal, civil society,  environmental and activist organisations; faced two angry street rallies organised to demonstrate opposition to the laws; and was roundly criticised by a range of peak legal and human rights organisations.

Back to the past
Worst of all from the government’s point of view, SA Unions accused Malinkaskas of trashing South Australia’s proud progressive history.

“South Australian union members have fought for over a century to improve our living standards and rights at work. It took just 22 minutes for the government to pass a Bill in the House of Assembly attacking our rights to take the industrial action that made that possible.

“Their Bill is a mess and must be stopped,” SA Unions stated in a post on their official Facebook page.

In hours long speeches during the night, Green MPs Robert Simms and Tammie Franks and SABest Frank Pangano and Connie Bonaros detailed the history of protests that have led to progressive changes, including in South Australia.

They read onto the parliamentary record letters from organisations condemning both the content and unprecedented manner in which the laws were passed as undermining democracy.

Their message was crystal clear — peaceful disobedience is at the heart of democracy and there can be no peaceful disobedience without disruption.

Simms wore a LGBTQI activist pin to remind people that as a gay man he would never have been able to become a politician if it was not for the disruptive US-based Stonewall Riots and the early Sydney Mardi Gras, in which police arrested scores of people.

Protest is about “disrupting routines, people are making a noise and getting attention of people in power . . .  change is led by people who are on the street, not made by those who stand meekly by,” he told Parliament.

Simms read from a letter by Australian Lawyers for Human Rights president Kerry Weste, who wrote, “Without the right to assemble en masse, disturb and disrupt, to speak up against injustice we would not have the eight-hour working day, and women would not be able to vote.

“Protests encourage the development of an engaged and informed citizenry and strengthen representative democracy by enabling direct participation in public affairs. When we violate the right to peaceful protest we undermine our democracy.”

At the same time as it was thumbing its nose at many of its supporters, the South Australian government left no one in doubt about its support for the expansion of the gas industry.

SA Energy Minister Tom Koutsantonis told the APPEA conference, “We are thankful you are here.

“We are happy to a be recipient of APPEA’s largesse in the form of coming here more often,” Koutsantonis said. “The South Australian government is at your disposal, we are here to help and we are here to offer you a pathway to the future.”

‘Gas grovelling’ not well received
This did not impress David Mejia-Canales, senior lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre, whose words were also quoted in Parliament:

“Two days after the Malinauskas government told gas corporations that the state is at their service, the SA government is making good on its word by rushing through laws to limit the right of climate defenders and others to protest. Australia’s democracy is stronger when people protest on issues they care about

“This knee-jerk reaction by the South Australian government will undermine the ability of everyone in SA to exercise their right to peacefully protest, from young people marching for climate action to workers protesting for better conditions. The Legislative Council must reject this Bill.”

During his five-hour speech in the early hours of Wednesday, SA Best Frank Pangano told Parliament that he could not recall when a bill has “seen so much wholesale opposition from sections of the community who are informed, who know what law making is about.

“You have got a wide section of the community saying in unison, ‘you are wrong’ to the Premier, you actually got it wrong. But we are getting a tin ear.”

And it was not just the climate and human rights activists who were “getting the tin ear”: the SA Australian Law Society released a letter expressing “serious concerns with the manner in which the [bill] was rushed through the House of Assembly”.

It wrote, “This is not how good laws are made.

“Good laws undergo a process of consultation, scrutiny, and debate before being put to a vote. The public did not even have a chance to examine the wording of the Bill before it passed the House of Assembly.

“This is particularly worrying in circumstances where the proposed law in question affects a democratic right as fundamental as the right to protest, and drastically increases penalties for those convicted of an offence.”

The Law Society also sent a list of questions to the government which were not answered.

One of the last speeches in the early morning was by SABest MLC Connie Balaros who, wearing a t-shirt that read “Arrest me Pete”, vowed to continue to campaign against the laws and accused Labor MPs of betraying their members, the community and their own history.

No more baby steps. No more excuses. No more greenwashing. No more bottomless greed of the fossil fuel industry and its enablers.

Early this year, UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutierrez declared, “2023 is a year of reckoning. It must be a year of game-changing climate action.

“We need disruption to end the destruction. No more baby steps. No more excuses. No more greenwashing. No more bottomless greed of the fossil fuel industry and its enablers.”

Climate disasters mount
Since he made that statement, climate scientists have reported that Antarctic ice is melting faster than anticipated. This week, there has been record-beating heat in eastern Canada and the United States, Botswana in Africa, and South East China.

Right now, unprecedented out-of-control wildfires are ravaging Canada.

An international force of 1200 firefighters including Australians have joined the Canadian military battling to bring fires under control. Extreme rain and floods displaced millions in Pakistan and thousands in Australia in 2022.

Recently, extreme rain caused rivers to break their banks in Italy, causing landslides and turning streets into rivers. Homelessness drags on for years as affected communities struggle to recover long after the media moves on.

Is it any wonder that some people don’t continue as if it is ‘business as usual’. Protesters in London invaded Shell’s annual conference last week and in Paris, climate activists were tear gassed at Total Energies AGM.

Is it any wonder that some people don’t continue as if it is “business as usual”. Protesters in London invaded Shell’s annual conference last week and in Paris, climate activists were tear gassed at Total Energies AGM.

In The Netherlands last weekend, 1500 protesters who blocked a motorway to call attention to the climate emergency were water-cannoned and arrested.

On Thursday, May 30, Rising Tide protesters pleaded guilty to entering enclosed lands and attempting to block a coal train in Newcastle earlier this year. They received fines of between $450 and $750, most of which will be covered by crowdfunding.

Three of them were Knitting Nannas, a group of older women who stage frequent protests.

This week the Knitting Nannas and others formed a human chain around NAB headquarters in Sydney. They called for NAB to stop funding fossil fuel projects, including the Whitehaven coal mine.

Knitting Nannas, Rising Tide
Two Knitting Nannas have mounted a legal challenge in the NSW Supreme Court seeking a declaration that the NSW anti-protest laws are invalid because they violate the implied right to freedom of communication in the Australian constitution.

A similar action is already been considered in South Australia.

In this context, fossil fuel industry get togethers may no longer be seen as a PR and networking opportunity for government and companies.

Australian protesters will not be impressed by Federal and State Labor politicians reassurances that they have a right to protest, providing that they meekly follow established legal procedures that empower police and councils to give or refuse permission for assemblies at prearranged places and times and do not inconvenience anyone else.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“When we don’t have any of these copper and gold mines anymore, where are we headed?”

This quote is by Jerry Garry, managing director of PNG’s Mineral Resources Authority (MRA).

According to Garry, mineral resources from large mines (both current and pipeline) will be exhausted in 40 years. Oil and gas will also eventually run out.

This should be a wake-up call for Papua New Guinea.

First, it is just over a generation away.

Second, PNG is overly and increasingly dependent on the mining industry for exports (80 percent of total export revenue) and economic growth.

The resources sector was only about 10 percent of the economy at independence in 1975, but is about 25 per cent today.

Third, despite a long history of mining in the country, socio-economic development is still lagging, as highlighted by poor performance in health, education, governance, and law and order.

Indicators languishing
The country’s human development indicators are languishing against compararable economies, and we are unlikely to achieve Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, or Vision 2050’s ambitious goals.

Last, the country has made little progress over the years in diversifying and expanding the economic base to enable broad-based, inclusive and sustained economic growth and development.

The government and its policymakers understand that the mining industry is capital-intensive and, given its enclave nature, has few linkages with the rest of the economy besides the jobs it creates and the contracts it provides to local landowners.

The main contribution the industry makes should be the transfer of resource rents to the government through royalties, taxes and profits (where the government has an equity stake).

But this is where the problems start.

First, the contribution of the resource sector to government revenue has been underwhelming — less than 10 percent in recent years.

Second, it is incumbent upon the government to deliberately and sustainably invest the resource rents in the rest of the economy, including through infrastructure development, strengthening of governance and institutions, as well as building human capital by investing in sectors such as health, education, water and sanitation.

Billions lost to corruption
“This has not happened consistently across the country, with billions of kina lost to corruption and mismanagement.

Third, and underlying these two problems, PNG seems to be subject to the “resource curse”, which is when a country is unable to successfully translate proceeds of its abundant natural resources into gainful economic growth and development outcomes for its people.

No one can dispute that PNG’s resource rents have not produced commensurate development outcomes for the country and the people.

There is a large body of literature on PNG which attests to this situation.

Understanding the problems is one thing, but what matters is addressing them. And given the ominous warning by the MRA, actions are needed fast, and now.

Prime Minister James Marape has embarked on a process to increase the proceeds of natural resources to national stakeholders, though how successful he is remains to be seen.

The more fundamental challenge facing the newly elected Marape-Rosso government is to diversify the country’s economic base and to promote the non-mining economy.

Bold step needed
The new government has taken the bold step of allocating new ministerial portfolios to coffee, oil palm and livestock.

However, this is more a symbolic step than anything else.

If we really want to encourage coffee growers, what is needed is better roads and security, neither of which a coffee minister can deliver.

Deliberate and sustained policy interventions are needed to lift the country and the people out of the resource curse, and forge a development pathway that is ultimately driven by sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, forestry, tourism and manufacturing, including downstream processing of the country’s agriculture, fisheries and forestry products.

To boost these sectors, the overvaluation of the exchange rate needs to be corrected.

This will address the problem of forex rationing, which is hurting businesses, and in the long run will improve agricultural exports by fetching higher prices for farmers/exporters.

This is important policy ammunition used to fight the Dutch disease associated with the resource curse.

Diversification options
Diversification would also include tapping into the country’s abundant renewable energy sources, such as hydro, geothermal and solar, to improve the reliability, affordability and coverage of electricity.

Initiatives to build capacity within key government departments and agencies, such as the treasury, central bank, national planning, health, education and the MRA, will be important, as well as investment in research and academia to support public policy.

Also needed are structural reforms to modernise and improve the efficiency of the country’s state-owned enterprises.

This has been on the agenda of successive governments, but it requires commitment and sustained effort to ensure that the policies and reforms are implemented.

There is only a handful of resource-rich countries in the world — including Botswana, Norway and Australia — that have fought off the resource curse and achieved broad-based economic growth.

The citizens of these countries enjoy a higher level of living standards, because their governments made deliberate policy decisions to invest the proceeds of their mineral and oil resources to support other productive sectors such as agriculture and the services sector.

Mid-course correction
They have also strengthened their governance to support growth and development.

What will we in PNG have to show for when our gold and copper as well as our oil and gas are exhausted?

We need to make a significant mid-course correction to our country’s development pathway now, through deliberate and sustained policy actions.

We must turn the proceeds of our country’s abundant natural resources to building the non-resource economy.

The resulting broad-based economic growth would lift the living standards of the rural majority and the urban poor, and prepare us for when PNG’s minerals and petroleum run out.

Andrew Anton Mako is an associate lecturer and project coordinator for the ANU-UPNG Partnership. He has worked as a research officer at the Development Policy Centre and as a research fellow at the PNG National Research Institute. This research was undertaken with the support of the ANU-UPNG Partnership, an initiative of the PNG-Australia Partnership, funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog, from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Independence leader and Nobel laureate José Ramos-Horta has declared victory in Timor-Leste’s presidential election, saying he had secured “overwhelming” support and would now work to foster dialogue and unity.

Data from the country’s election administration body (STAE) with all votes counted showed Ramos-Horta secured a decisive 62 percent win in Tuesday’s ballot, well ahead of his opponent, incumbent President Francisco “Lu Olo” Guterres with 37 percent.

“I have received this mandate from our people, from the nation in an overwhelming demonstration of our people’s commitment to democracy,” Ramos-Horta told reporters in Dili.

The 72-year-old statesman is one of Timor-Leste’s best known political figures and was previously president from 2007-12, and prime minister and foreign minister before that.

Addressing concerns over political instability in the country, Ramos-Horta said he would work to heal divisions in Timor-Leste.

“I will do what I have always done throughout my life… I will always pursue dialogue, patiently, relentlessly, to find common ground to find solutions to the challenges this country faces,” he said.

Ramos-Horta said he had not spoken to his election rival Lu Olo, but had received an invitation from the President’s Office to discuss a handover of power.

Political instability, oil dependency
Home to 1.3 million people, the half-island and predominately Roman Catholic nation of Timor-Leste has for years grappled with bouts of political instability and the challenge of diversifying its economy, which is largely dependent on oil and gas.

Ramos-Horta said he expected Timor-Leste to become the 11th member of the regional bloc the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) “within this year or next year at the latest”.

Timor-Leste currently holds observer status in ASEAN.

The president-elect, who will be inaugurated on May 20, the 20th anniversary of the country’s restoration of independence, said he would work with the government to respond to global economic pressures, including the impact on supply chains from the war in Ukraine and covid-19 lockdowns in China.

“Of course, we start feeling it here in Timor Leste. Oil prices went up, rice went up, that is a reality of what has happened in the world. It requires wise leadership.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua New Guinea’s Justice Minister Bryan Kramer has confirmed that he has ordered his department — Justice and the Attorney-General (DJAG) — to investigate a complaint against the National Judicial Staff Service (NJSS) hiring highly paid overseas consultants.

Their wages are paid in Australian dollars and deposited in overseas accounts.

Kramer made this statement on the floor of Parliament when answering a series of questions from shadow attorney-general and Rabaul MP Dr Allan Marat during question time.

Dr Marat had asked what the status of the investigations are?

Were there breaches of the relevant laws, and why they are paid in Australian dollars and their salaries paid in overseas accounts?

Kramer said this initial complaint came via a written complaint as chairman of Judicial Legal Commission concerning contracts that were recently awarded within the judiciary to overseas consultants.

The complaint, he said, had a report attached that raised specific issues of amount of money being paid, to foreign contractors and payments being made overseas.

investigations are ongoing
The investigations are not complete and are ongoing.

Once complete a decision would be made about course of action would be taken, Kramer said.

“On the issues of public service it is important to note that these contracts were paid for private consultancy services so won’t fall [under] the regulation of public service,” he said.

Kramer explained that there was a query raised with the State Solicitor to seek clearance concerning whether or not these contracts were complied with legally and lawfully under the procurement processes.

“And the advice I understand provided by the State Solicitor is that, they exceeded the threshold within the jurisdiction of the judicial services to execute these contracts and provided an advice [on] whether to re-negotiate the contracts down to the threshold or to call for public tender on those contracts.”

He added that the concern was over the manner in which the contracts had been approved and the amounts involved in the contracts.

“There are specialised skills or experts around the globe that the state may engage from time to time — be it in oil and gas, and in any new legislative areas like in carbon credits,” Kramer said.

Significant fee
“These experts will attract a significant fee but justification will be on a short term contract where they may apply to come on a three to six month to provide that expert opinion and advice.

“These contracts were extended over a period of, I think 8 to 9 years,” he said.

“That’s another contentious issue that we are looking at.”

• What was the justification;
• What were the terms of reference for engagement of these contracts;
• What were the specific outcomes of these contracts;
• Why were they continually renewed — is it necessary to renew?;
• Why were they not advertised for Papua New Guinean experts or other experts, like under the European Union (EU); or
• Why did we not engage these consultants under the existing EU [arrangements] where they pay for the contracts and we don’t have to meet the costs.”

Kramer concluded that once the investigations were completed and if it was confirmed that there was non-compliance with legislative procedures, then a decision would be made by DJAG to terminate these contracts.

Republished with permission from the PNG Post-Courier.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Fifteen months after the treaty pledged to usher in a “new chapter” in the relationship between Australia and neighbouring Timor-Leste, the document remains unratified and the country loses millions of dollars a month from a Timor Sea field belonging to the Timorese.

Reporting in the latest edition of Eureka Street, freelance writer Sophie Raynor, who has been living in Dili for two years, has condemned Australia for “another [action] in a long line of Australia’s failure to do the right thing by Timor-Leste”.

Then Foreign Minister Julie Bishop signed the treaty in March last year and tabled it in the Australian Federal Parliament, saying it was “her hope” that it would be ratified by the end of the year.

READ MORE: Ramos-Horta expects Australia to pay back ‘millions’ in oil revenue

Although it remains unratified, Australia continues to draw millions of dollars a month from a 10 per cent share in a field found to belong entirely to Timor-Leste.

The Timor-Leste Governance Project estimates that field could have generated A$60 million over the preceding 12 months.

Australia will provide $95.7 million in foreign aid to Timor-Leste between 2018 and 2019.

“Technically, we don’t owe that $60 million to Timor-Leste. There’s no legal right in the treaty for either country to claim compensation for lost revenue from the Timor Sea,” writes Raynor.

‘Beatific big brother’
“But Australia’s role in Timor-Leste’s historic and hard-won independence 20 years ago this August burnished our reputation as a beatific big brother — a reputation until now unmarred, despite decades of those fractious Timor Sea negotiations, allegations of our spying and serious accusations of collusion.

“For years, we’ve positioned ourselves as an international champion of moral righteousness, of sovereignty and of self-determination, and as Timor-Leste’s liberator.

“But we can’t have it both ways. Taking unearned Timor Sea wealth is another in a long line of Australia’s failure to do the right thing by Timor-Leste.”

Former Prime Minister John Howard called the Australian-led liberation of Timor-Leste one of our most noble acts of foreign policy this century — the peacekeeping part; not the preceding 30 years of heavy-handed economic encroachment in the Timor Sea.

“Our delay in ratifying the boundary treaty and our refusal to commit to repaying that unearned money is squarely at odds with how we think of ourselves in this story,” writes Raynor

“And it’s unconscionably in breach of our moral duty to do the right thing by a neighbour.”

‘Siphoning’ millions
In April, The Guardian published an exclusive stating Australia was accused of “siphoning” millions in Timor-Leste oil revenue from the Timor Sea; an amount the newspaper said was more than Canberra had given Timor-Leste in foreign aid.

“Australia remains Timor-Leste’s largest, most financially generous and most important aid and development partner, and many Australian-funded projects provide significant and much-needed support and opportunities to Timor-Leste,” writes Raynor.

“But it’s laughable to say we’re concerned with Timor-Leste’s prosperity if we’re committed to scraping from its vaults more money than we give in foreign aid; to say we’re for its stability when we’re eroding a fragile economy’s ability to reinvest its resource wealth into education, health and agriculture; to champion regional security when we’re risking a generation of economic refugees with few job prospects at home and an in-fighting government.

“We’re more concerned with excuses than with fronting up and admitting to ripping off Timor-Leste — again.”

Eureka Street is a publication of the Australian Jesuits and is a vibrant online journal of analysis, commentary and reflection on current issues in the worlds of politics, religion and culture.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

COMMENTARY: By Scott Waide in Lae

Just into the fourth month of 2019, and resource projects in Papua New Guinea have come under scrutiny.

Early last month, senior ministers of government, including Petroleum Minister Fabian Pok, traveled to Komo in Hela for meetings with landowners of the gas project.

After 15 years, there is some progress. Or at least that’s the positive spin to it.

READ MORE: O’Neill loses in high stakes battle for control of US$1.4b PNGSDP

There appears to be some indication that royalties locked away due to legal battles and tangled by bureaucratic red tape were going to be paid – but only after landowner identification processes.

Finance Minister James Marape told the media three months ago, that K300 million (NZ$132 million) is parked at the Central Bank ready to be released. But landowners or people claiming to be landowners had to follow a process of “landowner identification” in order to be paid the money.

There is some hope of an end to disputes. However, the final settlement is still a long way off. That’s the reality. Many of the elders died waiting for the royalty payments they were promised.

Since becoming a new province, there is still a lot that needs to be ironed out. The Hela provincial government still has to work its way through layers of bureaucratic processes that continue to favour the Southern Highlands in terms of royalty payments from the gas project.

It’s all that and a lot more.

Background to complexities
Understanding the background to the complexities of the resource project in Hela means going back some 20 years when oil extraction ended and the promise of Papua New Guinea becoming the Saudi Arabia and Dubai of the Pacific faded as the crude oil taps shut off.

It is against that backdrop that the neighbouring Enga province is now looking at the Porgera mine’s renegotiation through a wardens’ hearing. This is a process that is reopened after the end of a mining lease.

Landowners and the Enga provincial government are looking at a bigger slice of revenues and benefits.

What did they get over the last 30 years? That’s a point of contention for pro-mining and anti-mining proponents.

What is visible to the international community is the campaigns against alleged atrocities committed against local people in Porgera and the desperate push by locals to get what little crumbs they can from a mine that has existed for 30 years on their land.

For the first time in more than three decades, it appears the national government is speaking a different language: One that calls for greater benefits into government coffers and landowner pockets.

This rhetoric has come after 30 years of gold extraction, 500 shipments of liquefied natural gas and billions of dollars worth of round log exports.

Production-based tax
In Lae, during the opening of the Central Bank’s Currency Processing Facility, Deputy Prime Minister Charles Abel talked about a production-based tax. Instead of a profit-based tax for resource projects which will be signed from 2019 onwards.

The general thinking from the national government is that a profits based tax can be deceptive leaving the government with very little to collect if a mining company declares losses or breaks even.

While Porgera discusses mine benefits, a similar process is happening in Madang. Triggered by an agreement between the Chinese and the PNG Governments, Ramu Nickel’s expansion is in discussions ongoing between the government and the developer.

The processes are long and drawn out. The risk is that without proper representation, landowners could be left with another raw deal for several more decades before another opportunity for renegotiation presents itself.

Scott Waide’s blog columns are frequently published by Asia Pacific Report with permission. He is also EMTV deputy news editor based in Lae.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

This week New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern concluded her first bilateral with China’s two top leaders President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang and ended with clear signals the two countries are poised to build on the $30billion two-way trade relationship.

But there was more to this bilateral meeting than simply New Zealand – a comparatively small South Pacific economy – solidifying a progressive trade relationship with a global economic superpower. There were significant signals given by both state leaders involving multilateralism and a vision for a non-fossil-fuel future.

For more on this, listen to Radio New Zealand’s The Panel where Selwyn Manning joined Verity Johnson and Wallace Chapman to discuss the NZ-PRC bilateral (On fossil fuels + NZ-PRC’s Relationship )

***

As Ardern said: “We also discussed our shared interest in strengthening the international rules-based order and on climate change, as an issue of global importance.” As such, both New Zealand and the People’s Republic of China indicated significant stances in foreign policy terms.

Firstly, the reference to “international rules-based order” appears a signal that New Zealand Government would support China in principle should it seek recourse through World Trade Organisation rules when countering any escalation of the United States/China trade war. The WTO, and other multilateral bodies such as the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, are central to New Zealand’s independent foreign policy. There’s consistency here. New Zealand simply cannot support the alternative, unilateralism, even when disestablishment threats against multilateral bodies are being pitched by New Zealand’s most significant security partner, the United States.

This is a diplomatic delicacy, a courageous statement, that Ardern was willing to deliver.

On numerous occasions this year United States’ President Donald Trump warned that his administration would abandon the WTO should it not reform and emerge with a trade-rules framework that embraces US trade interests. Trump’s threats also signalled how his Administration would track further toward isolationist-unilateralism should China object to any abuses to WTO rules and international trade law.

You can expect that the US Embassy was busy overnight filing its briefing to Washington DC.

Secondly, China included a gutsy clause in the NZ-China Joint Climate Change Statement that was issued by both Premier Li and Prime Minister Ardern after their meeting.

The PRC and NZ stated: “Both sides recognise the importance of the reform of fossil fuel subsidies, which will bring both economic and environmental benefits, thereby supporting their shared global commitment to sustainable development.”

The idea of abandoning fossil fuel subsidies was first advanced by Jacinda Ardern at her first APEC leaders’ summit shortly after becoming prime minister. There, at APEC, she argued on a panel consisting of herself and the vice chair of Exxon Mobil that fossil fuel subsidies ought to be abandoned – that governments should cease subsidising fossil fuel industries and channel their economies toward developing a future free of fossil fuel carbon emissions.

Clearly, the PRC heard her message and was ready to signal support for it as an ideal. This is a win for Ardern. It is also a respectful acknowledgement that the Asia Pacific’s economic superpower rates her as a significant leader on the global stage.

Additionally, the clause also indicates China – in a week where reliable PMI figures showed it in a very favourable space – that it is confident that its future lies less with the old technologies that assisted the development of today’s western economies and more with the new-tech solutions to global economic development.

The USA will be aware that this move signals that China sees itself as more advanced in the area of AI, machine learning, alternative energy transportation and development than its European and United States counterparts.

Ardern has demonstrated how important it is to meet with significant powers face to face. At such bilaterals, she can offer respect and determination while her counterparts observe her honest, trustworthy, progressive no-nonsense leadership in action.

New Zealand will be the beneficiary of this approach: Ardern said: “I also raised with President Xi the importance New Zealand places on upgrading and modernising our Free Trade Agreement with China – an ambition that he shared.”

Both states have agreed to progress our trade relationship well beyond the current record levels of two-way trade (currently at $30b per annum).

With Premier Li, Ardern said: “We discussed the FTA upgrade, and agreed to hold the next round of negotiations soon and to make joint efforts towards reaching an agreement as soon as possible.

“We also discussed China’s Belt and Road Initiative, noting that the Minister for Trade and Export Growth, David Parker, would lead a business delegation to the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing in April. This will help identify opportunities for mutually beneficial and transparent cooperation so we can complete a work plan as soon as possible.

“I reiterated to Premier Li that New Zealand welcomes all high quality foreign investment that will bring productive economic growth to our country.”

This latter point deserves some caution. China has expressed interest in furthering infrastructure investment within New Zealand – including investments that could be argued are contrary to New Zealand’s strategic interests, into the dairy and primary diversification sectors. While any New Zealand Government ought to proceed with caution here, if our diplomatic trade-negotiation team is buoyed by the country’s new leadership style, then perhaps mutual beneficial ventures can advance beyond a Joint Climate Change Statement.

PS: While in Beijing, the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern also invited President Xi for a State visit to New Zealand as part of New Zealand’s hosting of APEC in 2021.

By Rahul Bhattarai

Greenpeace executive director Russel Norman praised the “people power” that gained an important victory in the “oil war” when the Rainbow Warrior docked in Auckland yesterday for a week-long visit.

The Greenpeace environmental flagship was welcomed by about 200 people – including some original crew members – on the first leg of its seven-week “Making Oil History” tour of New Zealand after arriving at Matauri Bay on Sunday.

“It brings a tingle down the spine to see the Rainbow Warrior return to the port of Auckland” where the original Rainbow Warrior was bombed by French secret agents on July 10, 1985, killing photographer Fernando Pereira,” Dr Norman said.

READ MORE: The Rainbow Warrior itinerary in NZ

“It’s about celebrating the people power movement in Aotearoa which was able successfully to put pressure and build a movement to support a government that wanted to end issuing new exploration permits for oil and gas,” Dr Norman told the crowd.

“And that’s a very, very important victory, and it’s a victory that was only possible because of people power.”

-Partners-

New Zealanders from north to south had come out to rally and protest against offshore exploration for oil and gas.

“Iwi and hapu came out to the beaches and in front of seismic testing vessels to stop and confront the oil industry,” he said.

“That was an epic struggle, mostly successful in ending new offshore exploration permits for oil and gas”.

But it was not yet entirely finished business, said Dr Norman.

The struggle needed to go on.

Hilari Anderson (from left), David Robie, Trevor Darville, Margaret Mills and Susie Newborn at the welcome for the Rainbow Warrior on Princes Wharf yesterday. Image: Del Abcede/PMC

The crowd included two original Rainbow Warrior crew members, Hilari Anderson and Susie Newborn, relief cook Margaret Mills on the ship at the time of the bombing and author and journalist David Robie, who travelled on board for the Rongelap Atoll voyage and wrote Eyes Of Fire.

The tour was “not only remembering about the past and the great victory in terms of nuclear testing in the Pacific and nuclear-free New Zealand”, it was about the continuing people power struggle, said Dr Norman.

The Rainbow Warrior will be open for public viewing on Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner Amanda Larsson said events would be hosted on board the ship to inform the public about what New Zealand’s energy transition might look like.

After Auckland, the Rainbow Warrior will sail to Whangaparaoa Bay in the eastern Bay of Plenty and to the East Coast to pay respects for the work the community has done.

Larsson said the ship would then go to Wellington for another event with politicians exploring the future of energy in New Zealand.

After Wellington, the ship will sail to Kaikoura where it will document wildlife.

The campaign ship will also visit Lyttelton and Dunedin.

The last leg will be to Stewart Island before heading for Australia to protest against oil companies’ offshore exploration plans in the Great Australian Bight.

Don McGlashan singing “Anchor Me” at the welcome for the Rainbow Warrior yesterday. Video clip: Del Abcede/PMC

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Glenn Banks and Martyn Namorong in Port Moresby

Government revenues from Papua New Guinea’s mining, oil and gas sector have essentially dried up.

With the ongoing effects of the devastating earthquake in Hela province, the eruption of election-related violence in the Southern Highlands, a significant budget shortfall, and a foreign exchange crisis driving business confidence down, the resources of the government are severely stretched… and the massively expensive APEC meeting looms in November.

In this context, the drop in government revenue from the resource sector is staggering. And accounts in significant part for the growing fiscal stress.

In 2006-2008, according to Bank of Papua New Guinea figures, the government collected more than K2 billion (NZ$0.9 billion) annually from the sector by way of taxes and dividends, on mineral exports that had just topped K10 billion (NZ$4.6 billion) for the first time.

In 2017, the figure is just K400 million (NZ$180 million) on exports of K25 billion (NZ$11.5 billion) – a revenue reduction of more than 80 percent in the same time that exports have increased by 150 percent.

Government dividends and corporate taxes made up just 1.6 percent of the value of exports in 2017 (and that was a significant increase over 2015 and 2016).

-Partners-

If we take the long-term average share of the value of exports that the government has received (at a little over 10 percent), this points to a potential ‘‘hole’’ of at least K8 billion over the past four years, an amount that would go a long way to covering the current fiscal deficit.

Some precedents
There are some precedents for the rapid drop in government revenues from the sector. In 1990 and 1991 – just as the ‘‘resources boom’’ triggered by the Porgera gold mine and oil production at the Kutubu oilfield began – revenues collapsed, largely due to the closure of the Bougainville copper mine in 1989; and again, briefly in 2009 due to the onset of the global financial crisis in 2008.

But neither of these has been as deep or as sustained as the current hole.

A full explanation of the precipitous decline in resource revenues is beyond the scope of this analysis.

Clearly, a number of factors are involved, including a fall in commodity prices, major construction and expansion costs (which attract accelerated depreciation provisions) and generous tax deals.

The revenue dry-up of the past four years also reveals that the state bears a disproportionate share of the risks associated with resource projects and investments. If we go back to the original intent of the post-Independence mineral policy, it was to translate mineral wealth into broad-based development across the whole country:
“…known mineral resources should be developed for the revenue they can provide to the government” (PNG Department of Finance 1977: 2).

This clearly has not happened in the last four years. And certainly the Treasurer cannot be critiqued for commissioning yet another fiscal review: this seems appropriate, although whether it effectively addresses broader issues of a “fair share” of mineral wealth remaining in PNG remains to be seen.

While there is much less money coming from the resources sector, there is at least better data than there used to be. The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) is a global initiative begun in 2002 to give transparency to what were regarded as often opaque flows of resource revenues from multinational companies in the extractives sector (especially oil) to the state in the countries in which they were operating.

Voluntary initiative
It is a voluntary initiative in which countries (and companies) can elect to become a “candidate” country, and so long as they are able to be compliant with EITI standards, they can be admitted as a full member of EITI.

The key requirement is to be able to report in a reliable way (through third party audits) on the revenues paid by companies, and reconcile these with payments received by the different arms of the state.

The involvement of all parties – companies, governments and civil society – and public communication around the event and its products is also seen as central to both transparency and raising awareness of the nature of resource revenues and their destination.

Papua New Guinesa initiated its involvement in EITI in 2012. Four annual EITI reports have so far been produced (for the years 2013 to 2016). These reports provide an increasingly rigorous and transparent set of data on flows from the sector to the government, and identify additional revenue streams to the government than what BPNG use (and have used for the past 40 years).

When all the additional revenue streams that EITI identify are included, the total share of the value of mineral exports rises to around 6.5 percent for 2017, up from the 1.6 percent based on the BPNG data.

EITI is not without its problems and the most recent PNG country report identifies areas where it needs to be strengthened in PNG, and a focus on companies rather than operations can lead to the obfuscation of total flows and payments from each mine, oil and gasfield.

In the PNG context, an examination of the sub-national flows and audit trails is also significant, and an initial study into this is underway.

This article was originally published in the PNG Post-Courier.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Timor-Leste’s parliamentary elections on May 12 have returned Xanana Gusmao to the Government Palace in Dili in an alliance that gives him enough votes to govern in his own right.

While Gusmao has won an election held only 10 months after the July 2017 poll, his CNRT (Party for Timorese Reconstruction Party) lost to FRETILIN (Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor) in the earlier election, albeit by a small margin. This forced him into an alliance with sometime rivals to secure the latest poll.

This suggests the people of Timor-Leste trust him, but they are not so happy with his previous government.

Timor-Leste voters sent a wake-up call to their leaders in the recent election. They are asking that the leaders, and most importantly, Gusmao, to continue governing but change their ways.

This all comes after a decade of high level government spending fueled by oil and gas riches. But questions remain. Has Timor-Leste gotten value for their money? Has the government’s spending priorities reflected the wishes and needs of ordinary Timorese voters?

Gusmao is seen as a leader with historical legitimacy, a man who has brought many good things to Timor-Leste since independence.

He resolved the 2006 political crisis, albeit despite being complicit in precipitating it, compensated petitioners, gave pensions to the veterans, initiated the beginnings of a social safety net for the poor, brought rural businesses into the private sector, brought electricity to the villages, and made many other positive changes.

Maritime victory
Most recently he won a victory for Timor-Leste’s maritime sovereignty with a boundary agreement with Australia although some see the deal as rushed for political expediency ahead of the recent poll.

But, there are complaints that the new government needs to address, and do so quickly in the first year of the new AMP (Alliance of Change and Progress) government.

Firstly, trust must be restored in the country’s leadership and to do that the lifetime pension for politicians needs to end. Office holders must likewise be held accountable through an annual declaration of assets.

Any forms of corruption must be stamped out among the country’s politicians and civil servants.

The people think, rightly, that leaders seek positions in order to make big salaries and look after themselves. Salaries and benefits need to be cut to reasonable levels. If the leaders give up benefits and stop corrupt activities then only then can the leaders ask people to work hard, sweat, and build a better country.

Secondly, the government must strengthen anti-corruption laws and pursue corruptors at all levels in Timorese society, from the remotest mountain village to Government Palace.

Looking ahead, Timor-Leste needs to move beyond its reliance on oil and gas and the government needs to prioritize the needs of the people who also need to become a community that can create wealth rather than just consume it.

Fund getting smaller
The Petroleum Fund was large but it is getting smaller and it will not last forever. Revenues from it could cease as early as 2026.

After ten years the country has built many things, but not enough for the land, human resources and environment. It is no small feat required of the people. We need to change focus.

Timorese are an agricultural people and it is a strength that needs to be prioritised and improved. More resources must be driven into building up the agricultural productivity and diversification. Funds need to be allocated to improving our farmers’ skills and their output so they can move from subsistence agriculture to agri-business.

Ordinary Timorese are not educated enough. Millions and millions have been spent on government scholarships to build the skills of technical experts, but the chiLdren have been left behind. The primary, secondary and tertiary educational institutions are underfunded and under prioritised.

The country would rather pay high tuition fees for international universities than improve the education of the 10-year-olds. This needs to stop or there will be a generation of Timorese who cannot contribute to the nation.

The country must change ways in the education sector to protect the future. School feeding programmes need improvement: a hungry child is not a child that can learn well.

The health of the people is poor, they are eating too much sugar and drinking too much beer. Timor-Leste need to dramatically improve public and preventative healthcare. The voters are asking for it.

Better health care
Rural clinics are an embarrassment. The country would rather send the rich and leaders to hospitals in Indonesia and Singapore than improve the standards of the children’s healthcare. It is not right nor is it wise. There can be no prosperity without good healthcare.

Timor-Leste needs to focus on its people in the rural areas. They need improved electricity access, improved rural roads, water and sanitation facilities. Improving these important assets will improve the ability of farmers and rural people to do business, the healthcare standards of people in the mountains and for schools to be where they should.

For sure, highways airports and bridges are important, but there needs to be a refocus on rural communities and their basic infrastructure needs such as water and sanitation.

About 65 percent of Timorese live next to or within sight of the sea. Timor-Leste has been negotiating maritime boundaries with Indonesia and managing new boundaries with Australia. With these boundaries come opportunities and challenges.

Future oil and gas resources need to be protected and developed very carefully. The fisheries can and should be an important source of sustainable income for Timorese for generations to come. The sea can also attract tourists to the coastal regions.

If Timor-Leste can protect and enhance its coastlines, tourists will be enticed to the villages creating jobs and income in a sustainable manner. But the sea can also bring problems. Rising sea levels, disasters, and smuggling. A coordinating ministry of maritime affairs is needed, just as Indonesia has done.

Again, there is much the Timorese need to do and they need to begin work today. The country just needs a trustworthy government to lead the way.

Jose Belo is an investigative journalist, publisher of Tempo Semanal and a commentator based in Dili, Timor-Leste. This article was first published by UCA News.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Kendall Hutt in Auckland

In 2010, gas exploration in Australia’s Northern Rivers region of New South Wales sparked protest and rallied a community into becoming a broad-based social movement.

The exploration by Sydney-based company Metgasco faced a five-year long opposition from the community of Bentley, where a 2km deep well was to be drilled on an old dairy property.

Several weeks before the planned drilling operation in 2014, thousands set up camp on a neighbouring property in a protest which made headlines and was dubbed the Bentley Blockade.

The blockade is the subject of multi award-winning feature-length documentary The Bentley Effect.

“The documentary chronicles my community’s response to the threat of unconventional gas mining and the industrialisation it brings.

“Although gas mining is the vehicle, it’s more about what community can do when it comes together.

“In this case, the community drew a line in the sand, came together en masse and said ‘No we don’t want to live in a gas field’.

Power of community
“It’s an inspiring celebration of the power of community,” says director Brendan Shoebridge.

Shoebridge has been in New Zealand since late September screening his documentary across the country.

He spoke to Asia Pacific Report ahead of the documentary’s last screening in Auckland at an event organised by Greenpeace, 350 Aotearoa and Fossil Free UoA.

Shoebridge said he hoped the spirit behind The Bentley Effect inspired a similar stand in New Zealand.

“New Zealand’s unique and precious beauty holds a special place in everyone’s hearts and I’m hoping the film will inspire local audiences to keep it safe and pure,” he said.

Asked why this was the case, Shoebridge told Asia Pacific Report it was due to “massive threats” to the country and its “brand”.

These threats included prospecting by New Zealand Oil and Gas in a massive gas field more than 60km off the coast of Oamaru and proposed oil and gas exploration off the coasts of Canterbury and Taranaki in the habitats of endangered Hector’s dolphins and blue whales.

Risk versus profit
“Really the last thing we need is more methane and another fossil fuel industry.

“Locals here have to ask the question ‘Who is going to bear the risk and who is going to take the profit?’ These are the questions we all have to start asking,” he said.

However, Shoebridge said New Zealand’s response to the documentary had been “fantastic” and it seemed to resonate with Kiwi audiences.

“New Zealand has a rich, proud heritage of protest.

“There is so many examples of successful non-violent civil disobedience.

“I think the story really does resonate quite powerfully here” he said.

Shoebridge said The Bentley Effect built on the threat posed by natural gas exploration in Josh Fox’s 2010 documentary Gasland.

Bentley Effect ‘solution’
The Bentley Effect not only showed the problem of exploration, it showed what the world could do about it, he explained.

“What viewers will see is a social movement from start to finish.

“It’s on a smaller, localised scale but what was achieved was a fully-fledged social movement, a broad-based social movement which involved everybody, all walks of life.

“Audiences can see for themselves how people mobilise. How ordinary, everyday people took a lead and made massive contributions in their own way.

“That was a key aim in showcasing what happened in Bentley – communities aren’t powerless, they can push back on these things.”

Shoebridge said at the time of the blockade, 50 wells had already been drilled.

However, due to the broad-based social movement’s opposition, Shoebridge said, the State Government was not prepared to pay the political price, despite earlier being “hell-bent” on pushing its gas plan through.

Exploration licences suspended
In May 2014 the State Government suspended Metgasco’s gas exploration licence and in October 2015 it bought back petroleum exploration licences covering more than 500,000 hectares across the Northern Rivers region.

“To get that overturned and those wells decommissioned and the licences removed was a real achievement,” Shoebridge said.

Shoebridge said Bentley’s stand against big business and its own government had set an “amazing” precedent in the war against natural gas.

“I think a lot of communities around the world will draw strength from what was achieved” he said.

Bentley’s story was also “universal”, Shoebridge said, as similar battles were happening across the globe.  

“These battles are happening everywhere and they’re playing out on all sorts of different fronts, but it’s essentially the same battle.

“When people come and see the film, I think they are drawing a lot of strength and probably seeing that the same strategies can be superimposed onto any of our battles, whether it’s the fight for clean water against big dairy, 1080, fluoridation, or logging.”

Youth involvement key
Shoebridge said a “big chunk” of the solution in battling such environmental and social injustice issues was people taking a lead with their skill set in their landscape.

“I think if everyone did that we’d smash our problems pretty quickly.”

Youth have a particular role in “smashing” problems in a world where political will on “climate chaos” was lacking, Shoebridge added.

“From our experience politicians don’t respond to education they only respond to pressure.

“That’s where the youth can come in. They can talk from the heart and talk about what it feels like to have your future robbed from you.

“Naturally the youth are going to feel varying degrees of despair and powerlessness, but we can’t afford to give up hope and we mustn’t.

“Anything that tops up their tanks and inspires meaningful action is a good thing,” Shoebridge said.

Although his work is largely about hope, Shoebridge warned the world needed to come together in order to face the “tough times” ahead.

“I know we all have to start thinking in terms of a global village rather than national borders because we’re all in this together and we’re all going to pay the same price if we don’t meet those challenges.”

The Bentley Effect screens tomorrow 4pm to 7pm at LibB28 at the University of Auckland and includes a Q+A with Shoebridge and key members of the documentary.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The majority of shareholders approve ExxonMobil Corporation’s takeover of InterOil in Papua New Guinea. Image: EMTV

Papua New Guinea’s InterOil shareholders agree to ExxonMobil acquisition; gender-based violence stakeholders condemn GBV deaths; and Sirinum Dam closure soon to affect Port Moresby residents are the headlines in the latest EMTV News.

InterOil Corporation announced that the majority of shareholders had “overwhelmingly approved” the acquisition of the company by ExxonMobil Corporation, LNG Industry reports.

The company claims that more than 91 percent of the votes were cast in favour of the proposed transaction.

The acquisition is worth kina 7 billion (about NZ$3.05 billion), reports EM TV.

On 21 September 2016, just 80 percent voted to approve the original transaction in a special meeting.

In the statement, InterOil claims that the court hearing in which InterOil is seeking a final order over the Amended and Restated Plan of Arrangement is currently scheduled for next week on February 20.

InterOil is an independent oil and gas business, which has a sole focus on Papua New Guinea.

The company’s assets include Elk-Antelope – one of Asia’s largest and undeveloped gas fields – in the Gulf Province, as well as exploration licences covering approximately 16,000 sq km.

The company’s main offices are in Port Moresby and Singapore.

InterOil Corporation