The
truth: Taurama Valley pilot project
I
WRITE to counter some of the misleading statements made by a Concerned Resident
of Taurama Pilot Project area on July 11 in The National newspaper in response
to my July 8 article.
I
believe Concerned Resident is attempting to justify or legitimise his residency
in a declared pilot project area. He and others can stay, but all the Office of
Urbanisation is attempting to do is make it a planned and serviced formal urban
suburb so he can be a proud city resident and not turn his environment into a
slum.
Concerned
Resident is claiming that the project started in 2000. I have taken out a paid
advertisement detailing all the activities that took place, including the dates,
so that everyone can appreciate that customary land development is not as easy
as Concerned Resident would like to have us believe.
The
National Consultative Committee on Urbanisation (NCCU) had its first meeting in
August 2003 and Office of Urbanisation (after its organisation structure was
approved) was formally in place with a skeleton staff of five in June 2004.
There
was no NCCU in 2000. There was no Office of Urbanisation in 2000. There was no
Max Kep as chairman or director or any other person as director or chairman of
such entities in 2000.
If
these institutions were in existence 14 years ago engaged in developing the
Taurama project, things would certainly be different. Concerned Resident would
not have been there to sabotage our genuine endeavour with a project aimed at
helping a marginalised people.
In
truth, the Taurama Valley Pilot Project was selected in 2007 and formally
launched in March 2008 by then deputy prime minister and minister for lands and
physical planning Sir Puka Temu and then minister for community development and
Moresby South MP Dame Carol Kidu.
The
billboard with the project concept was erected in 2009 after formal planning
approval was granted by the NCD physical planning board. The unveiling of the billboard
took place amid protest by the landowners as depicted in the inserted picture
in the July 11 article by Concerned Resident. The protest coming from potential
beneficiaries of the project was bewildering. From thereon, the project was
under threat from within the clans from the project site.
A
surveyor was engaged to undertake boundary surveys after the erection of the
billboard. His work was restrained by the landowners who were against the project.
Police were engaged throughout the duration of the survey at great additional
cost. The Taurama Incorporated Land Group’s office was constructed in 2011. The
contractor is being pursued to complete the office.
Several
workshops, seminars and awareness programs were conducted involving national leaders
like Sir Puka, Dame Carol, Dr Webster, Dr Yala, Mr Warvi, the NLDP manager, the
civil registry, the Office of Urbanisation, Motu-Koitabu village leaders like Rev
Dick Avi, Rabura Aiga, Eli Temu and Babani Maraga. It is therefore not a lack
of awareness that placed the pilot project under the current mess.
It
is people like Concerned Resident who found it right to invade the project area
and by making themselves residents, have been responsible for sabotaging the project’s
smooth finish.
The
greed and selfishness of some members of the landowning clans by selling their
land have also been a detrimental factor in the development of Taurama Valley.
The
reasoning that the Office of Urbanisation was slow and dragged its feet, giving
legitimacy for the invasion of the area by Concerned Resident is simply pathetic.
Taurama
Valley Pilot Project is a unique project. This means there are no similar experiences
elsewhere in the world to emulate. Most countries do not even have anything
called customary land.
PNG
can be proud that land is still with the people under customary tenure. In such
a scenario, the concept of developing customary land on the urban fringes is about
creating wealth for customary landowners, not for invasion by the people with
money.
Taurama
project was ambitious. We were certain that it would generate substantial
instant income for the landowning clans and long-term sustainability through
lease rentals for their land. A total of 1700 serviced allotments at a minimum
K200,000 per block would become a sizeable income. These allotments could have fetched
even more when compared to the adjacent East Boroko area which have been going
for K1 million a block. This opportunity was to be created for the three recognised
landowning groups; the Vamaga, the Vaga and Sere Guba for claims 68, 45 and 67
respectively.
Many
Motu-Koitabu people have been heard airing their grievances about how their
land was sold cheaply to the State during colonial times as was the case
everywhere in PNG towns. One would imagine that the bitter past would likely
have taught important lessons for all customary landowners not to sell land at
all. The land selling we are experiencing within the Taurama pilot project area
is unprecedented and simply unbelievable.
The
people selling land are the culprits who have engineered the sabotage of the
project. What is worse than the selling of land is the element of betrayal – the
betrayal of their clans, their families and the future generations by those
trusted as custodians. The future generations will no longer have a land
because their present custodians have decided to make few quick bucks. These
very people selling land will be the ones licking their wounds and hanging
their heads in shame when the land they sold is difficult to retrieve.
The
success of creating wealth for landowners depends very much on how solid the partnership
is between the urban customary landowners and government. It requires genuine
commitment and cooperation at all stages of the project development. When one
cannot get undivided cooperation, projects such as Taurama suffer. In such
circumstance, one cannot blame an insignificant office like the Office of
Urbanisation. If at all, it should be recognised for taking on the challenge on
urbanisation and complex land development issues.
I
am proud to have contributed to PNG’s progress in more ways than Concerned Resident
would ever know. The promotion of urbanisation policy and program to the
national forefront and the messy customary land development are examples of the
tasks I have taken head-on.
As
chairman of the industrial arbitration, I have also been responsible for putting
to rest industrial relations disputes for a long time from what the country was
facing 15 years ago. Have you ever wondered why industrial relations scene in
PNG is still peaceful today?
The
“Why Regulate Taurama Now?” heading suggests that the Office of Urbanisation
and NCCU abandoned the project area and by doing so that it will legitimise Concerned
Resident’s residency there.
I
don’t think the majority of the landowners of the project area will agree to this
suggestion. What I know is that they will be opting to get their land title under
the revised ILGs for the whole area. And they will be opting for all those in
the project area to cooperate with their three ILGs. I also know that they will
be asking the project area residents to formalise their residency with the
ILGs. So Concerned Resident needs to be aware of these requirements and create awareness
among his fellow residents.
MAX
KEP
Director
Office
of Urbanisation