 Hello and welcome to this event from the Lowy Institutes Australia Papua Beginning Network. My name's Anne-Marie O'Keefe and I'm a non-resident fellow here at the Institute, except of course today we're not at the Institute because of the social distancing requirements of COVID. But I'd like to begin by acknowledging you and people who are the traditional custodians of the land on which I am speaking today, which is not Sydney, it's the far south coast of New South Wales. And I'd like to pay my respects to the UN elders past and present of this beautiful part of Australia. I'd also like to thank the sponsors of the Australia P&G Network Events Programme for 2020. That's the Bank of South Pacific or BSP as most of us know it by and Coca-Cola Amital. The Institute also appreciates very much the support of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for the Australia P&G Network Project. Very happy that you could join us today and we're going to be talking about the strange times in which both our countries find ourselves along with the rest of the world. P&G and Australia, like the rest of the world, are facing an extraordinary time as we tackle COVID-19. Here in Australia, we are now behind a closed border with few exemptions. P&G has implemented strict requirements for anyone wanting to enter. And while only a handful of kilometres separate our two countries, we don't know when we might be able to resume the sort of economic, diplomatic, family, tourism, all the sorts of interactions we had and just took for granted only six months ago. Fortunately, both Australia and P&G have suffered significantly less than almost anywhere else in the world. But it's not over. And here in Australia, we are dealing with flare-ups, while in P&G, it's steady as she goes, but for now. How has this shared crisis affected our bilateral relationship? We're going to look ahead today and see what lessons might have come out of COVID for our shared future. What should our bilateral priorities be? To talk about this, I'm very pleased to welcome two very experienced hands in the P&G-Australia relationship. First, I'd like to introduce Sir Charles Lopani, who served as P&G's High Commissioner to Australia from 2005 to 2017. He's also one of the original gang of four who helped establish the administration of the newly independent P&G nation. Also with us is Ian Chemich, former High Commissioner to Port Moresby and former ambassador to Germany, as well as international advisor to the Prime Minister. Ian is now an advisor with Newcrest Mining and the Bauer Group Asia, and also, like me, a non-resident fellow at the Lowey Institute. Before we start just a bit of housekeeping, I'll lead the discussion, actually I'll be putting some tricky questions to Ian and John, until about half past 11, and then we'll be opening the floor to questions from our audience. We'll be using the Zoom Q&A function to do this, so press the button on your screen and type the question you'd like us to answer. So to get our discussion started, I'd like to sort of take a broad view of how things are going with the bilateral relationship between our two countries. And it's coincidental but probably fortunate that both governments are in the process of negotiating a new bilateral agreement, namely a comprehensive strategic and economic partnership, and that's to boost engagement across a range of issues, including security, cooperation, trade, investment, regional development, etc. So to open up, I'd like to find or like to ask Charles first, if you don't mind, what do you see as the priorities that such a strategic partnership should be looking at? What can we draw from the COVID experience that should influence the way in which we move forward? I think the important area of focus could be realigning Australia's aid to supporting trade and investment and economic focus for both countries. While aid has played historically a very important part of Papua New Guinea's development and our partnership, I think to realign Australia's aid to supporting initiatives towards, for instance, a trilateral arrangement of an economic zone between Indonesia, Australia and Papua New Guinea to start off with. At the moment, there's a focus for sub-regional arrangement in Pesa Plus. I think Papua New Guinea has not been fully on board with that for a while. I'm not sure whether they have come around, but it is, we have come around, but it is a contentious area for Papua New Guinea. So my suggestion is we focus on a sub-region of APEC regional organization, which is Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Australia, and of course New Zealand could be in there. Market size would be viable. Australia has established the North Australia Development Programme project with a funding of around 500 million. That needs to be progressed because that would provide a good linkage for Papua New Guinea and Indonesia to enter activities in the marketplace for whatever development that might arise from that. So I think, essentially, while the Development Assistance Programme on aid has been the backbone of our bilateral relations, I think to start refocusing because with the pandemic, there are views that globalization may falter going forward. So sub-regional arrangements may be the first step to reconstruct and align our economic activities and arrangements and partnerships here. Thank you. Thanks very much, Sir Charles. Ian, what views do you have on this? Look, the first thing I would say is that I believe that the cooperation between Australia and Papua New Guinea through the pandemic so far has actually been very positive, very practical. It hasn't just been about support for the PNG system. There's been a genuine exchange of information between the two governments. And our experience together has been, in the circumstances, it's been okay. PNG benefits from the fact that Australia has, notwithstanding the issues in Victoria have been relatively successful itself in managing the pandemic so far. But I must say, I think PNG's management of the situation has been commendable. As we move forward, going to the core of your questions, we move forward and think about the relationship through this and post the crisis. Yes, we should be thinking in an immediate way about what this teaches us about the importance of cooperation in the health sector. But beyond that, we're going to need a joint regional plan with genuine regional ownership when it comes to economic recovery for the Pacific. And I think Australia and Papua New Guinea will need to work very closely in that sense. As Sir Charles has said, there are existing arrangements, APEC, there's scope there with PACE or PLUS to provide a vehicle for that recovery plan. But look, when it comes to the economic and strategic relationship, I very much trust that it will be genuinely strategic. You mentioned in introducing me that I'd also been ambassador in Germany. And you reminded me of a point. When I sat in Berlin representing one developed economy to another very major developed economy, when we thought about the bilateral relationship, it wasn't just about the point-to-point relationship, it was what we could do together elsewhere. In the German case, it was what Australian Germany could do in places like Afghanistan or joined up work in the region. That's a genuinely strategic relationship. And it's that kind of mindset that I think needs to be brought to the relationship between Australia and PNG. There is scope, there is scope in the region for us to work together on common interests that aren't necessarily about that point-to-point relationship. PNG has exercised some influence in the region in the past. You think about the Ramsey contribution in Solomon Islands. When I was high commissioner, PNG had a couple of people with UN deployments in Sudan. And there is something in that. And I think it should start in the region. And to me, it's logical that it should start with an economic recovery plan for the region. Good. Staying with you, Ian, I wanted to move on to geostrategic competition in the region and particularly how it affects the bilateral relationship. As we know, the Pacific step-up is one of Australia's highest foreign policy priorities. And while the Australian government insists that the step-up responds to broad-ranging challenges of our region, and there's no doubt that that's true. Challenges such as climate change, disaster resilience, economic growth, as you've just mentioned, perhaps the need to have a joint regional plan for economic recovery. But it's also been seen by quite a range of commentators and observers, including here at the Lowy Institute, that it's seen as Australia's response to what it sees as a growing geostrategic competition in the region, particularly from China. Within the P&G context, this has played out in a number of ways. We saw that in what I called the bidding competition in the lead-up to APEC between Australia and China, supporting P&G and its ability to host APEC. And we've seen it more recently with Australia's investment in coal-sea cable. How healthy, Ian, is this competition for Australia's relationship with P&G? Look, as somebody who, like Charles, has been a very strong believer in the bilateral relationship and a very strong believer in the importance of Canberra, really focusing on the union. I strongly welcome the step-up engagement. I think it's real. I think it's genuine. I think it's taken practical form. The motivations, people can speculate about that, but I prefer to think of it very much as reflecting an assessment of the importance of the region. If there's some motivation associated with other players, then fine by me. But I think let's take it on its merits. I also think P&G is entirely entitled to diversify its own external links. I think that it's inevitable that a growing China will look at investing more strategically and economically in places like P&G, given its wealth of resources. Interesting thing is not much is actually eventuated in the China-P&G relationship since all the hoopla of APEC 2018, in my view. There hasn't been that much to it. The China relationship has been held up on many occasions in the past as the next big thing. We all remember the Look North policies of previous administrations. To me, it's not a zero-sum game. Australia needs to work positively with China and P&G. Australia has its own bilateral imperatives in Beijing. There's some precedent for trilateral cooperation. There's been a solid program in anti-malaria work in the past. I think if Australians are true friends of Papua Guinea and we are, we'll find a positive way to engage China there. I think in P&G, Charles should say, but I think while there's an opportunity to play one off against the other, there's really very little interest in P&G in my estimation in getting rolled up in a major geostrategic competition there. As for China, why would it want to work with us in P&G? Well, I do think it will, at some point, need to reevaluate its own aggressive diplomacy at a global level. It's experiencing tensions right across the world right now. Its own experience with investment in P&G has not always been an entirely happy one. So I think there's plenty of reasons for all of us to work together in a trilateral way. So Charles? Yes, I do endorse Ian's comments that Papua Guinea is of course sovereign nation. It decides who it will partnership, partner with in terms of development, but it does, it does bring to focus the potential for strategic security concerns that may flow on to Papua Guinea. We have maintained a very neutral position on this question to China and Australia because we are French to both of you. So there is no, there is the offer of a project that's really to be substantially moved forward and that is the energy project that was to be funded by, jointly by Australia, P&G, US, and Japan. That's still to be implemented that was offered to your neighbor and that was seen as a counter message to China, these activities in the region. So in the end, as Ian said, both of you, Australia and China are friends and to us there is no value in that signing with either one of you in terms of our strategic interests and our economic interests going forward. So I do endorse, you should, both should work together as far as the region is concerned. APEC provides that venue for that collaboration, economic collaboration and cooperation after COVID and we look forward to continuing that relationship. Thank you. I'd like to now move to something that both of you have raised and in particular you Sir Charles, the importance of trade and investment in P&G coming from Australia. And I guess what's happened in the past few months has created a climate that perhaps is not as welcoming as perhaps it was before. So for example, as you know earlier this year, Prime Minister Mo Ape announced that the extension to former mine would not be granted and Barrick Gold or Barrick and Guinea, the joint venture mine operator that's owned jointly by Canada's Barrick Gold Group and China's Xi Jinping mining group that had suspended production, they suspended production in April and placed the mine in care and maintenance status. And last month they denounced that it would lay off permanently more than 2,500 local mine workers as of the end of this month. Big stuff. On Monday, quite separately, the Australian listed energy producer OilSearch announced that it would wipe as much as 570 million dollars, Australian dollars off the value of its assets in P&G and could abandon some drilling projects. And this is in light of expectations that the coronavirus affected oil price collapse may not be temporary. This is all bad news for P&G's economy and in particular it creates a climate that will make investors from Australia perhaps more reluctant. What is your view, Sir Charles, on this? What do you see as this presenting for Australian investors? Well, it's a difficult position for P&G to find itself in. The Prime Minister in his statement, one of his views for underpinning this approach, this policy, is that it's a short-term pain for P&G for a long-term gain. I have grave doubts about that because investors can move around the world internationally and it will not wait for P&G in a long term. It's short-term policies seen as anti-investment in P&G. So I am very concerned also that this trend in government policy is set in a very dangerous prison for P&G's investment destination climate for foreign investment, not only for Australia but globally. Because these global companies with major investments around the world and they have a lot of say both in financing, capital flows into developing countries and international so I do share a lot of concern in the country as well by a lot of P&G's about this approach by this present government. I'm sorry to say this but I never thought P&G would get to that stage but it has happened and the consequences may be regrettable going forward. Is there anything that Australia can do to support P&G during this particular difficult time? Well Australia has done a lot to support property in these circumstances for instance the LNG project. One of the I remember a delegation of ministers coming down to seek an Exim Bank support fund that has a letter of comfort for investors and financiers to get into the LNG project. Australia under Labor government and committed 500 million of that fund. We never accessed it in the end but it was always in the background supporting this but I am not sure with this approach that Australia would be contributing to making that letter of comfort for this policy. That's my honest assessment. I'm not sure what Australia would do but I predict that two governments might have to have a bit of a chat in the end to make sure that the support to this kind of policy may that it rewards P&G as a whole. Thank you. Ian, you've got a private sector experience now post your diplomatic career. What's your take on what's happening at the moment? Thanks, I probably should disclose that in addition to the thing you mentioned I'm also vice president of the Australia P&G business council but I look I'll just give you a personal perspective. Paul Gord looks terribly messy and if you view it through the eyes of investors in major companies that are themselves engaged in P&G it just looks bad. The timing was poor. I sort of feel that advice received by government might have underestimated some of the challenges associated with transition to government ownership. I know we've got both the judicial process in P&G and the prospect of international arbitration has to be said that Barrick's most recent experience in similar arbitration was very positive for Barrick and very bad for the other country involved which was Pakistan but who knows how that will go, circumstances are different. It is about the signal it sends to the broader investment community and particularly now when companies are constrained in terms of their capital budgets they have to make even harder decisions or even more ruthless decisions but put it that way about where they put their investments. They're pulling back and where it's complicated and difficult you know it's unlikely to attract a significant investment. So I think a lot more work is needed on the messaging. Ironically it's companies that are not engaged in this particular issue at Pogra. Other companies that proportionally are more exposed to P&G than Barrick is who may be facing more difficulty in convincing their own investors in turn that their strategy of engaging with P&G is the right one and a positive one because from an investor point of view if you're a big corporate investor I don't know in New York or Europe somewhere you put together the sort of key things you without entirely understanding what's going on you put together this sort of language about take back P&G however it's made and I'm not trying to say one thing or another but that's what's preferred. You also hear about this decision and claims of lack of consultation in the process in relation to Pogra and then you you sort of see the struggles that for whatever reason people have been going through in trying to bring off new projects whether it's in oil and gas or in mine and people left with an impression. So it just puts an imperative back on P&G. Maybe Australia could help in some way but I think it is for P&G as a sovereign country to be very clear in its own messaging and in terms of consistency between external message and practice at home. Can I just add one point Anne-Marie and that is it's all up to the government as far as managing its sovereign risk very critical in terms of investment if you're looking for investment they will look at your sovereign risk and I think that those two incidents are that incident does not send out the message that P&G sovereign risk is good a good bet. And just very very quickly Anne-Marie I mean just to Charles's earlier point about that time back then in 2009 when Australia was working to support P&G as the P&G-LNG project was coming on. I don't know if we're going to have time to talk about the aid relationship but to the extent that the aid relationship is relevant and important for the future we should be taking our inspiration from that time where the development relationship was focused on a part of the P&G economy which was in itself wealth generating and which in itself laid out a future of economic independence for P&G focusing what support Australia gives in such sectors will be vital going forward. Well since you've raised the aid program let's have a look at that before we move to questions from our audience. So Australia's aid program to P&G has taken a front seat in the relationship for a very long time rightly or wrongly and the program itself this year is worth something like 512 Australian million Australian dollars and it represents the biggest aid program that Australia has anywhere. It focuses on governance economic growth and human development and right now of course it's it's had to focus very heavily on COVID response and supporting P&G in its COVID response. Looking to the future I guess my first question is given your points earlier Sir Charles about the need to focus more on trade than aid or perhaps just focus entirely on trade rather than aid should Australia continue to have an aid program to P&G and if so what should the focus be? So Charles do you want to take off with that one? Yeah well it's not going to happen dramatically that's the point it will happen over time to reduce Australia's aid and refocus on economic and investment and trade issues. So that's the first point the next point is the increasingly I think Australia is starting to target its aid so it gets the best value for its dollar and I think that's a good good good good start for going forward I think you've done a substantial amount of dissipating the value of your aid by trying to do everything in all the sectors. I think it's a good time to re-evaluate and focus on health sector is one area that Australia's aid has been very effective and very strong in all aspects infrastructure and technical assistance programs etc so I think that's that's a good start a new partnership by putting in Australia partnership for health transition to health is the initial recent initiative is a good one that's one area of expertise and it's worth about 200 million I think that you could continue in but the other component of that 520 million you raised is most most of it is on technical assistance actually I think 300 million of that 520 million is on technical assistance program which in the past has not been that effective and I think I think there is concern and realignment by Australia in that area and I think they're starting to you're starting to re-review that and realign some some of that fund towards infrastructure infrastructure is another big area that in terms of the response so to speak to China's infrastructure moves in Papua New Guinea and the Pacific I think that that also may bring some value to the to the to the dollar eight dollar that you're spending so I live it at that there is some serious consideration for realignment and that should be included I hope in the discussions between the two countries Ian as a former high commissioner what do you think about the future of Australia's aid program the reality is that the Australian aid program yes it's the biggest that Australia has it's significant in as a signal of support but if you relate the figure to the overall size of the png economy these days if you relate that figure to the size of the the size of Australian investment commercial investment in png so at 17 billion it's actually a relatively small contribution to the png economy and we Australians tend to overemphasize it in terms of its its importance in png in my view it's an important signal I would not propose giving it up at all but I do think as I mentioned earlier that it should be focused on those elements of the png economy which are wealth-generating and that it should be targeted towards png becoming genuinely economically independent so stimulating and strengthening those components of the economy that will make create wealth for png and png thanks we've reached the time where we'd like to invite the audience to put their questions forward to us all you have to do is use the q&a button on zoom and you can submit it there we have a few questions that have already lined up so I'm going to ask ask both of you to answer this question I think you're both in a position to to have have good views on it it's a question from Tim Murphy and he'd like to know how does Australia and png normalize trade and travel between the two countries now this is clearly post-covid because right now it's impossible but at least on the travel side but as we know in the past there's been issues the visa issues between Australia and png so how do we normalize going into the future trade and travel so Charles do you want to start with that one yes I think for the visa issues APAC provided excellent experience we had a magnificent effort from our immigration agency that a lot of the incoming delegates from other economies were very complimentary of the way smooth way that they can apply for their visa on the internet and get into the country but with the COVID restrictions the example that's been currently experienced is the movement of our essential your essential services staff Australians coming into power point again they still have to go through 14-day quarantine service and the power point again is returning there's been a big mobilization of effort between our foreign affairs protocol division and the immigration immigration from internationally and from Australia Papua New Guinea it's returning so the recent suggestion of a bubble for Australia and Pacific and Papua New Guinea that needs to be discussed and how to manage that within a COVID pandemic environment so I think rush in things as we can see is not a good idea while COVID is rampant internationally and within our region so it has to be carefully managed but yes there should be some consideration to movement of essential people business people technical people in the two countries so yeah the framework is here already that we can manage this thing so I think that that is important Ian do you have any views on this one look I think that the the trading relationship and the business travel relationship there's probably been a less impacted than than than many people think by COVID it is possible for Australian business people to travel in and out of PNG the company that I'm associated with and the broader council has actually found the PNG authorities very accessible very practical and in terms of its engagement with the business community take an example the new crests chief operating officer for Papua New Guinea is currently here having travelled up to PNG a couple of weeks ago yes he spent 14 days at Airways Hotel in quarantine but he's he's engaging it is we have found both governments to be honest quite the solicitude of the of ongoing business including ensuring the continuation of that key operation of the year mine and there's a lot of equipment personnel that has to come back and forward has to be subject to proper protocol both governments have helped as for normalising travel beyond this look I think Australia has to Australia has to take as a first step dealing with its own internal state boundaries we we've got to get through all that first I think a Pacific bubble is still someway away I can imagine it reasonably readily with New Zealand over time I think a reality that Papua New Guinea and other Pacific island countries will face as we move into that phase is that governments like Australia will want some kind of good solid evidentiary data about the extent to which COVID-19 remains an issue in those in those in those countries and I think I have to be said that we're probably not at that stage yet with PNG we don't have a good enough picture of what's going on clearly the country the country is not beset by coronavirus but hard data on on where it is what the status is that's going to be needed before we we move into some relaxation of travel I suspect right thank you so our next question comes from our old friend Sean Dornie and he's asking about the redevelopment of the manas naval base now I'm not sure how much either of you know about this in terms of the latest the latest developments but just to recap for the sake of sake of the audience it's being one of the big Australia PNG agreements in recent years has been the joint US Australia PNG deal to upgrade the lumbering naval base and there seems to be some pushback though particularly from the manas governor Charlie Benjamin and he seems to have the support of PNG's foreign minister for a review what what does this mean for for the bilateral relationship and as as Sean asked what do we know of what what stage the redevelopment is up to so Charles I'm going to ask you first because of of both of you you might have more of an inside view on this well I must admit I don't Henry and Sean good to hear from you it's a difficult question because it again this was couched in the framework of security and regional influence of China I think rather than anything of substantive manas based development for manas people yeah it is emerging to be a controversial arrangement so to speak to say the least so I'm not surprised that the governor of manas and at the political level it's starting to gain some attention and probably traction to to review this but it's not I am not very much in the loop on this so that's the only comment I can make it is it is contentious in terms of what its intention so thank you Ian do you want to add anything oh look I I I give a shout out to Sean it's nice to hear from you I'll reach out to your local Sean but the I would say that just express of you that to be talking about the redevelopment of that naval base is actually a more positive thing to be talking about than the predecessor arrangement the asylum seeker processing management which I think you know proved to be a difficult issue overall in the in the relationship and the cause of redeveloping an important military base to me is an important one I think that can be done in the spirit of the the bilateral strategic relationship um uh uh you know in a very positive way in the same way that other other activities in the events cooperation program run to take and like the patrol boat program okay thanks very much for that um we have now another question quite a different one from peter aid see and he'd like view from both of you are on the potential risk of movements of people as economic refugees from png if the economic downturn within the region is prolonged do you want to start with this one uh so we're hearing from all our friends today good to hear from peter uh I think um I think this does require careful monitoring I must say that the cooperation between both the immigration and customs agencies for between Australia and Papua New Guinea has been outstanding over the years and that um uh the regular exchange of information is is very positive so I think we're in we're well placed to work together in managing any pressures that arise there um I I'm hesitant to think of this as something that is you know alluming very serious problem there's been a lot of talk over the years about the potential for economic refugees to come through the ng to Australia it's proved um to be much less than many many have expected um it's not really a regular channel for uh for um refugees seeking access to Australia um and apart from some interesting historic associations by certain Papuan communities in in Australia I don't see a great flood of Papua New Guineans wanting to come to Australia either um I think the uh I also think that the arrangements we have in normal times around the border between Australia and Papua New Guinea are world class and world leading um so I think we're in reasonable shape uh the overall overall um demand for asylums that could place us in them in Australia um has declined considerably as a result of Australian policies so I don't see this as a very big deal just now something to watch right um so Charles there's a question for you from um Jan Zomedic he would like to know or she I'm sorry I can't tell from the name uh gender um do you see a need for financial aid in the PNG health sector um Jan mentions that uh they've been working for over six years in volunteer capacity in health in the Highlands and have experienced firsthand that many women and children do not have access to primary health care so with that as background do you see a need for financial aid in this well definitely um Jan thanks for that question because COVID has highlighted the necessity for just dealing with primary health care space um and and and the sanitation issues and we also thank the effort and brought by the NGOs the very important cogs in a will to Papua New Guinea's development as well as its health in the health sector so thank you for for your health efforts and and uh support in this area for Papua New Guinea yes funding by both governments it's a necessity to continue to maintain that or improve particularly primary health care uh statistics have not all good well for Papua New Guinea maternal health child health areas uh the issues of tuberculosis and malaria and continuing threats so with the pandemic uh looming um it's incumbent on both governments to continue focusing resource in the health sector in and in developing uh and enhancing relationships with those who are out on on the on the field like NGOs and rural health workers of Papua New Guinea deserve a lot more attention a lot more assistance and support so um yes I fully endorse your your question and highlighting this uh this funding and resource enough primary health care particularly good um there's a few questions on the aid program as I said before it always seems to end up in the front seat whether or not it should um so I have a question from Goody Coleman who's asking if PNG uh has focus initiative areas where Australian aid can progress and to what extent does PNG drive this so Charles do you want to start again and then then Ian if you could come in that would be great well of course Papua New Guinea should uh drive be the driver in development and setting its priorities and funding its priorities that's very critical historically um with your budget support and increase and then at times Australia's aid was funding 80 percent of Papua New Guinea's priorities and 20 percent of the 80-20 dilemma and how to adjust that to balance in 50-50 Papua New Guinea and Australia and even increasing it to Papua New Guinea 80 percent bear bearing its cost of its development and its priorities is very critical so yes um historical area of trends in Papua New Guinea's efforts to fund its own priorities have been lacking but now with the revenues from the major resource projects there should be effort uh to make sure that these uh benefits and wealth that we're getting from our resources should be focused on taking over the responsibility of our own priorities right and depending on Australia's aid to take on the burden of developing uh through our priorities policy priorities and then we uh use use our own funding for um for whatever it is that we are using so I am very very uh hopeful that government successive governments of Papua New Guinea will take continue to talk sovereignty of the nation and walk sovereignty by funding our sovereign national interest and national development. Thanks sir Charles Ian do you have anything to add? Yeah look I would just say that of course uh external assistance needs to support and reflect the key priorities identified by the sovereign government concerned and I believe the Australian aid program does and you know the the the PNG government's development plans have a very strong focus on health and education and a range of other areas. There is also a an imperative on the Australian government as the provider of funds to um uh you know see the disbursement of those funds in a way that uh it feels it can feel confident that its own that its own constituency it's its own population it's own voters uh will support so there can sometimes be at least the dialogue if not tension around around those issues um where it tends to come together in my experience and probably Charles's too was that the at the annual um bilateral ministerial forum where these issues are are talked through. I always felt the sort of looking back that was almost as we needed sort of something else something else that engaged our leaders a little bit more regularly um uh on the design and shape and management of the aid program there was a bit of a tendency for politicians to come together briefly for a half a day once a year and then back into their own political um context uh it'll be nice to see some kind of uh instrumented merge perhaps from this um negotiation over the strategic and economic partnership which actually brings us together in a more deliberate way at the leadership level over the design of the aid program. Okay um we actually have uh another question on aid but I'm going to skip that just for a moment I'll come back to it if we have time but there's a question on Bougainville and as we know the referendum last year showed a vast vast majority of Bougainvillians on independence and of course there are the local elections in Bougainville coming up uh I think in August uh Ian Prentice asked the question how do you both see the challenges and potential outcomes as that election plays out particularly given the referendum result? Um I should like I first Charles the uh um look uh this is a really interesting issue I mean there are there are very different perspectives here you know Papua New Guinea um uh uh is right to um you know very very much think about this as a as a national issue um uh Australia and its role is a matter of um some debate and discussion in in in BNG. I um uh when I look at the terms of the Bougainville peace agreement and Ian Prentice of all people knows knows all about that uh in the end um it allowed for a referendum which has taken place and as we know we've seen Bougainvillians vote um uh with a significant majority for independence but it also requires um endorsement and ratification by the national parliament of Papua New Guinea. As Australians when we listen to that and think about that that situation we often will take a slightly black letter sort of legal mindset to the situation um and assume that you know here's a serious problem it's all going to explode at some point. I don't know Papua New Guineans have a way of um finding their way through these issues and um I was you know heavily involved with Bougainville during my own time as high commissioner and I must say I I uh I did observe um significant support for independence when people were asked but I also observed a deep reluctance on the part of most to go back to the situation of the 1990s and and the conflict there um so I'm very hopeful there's a real there's there's a spirit which will see cooperation and a new way forward beyond the BPA um and that that will merge emerge in dialogue over the next year or two. So Charles? Ian um how are you all right um you should know this issue is more than any of us you you spend a lot of time in Bougainville but um there are certain basics that I think as far as national government I can't speak for them but from my observation need Bougainvillians to do and that is set up a function in public service if they want to be independent uh the funding arrangements that have been in dispute needs to be sorted out by both levels of government and um uh there are some terms of the uh peace agreement that needs to be adhered to and that is the um arms uh surrender of firearms that is in Bougainville and uh also to um ensure that um the infrastructure for for being an independent Bougainville needs to be in place so this these are issues that are not not small if you want to be independent of your currency deal with your current own currency and you're setting up your foreign relations area so the national government I think while it may at this stage express some reluctance about Bougainvillians going to be independent it's a part of what Bougainvillians have voted on it so with to our respect uh in the end I suppose the Bougainvillians desire we don't want to as as Ian mentioned revert back to the 1990s days so it is uh it is basically a challenge for both governments Bougainville people and Papua New Guinea people the rest of Papua New Guinea uh to move forward to serious discussions and how to resolve this issue because that referendum outcome will be voted on in parliament I don't know what the situation is there at the moment but yes all these uh areas critical areas for for to settle amicably this issue well I think that's uh that's a really important question to end on unfortunately we won't have time for any more I thank you all though for putting in your questions and fortunately we've been able to uh to answer most of them but I'm afraid some of them we can't um but it's been an incredibly interesting discussion and I want to thank both of you for making it that interesting Sir Charles who's been with us um from Port Moresby and Ian Chemish who's been joining us from Brisbane thank you both very very much thanks again to our event sponsors BSP and Coca-Cola Amital to let you all know we'll have a recording of this event to share on our website very soon and you can follow the Australia PNG network on Twitter and Facebook for alerts about our upcoming events I'm Annemarie O'Keefe thanks for joining us today and have a great day