logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo logo
star Bookmark: Tag Tag Tag Tag Tag
Papua New Guinea

Strategic development plans must be subjected to high level scrutiny

If the initial analysis by Shadow Treasurer Ian Ling-Stuckey of the 2018-2022 MTDP III showing glaring errors in numbers is any indication, it should be withdrawn and the figures amended forthwith.
The Shadow Treasurer has only started picking out the general economic and health sector projections in the entire document and has pointed out many flaws.
They are contained in the tables, flow charts and figures which contain very bad mathematical errors.
In his own words he said some of the assumptions and incompleteness of the document in mainly the health plan would fail the Grade 12 exams students are sitting this month.
As he says the priorities may be in line with good development strategies, but closer look and analysis would clearly defeat the purpose of the document.
Some conclusions contained are clearly political rhetoric which defies reality in forward planning and the actual development needs of the country.
The question that arises is why table and endorse a document that is supposed to be the official blueprint of development for this country that is a far cry from what it is supposed to be.
Because politicians do not bother reading thick documents and reports or understand figures does not mean that bureaucrats and advisers can get away with such high level professional negligence.
Professional negligence is a sackable offence in the public service so is undue care in presenting documentation for the endorsement by government of its supposedly blueprint for development.
Documents like the 2018-2022 MTDP III are too important to allow silly and ridiculous errors contained in it.
Tedious and careful mathematical scrutiny must be undertaken before the plan becomes a fully endorsed government document.
If foreign investors were to ask for a copy for the sake of supporting development projects, how are they going to be convinced to invest their money when such a plan has misleading figures in them?
How are they going to buy into participating in development when official policies of government are badly represented and akin to that of amateurish accounting?
Documents like the 2018-2022 MTDP III are supposed to be flawless and pinpoint accurate in every aspect.
It should portray the professional approach and plans the government spends hours deliberating for the benefit of its people, not half-baked assumptions and inaccurate figures and assumptions.
Amendments should be immediately made to the plan and corrections to flaws and errors that do not portray the good policies of government.

Themes
ICO