Latest News

The signing of the K260-million Kimbe Rehabilitation and Upgrade Marine Package contract, awarded to Pacific Marine Group (PMG), was made official on January 16 at the Kumul Consolidated Holdings (KCH) Boardroom in Port Moresby. Work on the Kimbe Port is expected to commence at the end of the first quarter of 2025 and would be completed within 16 months. The Land Package component of the project is currently under evaluation and will follow soon, proponents said. Kimbe Port is the first of several ports slated for upgrades under the K1.5-billion blended financial package provided to PNG Ports by the Australian Government through the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific (AIFFP) in 2022. The package contract is part of a larger initiative under PNG Ports’ 30-year Master Plan, launched in June 2021, and supported by Australia through a AU$435-million (1.5 billion kina) infrastructure funding package. PNG Ports Chief Executive Officer, Mr Neil Papenfus, hailed the project as a significant milestone, highlighting its importance for enhancing trade, connectivity, and commercial opportunities for West New Britain Province and Papua New Guinea as a whole. “We sincerely thank the Australian Government for its financial support, which has made this development possible. We also acknowledge the West New Britain Provincial Government for their partnership in advancing this initiative,” said Mr. Papenfus. “Kimbe Port is our third-largest port and a priority in our 30-Year Port Infrastructure Master Plan. Located in PNG's largest producer and exporter of crude palm oil, the port is critical to our economy. This project will bring key benefits, including local job creation and economic engagement.” “Our ports must remain fit-for-purpose, capable of meeting future business demands, and resilient to climate challenges. This project is an important step in achieving those goals”, he added. Mr. Papenfus also expressed excitement about collaborating with Pacific Marine Group, a leader in marine contracting and commercial diving with over three decades of experience across Northern Australia, PNG, and the Pacific region. “Pacific Marine Group’s expertise will be vital in building reliable and sustainable infrastructure for the province and the nation,” he said.  Mr Papenfus added that the rehabilitation of the port would lead to increased economic activity for Kimbe based businesses over the construction period. Contractor Assures Project Completion Speaking at the project’s signing, the Managing Director of the Pacific Marine Group, Mr. Terry Dodd, reflected on PMG’s extensive history in PNG, with over 30 years of successful collaboration on infrastructure and maritime projects with major organizations such as Chevron, Oil Search, and Kumul Holdings. “We’ve worked on a range of projects in PNG, including the sewage outflow in Port Moresby, the Palatau Wharf rebuild, and the Manus Island Wharf and barge ramp rebuild. We’re bringing the same experienced team who completed those projects to lead the Kimberley Wharf rehabilitation,” Mr. Dodd said. Mr. Dodd emphasized PMG’s commitment to utilizing local talent and resources for their projects in PNG. “Our focus when working in PNG is to engage as many local contractors and national staff as possible,” he said. “We also prioritize upskilling and training. The people of PNG are great workers, and we’ve built a strong cohort of employees over the years.” The company’s approach extends to partnerships with local educational institutions. Mr. Dodd highlighted an ongoing collaboration with the University of Technology (UniTech) in Kimbe, where the company will provide equipment and training. “In return, UniTech will send trainees to work with us on a rotating basis, allowing us to upskill them directly on the project,” Mr. Dodd noted. “We’re also proud to have PNG graduate female engineers who have worked with us on past projects. They’ll lead the Kimberley Wharf project as some of the first personnel on-site.” As the project gears up, Pacific Marine Group has already received overwhelming interest from local workers eager to join the effort. Mr. Dodd said, “Our interactions with everyone at PNG Ports have been outstanding. We are open to addressing any challenges that may arise to ensure we deliver a high-quality outcome for the Kimberley Port Rehabilitation.” He acknowledged the weight of expectations but remained confident in the company’s ability to deliver exceptional results. “We’re excited and ready to meet the challenge. This is a major project for us, and we look forward to working with all stakeholders to achieve a successful outcome.” Duma Commends Stakeholders’ Collaboration Minister for State Enterprises, Hon. William Duma, acknowledged the collaborative effort behind the project, highlighting the enduring relationship between Papua New Guinea and Australia. He witnessed the signing of the project along with the Management of KCHL and the Australian High Commissioner, His Excellency John Feakes, Kimbe Provincial Government, and Project Location Administrative Leaders. Minister Duma stated: “This for me also demonstrates the never-ending special, very special relationship, mainly based on personal relationships, political considerations of course, and economic relations between our closest neighbour, Australia.” He lauded the establishment of the Project Management Unit under the AIFLEAD programme, and its role in ensuring transparency and effective utilization of Australian aid. “We felt that to be able to demonstrate to everyone involved... that we were quite determined and serious about making sure that all those processes that we're involved in, tendering and selection of successful tenders... were used and utilised properly.” The rehabilitation of Kimbe Port is poised to unlock economic potential in Western New Britain, a province the Minister described as a “sleeping giant” with opportunities in agriculture, fisheries, timber, oil palm, and tourism. He expressed confidence in Pacific Marine Group, stating: “Your company is not new to power, and you've got to establish a track record. I do not for one minute doubt that the people who are behind this made a mistake in selecting this group.” Minister Duma also emphasized the importance of this project as a foundation for future developments in the region, noting that Kimbe Port’s upgrade is part of a broader strategy to enhance PNG’s economic infrastructure. “Once again, I want to thank the people and Government of Australia for their never-ending help.” Australia-PNG Partnership in Project Development The Australia and PNG Partnership is now bonded with more projects as Australian High Commissioner Feakes announced the AIFFP support for the Kimbe Port upgrade. He said it aligns with PNG’s upcoming 50th anniversary of independence and its vision for long-term resilience. "I'm delighted to be here to support this contract signing, the starting point for significant upgrades to Kimbe Port. As Papua New Guinea approaches its 50th anniversary, it's fitting that critical works will be well underway, with designs tailored to withstand climate challenges for the next 50 years," he said. The Kimbe Port initiative marks the first of five major port upgrades in the country backed by Australia. Acknowledging PNG Ports Corporation Limited and its leadership, including Minister Neil, Mr. Feakes expressed gratitude for the collaborative efforts that brought the project to commence. The project is expected to generate significant local economic benefits, with up to 300 local jobs created during the construction phase. "Marine works at Kimbe will involve a workforce made up of 70% locals, and over 30% of project spending will go through Papua New Guinea companies," Mr. Feakes emphasized. Landside works will also prioritize local firms, with contracts to be awarded in the coming weeks. Mr. Feakes contrasted this approach with other international development models that often rely on foreign state-owned firms, bypassing local labor and suppliers. "These outcomes for Papua New Guinea are only possible when high-quality contractors with proven track records, like Pacific Marine Group, deliver works that put Papua New Guinea first," he said. The upgrades to Kimbe Port are set to improve maritime connectivity, enhance regional economic integration, and provide skills development opportunities for local workers. This partnership underscores Australia’s dedication to building infrastructure that directly benefits the people of PNG, he said.

Ok Tedi Mining Limited (OTML) is pleased to announce its exceptional performance results for 2024, showcasing yet another successful year of disciplined operational and financial excellence. In 2024, OTML achieved outstanding strong, safe and reliable production results, surpassing set targets for copper, gold, and silver. The company produced 103,246 tonnes of Copper metal, 265,830 ounces of Gold and 993,274 ounces of Silver, showing and reinforcing its turnaround of the business in the last 18 months. Despite some operational challenges, this success is attributed to the dedication of our workforce, optimized operational efficiency from the pit to the port, and a seamless execution of the major processing plant shutdown earlier in the year. OTML delivered robust unaudited financial results, reflecting increased metal prices, efficient cost management, and consistent production levels. The company reported a revenue of K5.7 Billion (US$1.5 Billion) contributing significantly to Papua New Guinea’s economy through royalties of K106M, taxes K346M, compensation K119M, training K30M, Tax Credit Scheme K285M, and a total of K450M in dividends for the year 2024. The company also celebrated 40 years of production since 1984, highlighting its significant contribution to PNG’s economy over the years. The year 2024 also brought its share of challenges; among the hurdles faced were shipping constraints, such as fuel, concentrate and cargo shipment issues and evolving operational demands. In addressing the fuel crisis, OTML not only ensured operational continuity but also supported the nation by supplying JET A1 fuel to commercial airlines. Furthermore, as a responsible corporate entity, the company made significant contributions through key donations at both local and national levels, reinforcing its commitment to the community. Looking ahead, OTML remains steadfast in pursuing its Growth 2050 Strategy, which focuses on long-term sustainability, operational excellence, and community partnerships. Key initiatives include: Environmental Stewardship & Sustainable Growth Projects Engineered Waste Rock Dump 1 & 2 Electrical Haul Truck Drive Process Asset Renewal (PAR) Pyrite Concentrate (PCon) Pit 4 Construction Tailings Storage Facility Copper Mark Certification Electrification & Energy Transition Strategy Accessibility to Diesel & Jet A1 Storage & Supply Facilities in the country OTML’s Managing Director and CEO, Kedi Ilimbit, stated that “2024 has been an extraordinary year of resilience, collaboration, and achievement for Ok Tedi. These results reaffirm our commitment to creating value for all stakeholders, while upholding our responsibilities to the people of Papua New Guinea and future generations. Our focus on sustainable growth under the Growth 2050 framework ensures that we are well-positioned for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.” “Our unwavering commitment to responsible mining practices and sustainable development has delivered outstanding outcomes for stakeholders, employees, and the communities in which we operate,” said Mr Ilimbit.

Prime Minister Hon. James Marape has extended his gratitude to senior leaders from ExxonMobil’s headquarters in Houston, Texas, who visited Papua New Guinea to reaffirm the company’s long-term commitment to the country’s energy sector. Three senior ExxonMobil corporate executives, led by outgoing Upstream President Liam Mallon, traveled to PNG to personally bid farewell to Prime Minister Marape as he prepares to retire from his role. Mr. Mallon, a key figure in ExxonMobil’s operations in PNG, expressed his appreciation for the strong partnership between the company and the Government of Papua New Guinea. “I want to thank the ExxonMobil leaders from their Houston head office, especially Liam Mallon, who flew all the way to PNG to say farewell,” Prime Minister Marape said. “He has been a strong partner in ensuring the success of PNG LNG and has worked closely with us over the years. His commitment to our country will be remembered, and we wish him well in his retirement.” During the meeting, Mr. Mallon introduced his successor, Dan Ammann, the incoming Upstream President, who will now take over ExxonMobil’s global upstream operations. Prime Minister Marape also congratulated Ms. Tera Shandro, the outgoing Managing Director of ExxonMobil PNG, on her promotion to Vice President of Upstream Business, based at the company’s global headquarters in Houston. “We are proud that Ms. Shandro, after her time in Papua New Guinea, has been elevated to a senior global role within ExxonMobil. This speaks volumes about the importance of PNG in the company’s operations,” PM Marape said. “We wish her all the best in her new role and look forward to continuing a strong relationship with ExxonMobil under the leadership of Dinesh Siwasimboo, the incomingChairman and Managing Director of ExxonMobil PNG.” The meeting also included Peter Clarke, Senior Vice President for Global LNG, who provided updates on ExxonMobil’s commitment to advancing key projects in PNG, including the ongoing developments at Angore, progress on P’nyang, and efforts to synchronise multiple LNG fields for greater efficiency. Prime Minister Marape noted that ExxonMobil is also working closely with TotalEnergies to support the successful delivery of the Papua LNG project, which is expected to play a significant role in PNG’s energy future. “This collaboration between ExxonMobil and TotalEnergies will ensure that Papua LNG is developed efficiently and contributes to the broader synchronisation of PNG’s LNG projects, maximising benefits for our country,” Prime Minister Marape said. “They assured me that PNG LNG remains one of the best-performing fields globally and that the company remains committed to ensuring PNG continues to be a major energy producer for at least the next 30 years,” he added. ExxonMobil’s leaders also discussed the importance of positioning Papua New Guinea as a producer of clean and green LNG. The company recognises PNG’s negative carbon footprint and the country’s potential to market its LNG as a cleaner, more sustainable energy source in the global market. “We discussed the importance of aligning our LNG production with PNG’s green credentials,” PM Marape said. “Our goal is to brand Papua New Guinea as a green energy nation, producing LNG from a country with a negative carbon footprint. This will make our LNG more attractive to buyers in both spot and long-term contracted markets.” ExxonMobil further highlighted PNG’s strategic location and proximity to major markets, which places the country in a favorable position for energy exports. Prime Minister Marape concluded by expressing his confidence in ExxonMobil’s continued leadership in PNG’s energy sector and the Government’s commitment to supporting further LNG developments. “ExxonMobil’s senior leadership has assured me that PNG is a top priority in their global portfolio,” PM Marape said. “We look forward to continuing our partnership to ensure the success of current and future LNG projects, which will play a significant role in the country’s economic growth for decades to come.”

Prime Minister Hon. James Marape has recently (11.12.24) announced his government’s decision to partially privatise PNG Power Ltd amidst Government’s further decision to open up other parts of the country to independent power suppliers. Prime Minister Marape told the PNG CORE Investment Week in Sydney that Cabinet has approved the decision in one of its final meetings this year the partial privatization of the State-owned enterprise to improve its operations and efficiency of power supply to Papua New Guinea. The partial privatization means the State will continue to maintain its interest in PNGPL with the investor taking over management of the enterprise and equity - assets worth over K4 billion in the company. This will be the second decision Cabinet has made on PNGPL, where an earlier decision was made to look at the company’s power generation, retail and distribution status. The Prime Minister urged investors to keep an eye out for Expressions of Interest soon to be advertised, pointing out the advantage in PNG Power’s “first right to supply power” monopoly in Papua New Guinea. “Power supply is a strategic asset and investment, and PNG Power has two important assets. It has asset that is K4 billion in total, and more importantly it has monopoly in first right of supplying power with its community service obli-gation that it still holds,” said the Prime Minister. Prime Minister Marape said reforms in the energy sector have begun with the government ministry responsible ready to issue licenses to investors willing to partner his government to take power supply to parts of PNG that are out of reach of PNGPL, as up to 70 percent of the country still remains without elec-tricity supply. The Prime Minister also highlighted Government’s long-term decision to move into clean, green energy in the next 20 years, while pointing out PNG’s numer-ous clean energy potential in hydro, thermal, wind and solar sources. He urged investors to seriously consider this space and to look further down the line to selling power over the borders to Indonesia and Australia. “We want to unlock power in our country by bringing cheaper reliable and cleaner power to our people at the earliest. We have more than enough sources of clean energy where hydro remains the biggest available source. “I encourage investors to think big and take up these opportunities that are available in our country,” said PM Marape.

The Goilala District Development Authority (DDA) has prioritized heavy investment in agriculture, particularly in coffee farming, in close collaboration with the Goilala Development Corporation Limited (GDCL) becoming the first 100% local business to purchase coffee directly from local farmers. Goilala, in the Central Province of Papua New Guinea, is known for the Tolukuma Gold Mine, but today, the Member for Goilala and Chairman of the District Development Authority, Honorable Casmiro Aia, said it works towards setting Goilala on the exporters’ map as the producers and suppliers of the country’s quality coffee. Aia said that direct purchasing empowers local farmers and strengthens the district's coffee industry with a clear priority to one day export quality Goilala Coffee. Goilala in 2022 first exported a container of coffee to Dubai, under a 3rd Party export arrangement officiated by MP Aia in Lae. The National Cup Testing Competition in the same year resulted with Goilala organic coffee scoring 84% and 85% respectively, which is A & AA in grading.  Internal quality assessment and tests done by CIC Provincial Extension Coordinator and CIC Team based in Port Moresby ensure quality is maintained. Today, the DDA, including the company and the committed coffee farmers in Goilala, hope to maintain the grade and quality title their coffee holds in quality checks. This January, a total of 17,917 kilograms of coffee parchment, packaged in 50kg bags, was purchased by GDCL at K6 per kilogram, amounting to K107,502. The purchase directly benefited more than 100 coffee farmers from Lower Vetapu in the Woitape Local Level Government (LLG). The occasion was witnessed on January 8 at the Ononge Airstrip by Hon. Aia and Dr. Titus Girau, District CEO for Goilala. GDCL General Manager, Mr. Ronald Kolalio, officially handed over the funds to the Ononge Coffee Growers Cooperative Society executives, who facilitated the payments to the farmers the following day. Aia said Goilala DDA decided to invest heavily in agriculture, especially coffee and other agricultural projects that will follow, to create direct revenue for the locals. "In doing so, we encourage them to be self-reliant rather than relying on the handout mentality from the government. This handout mentality promotes laziness and develops a parasitic attitude feeding off the hard work of the government and other people,” he emphasized.  Aia expressed gratitude to the Coffee Industry Corporation (CIC) for supporting Goilala's coffee initiatives and called on the Ministries of Coffee and Agriculture to extend further assistance. Economic Independence Driven by Agriculture Hon. Aia has also made a called for a stronger focus on economic independence for PNG, emphasizing agriculture as the key driver for sustainable development and poverty reduction. He expressed concern over the nation’s reliance on imports and the lack of economic empowerment for its citizens. “This country was given political independence but was not given economic independence.” “Papua New Guinea is still an import driven country. We need to cultivate the land to cut down on imports, especially food items that can grow here by our people to sustain ourselves and generate little income for our people,” Aia said. Highlighting agriculture as a solution to social issues, Aia said farming could address poverty and curb rising crime and social disorders driven by food insecurity. The MP acknowledged the importance of infrastructure but warned that it must be complemented by strategies that empower people economically. “There is no problem building roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure like clinics, classrooms, communication towers, police stations, and health centers. However, we need to craft mechanisms to encourage our people to be economically independent and be able to have money in their pockets to attend to their wide range of demands,” he explained. Without disposable income, he said rural communities cannot fully utilize the infrastructure built for them. Given Goilala’s remote geography, Aia acknowledged the critical role of aviation partners in enabling agricultural operations with Air Sanga, Farland Aviation, Helifix Aviation, and Loma Aviation in meeting our transportation needs in Goilala. To complement the DDA's efforts, Goilala has launched the Goilala business arm, an initiative aimed at addressing critical issues in the district. The first major step has been the purchase of coffee in Ononge, which will soon expand to Woitape, Tapini, and Guari local-level governments. “Having come a long way with many struggles, we decided to come up with Goilala Business to complement DDA to attend to some of our pressing issues. The purchase of coffee in Ononge is the first and will roll out to the entire Goilala from Woitape LLG to Tapini LLG and finally to Guari LLG,” Aia said. His vision for Goilala reflects a broader push for self-reliance and sustainable development, aligning with national goals to strengthen PNG’s economic independence through grassroots initiatives.  Accessing Local and International Coffee Markets Goilala coffee has gained interest from both domestic and international markets, notably in South Korea and Dubai. However, Goilala Development Corporation Limited remains cautious about exporting due to limited capacity and logistical hurdles.  "We'd prefer to export, but we lack the consistent supply volume required. For now, we're focusing on local sales, buying at K6 per kilo from farmers and aiming to sell at K8 or K12.” "With the high costs of transport, breaking even with sales and profit especially overseas, would be a great success," General Manager for GDCL Ronald Kolalio explained in an exclusive interview with PNG Business News. The company is the business arm of the Goilala District Development Authority (DDA), taking steps to unlock the economic potential of the remote Goilala District in the Central Province. Kolalio described the process as a game-changer with the opportunity to change the negative labeling of Goilala in the country for social issues. He emphasized the company’s renewed efforts to drive local development through agriculture and infrastructure projects. The company’s first major venture focuses on capitalizing on Goilala’s renowned coffee production, which is highly rated on the global market. At the beginning of January 2025, the company purchased K107,000 worth of coffee from farmers in Ononge, Woitape LLG.  However, moving the coffee to market has proven difficult due to the region's rugged terrain and lack of reliable transport. "Out of the 365 bags we bought, we've only managed to move 41 bags due to limited access. The only way in and out is by air, and small airplanes can't carry much cargo," the General Manager shared their challenge. "Cloud cover and tough geography make flying difficult, limiting how much coffee we can bring out at a time." To address these challenges, GCDL plans to collaborate with DDA projects to utilize return cargo trips for transporting coffee bags and is exploring charter flights to speed up delivery. Long-term plans include establishing a coffee processing facility in Goilala to secure an export license and reduce dependency on third-party exporters. Kolalio confirmed negotiations a currently in progress for land to build this facility on. Beyond agriculture, GCDL is stepping into the construction sector to improve the district’s struggling infrastructure. The DDA, dissatisfied with the performance of external contractors, is now relying on GCDL to deliver critical road projects. "We have two machines on route to Tapini, earmarked for two critical roads— from Tapini to Kerau and  Tapini to Woitape," he said. Progress is hindered by flooding and wet road conditions, but once weather permits, construction will begin—offering a lifeline to remote communities and a more logistically convenient for coffee purchasing. "If all goes according to plan, we hope to generate profits from construction, coffee, and other ventures to declare dividends to the DDA. This will support the DDA’s social obligations in health and education." Established in 2016 under the leadership of the late Hon. William Samb, GDCL struggled to progress due to funding constraints. Operations stalled after Samb’s passing, but the company was recently revived by MP Aia. "The Goilala Development Corporation is owned 100% by the Goilala DDA, for the people," the General Manager explained. "The wisdom behind setting up the company is a great undertaking. When William Sumb set out to do this, he had a very long-term view about the successes that could be achieved. And it gives me great pleasure to be part of this company and project, to work closely with DDA and the Member Casmiro, to change Goilala through agriculture – coffee.” The company officially resumed operations in December 2024, marking its first active year in 2025. He emphasized the company’s broader mission to reshape Goilala’s image, which has often been overshadowed by negative perceptions. "Presently, when you mention Goilala, people think of crime. But we want Goilala to be known for something positive, like our coffee," he shared. "If a Korean chooses Goilala coffee over other brands that would mean everything to us." Despite formidable logistical and environmental challenges, the people of Goilala have shown remarkable resilience and determination. The General Manager praised their efforts and expressed pride in contributing to the district's progress. "Goilala is a very challenging place, but the people are very hardworking, resilient, and hospitable. I’m privileged to be part of the change shaping a better image for Goilala," he said. MP Aia commended both GDCL and the hardworking farmers for their dedication. He reaffirmed his commitment to advancing the district's coffee industry by advocating for an export license for Goilala. Cyprian Ile, Chairman of the Ononge Coffee Growers Cooperative Society and Woitape LLG Coffee Rehabilitation Projects Coordinator, expressed gratitude for GDCL's partnership with local farmers. "This is the first direct partnership with our people, especially coffee farmers in the district, where their coffee parchment was previously sold to companies outside of the district." Mr. Ile reiterated MP Aia’s comments and stated that the timely payment would help farmers meet crucial family financial obligations, including school fees, healthcare bills, and household expenses. He noted the relief this brought to parents preparing for the upcoming academic year, easing the burden of school-related costs such as uniforms and supplies. The purchase marks the beginning of ongoing efforts, as GDCL plans to continue buying coffee parchment from farmers in Woitape Station, Jongai, Sopu, and Tapini Station.

PNGX recently released the 2024 performance data for the Papua New Guinean market. 2024 represented a year of remarkable growth on the market. The financial services sector emerged as a strong performer, delivering robust returns for investors and setting a high benchmark for the market. Key highlights among PNG companies included: Kina Asset Management Limited (KAM): Share price rose from K0.90 to K1.60, achieving a 77.8% annual gain. With dividends of K0.20 per share, KAM shareholders enjoyed a total annual return of 100.0%. BSP Financial Group Limited (BSP): Share price climbed from K13.70 to K19.90, representing a 45.3% increase. With dividends of K1.51 per share, BSP shareholders saw a total annual return of 56.3%. NGIP Agmark Limited (NGP): Share price grew from K0.69 to K1.00, achieving a 44.9% increase. Including dividends of K0.07 per share, total annual returns reached 55.1%. Credit Corporation (PNG) Limited (CCP): Share price increased from K2.00 to K2.70, a 35.0% gain. When adding K0.25 per share in dividends, total annual returns reached 47.5%. Kina Securities Limited (KSL): Share price rose from K2.50 to K3.25, delivering a 30% gain. With dividends of K0.266 per share, shareholders experienced a 40.6% total return. Steamships Trading Company Limited (SST): Share price increased from K35.46 to K48.00, a 35.4% gain. Including K1.0 per share in dividends, total annual returns were 38.2%. City Pharmacy Limited (CPL) faced challenges following civil unrest in early 2024 resulting in a 12.7% decrease in share price. Increased trading activity significantly enhanced liquidity in the PNGX market. Total trades, share volumes, and transaction values demonstrated robust investor engagement compared to previous years. 2024 saw a 47% increase in the number of trades and a 37% increase in the value of shares traded. There was also a significant decrease in the average trade size which is an indicator of increased retail investor participation in the market. These indicators are a clear sign of a higher level of activity and liquidity which is positive for the PNG market. The major increases from 2023 were in the volume and value of KSL and NGP shares traded. KSL saw a 123% increase in volume and 181% increase in value of shares traded. Meanwhile, NGP saw a 535% increase in volume and a 581% increase in the value of shares traded.   The year ahead promises exciting developments for PNGX: PNGX will launch a new Investor Education Program to empower investors, the first of which will be in Port Moresby in February. Follow PNGX on its website, LinkedIn, and Facebook for updates or email PNGX at education@pngx.com.pg Upcoming listings, including Pacific Balanced Fund and National Banking Corporation, are anticipated, though timelines remain uncertain. The potential partial privatization of PNG Power would be a future opportunity for market expansion, though whether listing is proposed is unclear. The 2024 market performance underscores the resilience and growth potential of PNGX-listed companies. As always, investors are reminded to consult with stockbrokers to make informed decisions.

The Papua New Guinea Tourism Promotion Authority (TPA) reaffirmed its partnership with Carnival Australia (P&O Cruises) to strengthen Papua New Guinea’s (PNG) growing cruise sector on Monday 9 December in Sydney, Australia. TPA’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Eric Mossman Uvovo, met with Carnival Australia’s Vice President, Peter Little, to reaffirm the partnership between PNG and the region’s leading cruise liner, Carnival Australia. Carnival Australia, under its passenger cruise brand, P&O Cruises, have been sailing into PNG waters since 2014, a significant moment that marked the entry of large capacity passenger cruising into PNG. Since then, the cruise sector in PNG has grown exponentially. In 2019, prior to the onset of the global pandemic, PNG registered the highest number of cruise arrivals into PNG at 52,000 cruise passengers alone. Over the years, Carnival Australia has played a significant role by ensuring continued cruise itineraries for PNG as a cruise destination in the Pacific. Cruise tourism in PNG has contributed an estimated US$20 million to the PNG economy, a specific percentage of which goes directly to the local communities through landing fee’s, shore excursion activities, arts and crafts, local hire bus services and tour guiding. TPA’s CEO alluded to the importance of ensuring concentrated investments in cruise provinces to improve the overall cruise experience. “Our cruise hubs, Milne Bay and East New Britian, have incredible potential and require stronger coordination in the province to drive community educational programs and tourist safety initiatives,” said Uvovo. Uvovo also highlighted his concerns over recent law and order issues which have cast a cloud of doubt over the cruise sector in PNG. “I look forward to working with the leadership in the cruise provinces of PNG to establish community policing initiatives and youth ambassador programs to mitigate risks associated with cruise port call days. The communities in these cruise destinations must appreciate the windfall of tourist a cruise brings into a town when the passenger ship calls into their port, it should be a time to embrace our visitors and take ownership as proud ambassadors for your culture, community, province and country. I appeal to all stakeholders in our cruise provinces, a coordinated effort is critical as we continue to welcome cruise ships of all sizes into our coastal and riverway communities,” said Uvovo. Uvovo has reaffirmed TPA’s partnership with Carnival Australia and has committed to finding proactive solutions to issues currently faced in the Cruise sector for the benefit of all cruise stakeholders.

 Michael McWalter picks up his prior discussions of petroleum sector reform (Issue No. 3 2024) and describes in more detail exactly what a Production Sharing Contract, or what a PSC, is all about. In my commentary of PNG Business News, Issue 2, 2023 entitled: Petroleum Sector Reform for Papua New Guinea, I wrote about the need to apply better governance to the sector to achieve optimal outcomes for the State. In particular, I spoke of the need for the petroleum revenues arising from petroleum resource development to be deployed wisely for the benefit of the people of PNG on capital formation activities like: education, health, social welfare, infrastructure, etc. – all of which should promote the National economy to grow, and thus improve livelihoods.  This translation of the value of resources with appropriate management into sustainable development is often called the value chain, and each aspect of the chain needs most serious and competent management.   There is little point in mobilising one’s natural resources to make an income for the State, if that money is not put to good purpose, but rather wasted one way or another by folly or malady.  Those resources may only be produced once, and not again; they are finite and have value now at such time as that kind of resource is sought after in global markets. We must remember that there may come a day when oil and gas are no longer consumed with such avid demand as today. This might eventuate as more investments are poured into the development of renewables sources of energy and advancements are made with cleaner nuclear fission and sustainable thermonuclear fusion. Oil and gas might become a quixotic, antiquated and outmoded source of energy, and thus attract considerably less value.  So, if a government is going to foster investment in petroleum exploration and development, it needs to embrace such grave and important responsibility to ensure that the Nation’s petroleum business is conducted most professionally and with total accountability. Government must ensure that the resultant revenues from subsequent production are appropriate, reasonable and respected as being derived from the overall patrimony of the people of the Nation.  This requires investment by the State in professional excellence to manage, moderate, administrate and regulate the sector and its operations firmly and fairly.  The oft cited National Petroleum Authority (NPA), which was first defined in the Government’s 1976 White Paper on Petroleum Policy and Legislation by two of our greatest leaders, Sir Michael Somare and Sir Julius Chan, has been repeatedly conceived, only to be still born. Into that vacuum, Kumul Petroleum Holdings Ltd, PNG’s de facto National Oil Company (NOC) has steadily and bravely taken the lead and embraced National development in the oil and gas sector, and all that it entails. Meantime, the Department of Petroleum and Energy has valiantly tried to keep up with ever increasing core and essential petroleum sector functions, like licensing, operational approvals, and data collection, whilst otherwise becoming absorbed, and perhaps overwhelmed, in the peripheral though, absolutely essential tasks of dealing with project area landowners, their benefit claims and their many other concerns and worries. Plans for a NPA have been formulated in great detail several times over in the last few decades, only to be forsaken, lost, sidestepped, and derailed time and time again. The whole notion of the NPA was to bring together a cadre of PNG excellence to lead the petroleum sector as the guardian of PNG’s petroleum resources. The members of that cadre were to have been well-paid for their experience and important responsibility, and as an Authority of the Government, the NPA might have been able to retain and attract some of PNG’s finest graduates in such exciting and challenging work.   I also discussed the vital need for the commerciality of petroleum developments without which investment by the industry in field development would be withheld.  I discussed how the 2020 amendments to the Oil and Gas Act imposed a test on a proposed petroleum development project that the applicant’s proposals should reflect a minimum expected return to the State over the life of any recovery of petroleum. However, that minimum expected return to the State is not specified in law and is only examined and determined by the Petroleum Advisory Board (PAB), and then considered by the Minister at the time of application for a development licence.  This leaves investors with great uncertainty and unnecessary risk throughout the period of exploration, appraisal, development planning and the application phase of petroleum resource development.  There is thus now no absolute certainty of development if a discovery of commercial extent is made. Either the PAB or the Minister may set a threshold minimum expected return to the State during the consideration of an application for development. This is at a very late stage in the cycle of petroleum resource development investment and comes just before the investing companies have to elect to develop their discovered petroleum accumulation, or not. If a field development is marginally economic, the setting of such a minimum expected return to the State might in some circumstances make corporate consideration of development uncommercial, and as a consequence the field might be left undeveloped. In any normal distribution of petroleum accumulations, there are a few large fields, a fair number of medium size fields and many smaller fields. It would not be wise to disadvantage the development of smaller and often smaller marginally economic fields, which tend to be developed after the larger fields have been found and produced, and which can readily sustain a domestic petroleum industry populated by smaller, and likely, local companies with smaller investments.  Oddly, as I said in 2023, the potential introduction of Production Sharing Contracts (PSCs) would obviate such a risky situation because the terms of development are normally locked into a PSC when originally negotiated and agreed between the State and the investing companies as contractors to the State at the outset. Being a contract, any capricious demand by the State for unexpected returns on petroleum development pursuant to a PSC would end up with the contract being the substance of legal proceedings.  I now want to pick up on my themes of a year ago and discuss optimal and necessary arrangements for petroleum development in the light of some creeping petroleum policy change in recent years, and a keen desire by the Government to change the PNG petroleum regime and to adopt the use of PSCs. I particularly wish to demystify PSCs. Figure 2: Much has been written on PSCs. Celebrated analyst, Daniel Johnston, is prominent with his simplified mapping of fiscal and commercial regimes. King & Spalding, an American multinational corporate law firm, has also written a most comprehensive book on the topic, ex libris McWalter.   WHAT ARE PRODUCTION SHARING CONTRACTS?   The notion of a Government sharing the production of oil and gas arising from the development of a successful petroleum exploration campaign by companies as part of a commercial venture was first developed and employed in Bolivia in the 1950s. A Production Sharing Contract (PSC) is an arrangement between a host Government and an international oil and gas company (IOC) for the division and allocation of the oil and gas produced between those two parties under a contract which provides for the exploration for and the development and production of petroleum resources. The allocation of a share of the production to the IOC serves to recompense the IOC for its investment and to provide a reasonable reward for its success. The Government, as owner of the resources, also provides a mechanism called a cost recovery allowance to the contractor for its work, but keeps the rest of the petroleum produced. The PSC was introduced in Indonesia in 1966, and PSCs of this kind or variants of the same are used extensively to agree the arrangements for oil and gas exploration, development, and production with oil and gas companies. PSCs of one kind or another are used in over 40 countries, throughout the world.   The PSC is not the only manner by which a government may grant oil and gas exploration, development and production rights to commercial investors and gain a share in the value of successful petroleum production.  Prior to the development of the PSC, exploration and production of oil and gas was typically governed by way of a licence or a concession agreement, and such regimes still remain in effect in many different places around the world. In many developing nations, the PSC is now the most common means by which a government allows corporate investment in the oil and gas industry. It provides a company or consortium of companies the right to explore and produce oil and gas.  In many jurisdictions, there are political or nationalistic reasons for the adoption of PSCs as they perceptibly provide the Government with greater and more direct control over its resources and the ability to exert National sovereignty over the industry more readily.   After gaining independence in 1945, Indonesian’s concessions regime came under attack by certain nationalist groups leading to the nationalisation of Royal Dutch Shell’s assets. Indonesian Law 44/60 abolished the old concessionary system and specified that: “Oil and gas mining shall only be carried out by the State and implemented by State enterprises,” and further that, “the Minister may appoint other parties as contractors of the State enterprises.” Alas, a decline in foreign investment in Indonesia’s oil and gas sector inevitably ensued. To mitigate this decline, the government eventually negotiated and agreed in 1962 with the Pan American Indonesia Oil Corporation, a subsidiary of Standard Oil of Indiana (later to become Amoco), a new contract based on legislation that was much more favourable to the Government.  The other large foreign petroleum investors, Caltex (a venture of Chevron and Texaco), Shell, and Stanvac (a venture of Socony [Standard Oil of New York] and Vacuum Oil and Standard Oil of New Jersey, later to become Exxon) followed by signing Contracts of Work in September 1963. These early PSCs were widely considered to be less controversial than the previous concessions system, as they enabled the government to maintain formal ownership of the resources until sold, while permitting the IOCs to exploit them for and on behalf of the Government. These contracts provided for the recovery of the costs of the contractor up to an agreed percentage of overall production plus an agreed, but often scaled, share of the produced oil and gas as a reward for its investment. Although often cited as the example of the use of PSCs, in 2017, in a somewhat odd twist, the Indonesian Government established a new form of PSC called the Gross Split PSC. This completely abolished cost recovery systems pioneered in the classic PSCs of the 1960s. Instead, this new arrangement simply relies on an agreed split of the actual production between the Government and the IOCs, typically 43% to the contractor for oil and 48% to the contractor for gas production, with the balance of production going to the Government. Due to a loss of faith in Pertamina (Indonesia’s national oil company) in the late 1990s (an audit had shown that Pertamina had allegedly lost about US$6.1 billion from inefficiency and corruption in 1997 and 1998) the Indonesian Government took steps to rein in control of the industry at the Ministry level, but they had no financial ability to manage the proceeds of the sale of oil and gas which were remitted to the revenue account of the National government.  Without any retained funds, this then entailed the Ministry having to seek parliamentary appropriations to pay the cost recovery allowances to the IOCs, but then the Indonesian Parliament questioned these payments. This brings home the need to think through the implications of changes in regime and the management of any given regime, especially if one is contemplating changing from a licence or concessionary regime to a contractor-based one. What is a PSC? In a PSC, a government makes a contract with an IOC to provide the necessary and requisite financial, technical, management, environmental, social, planning and logistical skills in order to explore for, and hopefully, if successful in finding oil and gas accumulations, to produce the oil and gas. The host State (that throughout most of the world, normally owns the subterranean resources) will usually be represented by the Government or a Government Petroleum Ministry, Department, Authority or quite often some other type of agency of the State, such as its National Oil Company (NOC), which will take delivery of the State’s share of production and generally manage the commercial aspects of the PSC. The IOC is typically granted an exclusive time-limited right to explore for petroleum accumulations, appraise any discovery, plan and execute development and produce oil and gas within a defined area, generally known as the contract area. Under the PSC arrangement, the IOC bears the entire risk of the project, both technical and financial. If a commercial discovery is declared, the IOC becomes entitled to a portion of any subsequent petroleum produced as an effective payment for its efforts, in addition to recouping all its costs from the production. Conversely, if no discoveries are made, the IOC receives nothing. The Government retains ownership of all the oil and gas produced, save for what oil and gas is allocated to the IOC as cost recovery petroleum, or is the subject of sharing between the IOC and the NOC as profit petroleum. This causes the Government to be involved in selling its share of the produced oil and gas.  In some jurisdictions, the IOC is allowed to keep the physical oil for itself, and the IOC makes just cash payments only to the NOC, based on the sale of the NOC’s petroleum entitlements; in others, physical oil and gas allocations are used to reward the IOC. The extent to which the NOC is involved with the exploration, development and production process varies from country to country with some NOCs seeking to take a significant lead in the business other than a just managing the PSC, whilst other NOCs take only a small participating interest in the commercial venture, so as to be within the operating consortium and to learn from it. There are commonly four key financial aspects to a PSC: royalty, cost recovery petroleum, and profit petroleum, though many other relevant matters are agreed in the PSC. Figure 3: Contents of a PSC: A sample from Equatorial Guinea, after the Republic of Equatorial Guinea, 2006    Royalty Most often and foremost, the IOC is typically expected to pay a prescribed or agreed royalty as a percentage of the gross value of oil and gas production to the State as valued at the point of export from the contract area. The royalty is often, at the State’s option, taken as a physical share of production, or alternatively by way of a payment by the IOC equivalent to the sale price of the State’s royalty share of production. Sometimes, the percentage rate of royalty may be the subject of bids for a contract area by competing oil and gas companies when bidding for the same or similar areas.  Royalty is a payment made in kind or related to produced volumes and price without regard to the profitability of the business. Therefore, in times of low petroleum commodity prices it has the effect of digging deep into profitability.  However, for a host Government, royalty is an assured payment regardless of profitability, but proportionate to the value of the produced oil and gas. Cost Recovery Petroleum Following payment of any royalty, the IOC is normally entitled to a pre-determined maximum percentage of gross production from which it may recover all its genuine costs, with any costs not recovered being carried forward to the next accounting year. Such production is known as cost oil and cost gas, and again may be taken in cash or kind. Obviously, the IOC attempts to maximise cost recovery early in the cycle of production up to the agreed maximum percentage limit, so as to recoup its expenses soonest, and likewise the Government will scrutinise the costs submitted to it for recovery as to their genuine eligibility. That scrutiny involves approval of all procurements and sub-contracts of the IOC, and represents an enormous accounting burden for the Government.   Profit Oil The oil and gas remaining after the payment of royalty to the Government and the cost recovery allowance to the IOC by the host Government is known as profit oil and profit gas, and it is generally divided between the IOC and the Government in accordance with the production sharing provisions agreed and defined in the PSC. Quite often the Government’s share of profit oil and profit gas increases as the production rates increase. Income tax Finally, the IOC is quite often required to pay income tax on its share of net benefits which should strictly amount only to profit oil, as cost oil and cost gas represent only a recoupment and recovery of costs. However, the application of income tax varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and in some cases the IOC’s notional income tax due is often paid by the NOC, or the State on behalf of the IOC, such that there is no financial impact on the IOC, there being just a journal entry between different parts of the Government. An income tax superposed on the PSC regime without appropriate tax deductions can rapidly make a fair PSC regime become a very hostile one.  In the calculation of the net take to the State under a PSC, one has to include the results of any Corporate Income Tax and all and any other taxes, levies or imposts that affect the outcome of the overall PSC.  In some PSCs, there is simply no tax, and the royalty, cost oil and gas, and production share are deemed to be final fiscal devices. Figure 4: It must be noted that the production or profit oil split is not the same as the overall net take to each party, after Daniel Johnston in International Petroleum Fiscal Regimes and Production Sharing Contracts      Government Involvement The objectives of the parties when negotiating a PSC and its terms will generally be diametrically opposed.  An IOC will strive to negotiate for itself as much independence and control as possible over operations, and it will want any State intervention in the running of the project to be kept to a minimum. Naturally, it will be keen to keep its costs low, by negotiating the highest cost recovery allowance and the largest production share it can, and it will seek the full recovery of all its costs. The Government will wish to have an overall say in the development of its resources in an orderly and systematic manner that creates synergies for future development. The Government will also wish to make as much money as possible, reduce cost recovery allowances, and have access to an IOC’s resources and relevant expertise, without spending much time and money. The Government may also have economic priorities for domestic petroleum supply to its economy to mitigate energy import requirements and obviate foreign exchange requirements. Throughout the contract from exploration to development to production, the Government will want to ensure that the IOC is undertaking a technically appropriate exploration work programme with appropriate levels of investment and that the exclusive right to access land or the offshore area is being used efficiently. In addition, the Government will typically be concerned to secure as many rights and benefits for the people and local businesses, including affected local communities, as possible.  This is generally accomplished by the optimisation of jobs and training for local workers through requirements to use local goods, services and contractor and subcontractor services as far is feasible and practical – this is what is typically called local content. Figure 5: The main elements of a PSC, after Hassan Harraz, Tanta University, Egypt, 20106   Why the PSC Model? The obvious advantage of the PSC model for a government is the minimal risk on its part throughout the value chain of the enterprise. It is thus able to reap the benefits of its natural resources without having to spend its own time and money even for development. This is not to say that the State does not pay. It inevitably pays for its share of all and any costs of exploration, development and production through the cost recovery process payable to the Contractor. In most cases, the Government will not have the technology needed to explore for and produce oil and gas, and so contracting the help of an IOC that has the appropriate skills, capacities and technology is usually necessary in order for the Government to exploit its natural resources optimally, especially in the offshore areas. The same is, however, also true for licence and concessionary arrangements where even if the host Government has an equity option to take up a participating interest in a petroleum development project it will still pay for at least its pro rata percentage share of sunk and past exploration, appraisal and development planning costs up to the point of the establishment of facilities for development and the commencement of the recovery of the petroleum. As and when exploration proves to be successful, the Government can secure long-term supplies and/or exports of oil and gas in a PSC regime, which it can trade as it sees fit. The long-term nature of a PSC enables the Government to predict future levels of oil and gas for domestic use, export and to make provisions in the national budget accordingly. Alternatively, the PSC model can be most lucrative for the State, if it takes the option of taking its share of production as a cash payment, rather than in kind. It is also very common for PSCs to contain provisions that as the production rate increases, the proportion of the production attributable to the Government may also increase, meaning that a significant and increasing proportion of the value of profit oil is paid to the host Government and its representative entity defined in the PSC. In all cases, at the initial stage of petroleum resource development, the IOC bears substantially all the financial risk. If, and only if, exploration proves successful and the discovered oil and/or gas accumulations are developed and produced, the IOC may be able to recover its costs through cost oil and/or cost gas and an agreed share in the profits of the remaining quantity of oil and gas. As to whether the PSC model is more favourable to the State than to IOCs in contrast to the licence or concessionary system, ultimately depends on the rates used for the various fiscal and commercial parameters in each system. In a concessionary regime, costs are only recovered slowly as depreciation allowances against assessable income. The speed of the recovery of costs depends entirely on the terms set by law and those allowed to be negotiated in the framework of a PSC. It may or may not be possible for an IOC to negotiate the terms of a PSC with more, or less financially and commercially attractive terms for petroleum development than a licence or concession arrangement might otherwise have offered under a prior regime. It is all about the terms of the selected regime, whichever is applied. Figure 6: Some terms of the petroleum regime may still be contained in legislation whilst others will be negotiable depending on the particular regime, after Daniel Johnston in International Petroleum Fiscal Regime and Production Sharing Contracts.     One possible negative aspect of the PSC model is that it is an agreed and contractual arrangement, and not the product of binding and enforceable legislation. Thus, any breach of the PSC by either party will constitute a breach of contract for which civil relief may be obtained.  Pursuant to the PSC model, the State always remains the owner of the resources, with the contract establishing the applicable compensation arrangements and level of NOC or Government involvement in the asset. The negotiation of a PSC is up front before any investment is made in exploration by the IOC, so the terms are locked in.  PSCs tend to afford IOCs less freedom to run an asset, with Contractors being subject to restrictions and required approvals in addition to those contained in the applicable legislation and regulation. Commonly Used Alternatives to the PSC There are several substantial alternatives to the PSC model. The differences in these alternatives are mainly in relation to the level of control granted to the IOC, the level of involvement of the NOC, and the compensatory arrangements for the investment made. Licences Generally, under a licence arrangement, there is normally little scope for an IOC to negotiate specific fiscal or commercial terms in relation to its exploration and production rights. Licensing regimes and their terms and conditions are typically standardised and embedded in legislation, such that the terms of each licence are near identical. This regime is most common in developed countries, e.g. UK, Norway, the Netherlands, and Australia. The terms of licences may change from time to time as the Government seeks to restrain or encourage sector investment.  The IOC is typically granted complete control over the contract area and complete ownership over any oil and gas that it successfully produces. Unlike PSCs, where ownership of the resources always remains with the State, in licence regimes ownership generally passes to the IOC at the wellhead, with the IOC’s profits from the sale of the oil and gas produced being the subject to general tax legislation, or specific petroleum taxation legislation. Like in PSCs, if the IOC fails to find commercially producible oil and gas within the limited terms and periods of their licence, they go home empty handed.  In some jurisdictions, the Government has an entitlement to join in at the development stage when the risks of finding oil or gas have been mitigated and it may either chose to pay its proportionate share of costs of exploration and development and participate alongside the IOCs, or be carried in some form or another. This can be a very profitable feature for the Government, but it essentially takes a slice of the venture away from the IOC venture at the proportionate sunk costs only, without any regard or compensation for the commercial value of any oil and gas discovered by the IOC. Concessions A concession arrangement is generally subject to a greater level of negotiation than a licence. The IOC is typically granted proprietary rights over the contract area and complete ownership over any oil and gas that it successfully produces, subject to the payment of a royalty and income tax, each of which may vary in rate depending on the level of production as negotiated and agreed. There may be specific taxes like the Additional Profits Tax (APT) which progressively applies further amounts of tax, the greater the rate of return of the production project. In some jurisdictions, licences have become more concession-like as the terms and conditions of the licences have increasingly become the subject of Agreements with the Government defining those agreed terms which are supplementary to or adjust the current and applicable legislation as sought by and agreed by both the Government and/or the IOCs. Service Contracts Under a service contract, the IOC provides its technical services to the State to explore and develop oil and gas resources, and therefore in so many ways, it is similar to a PSC. However, remuneration to the IOC is usually by way of a service fee or payments based on the value of oil produced in US$ per barrel for oil and other hydrocarbon liquids, or per million British Thermal Units (BTU) of energy for natural gas. The term of a service contract is often very short, leaving an IOC with considerable risk and no guarantee of a long production period Services contracts are common in Iran, Iraq and Kuwait and have also been used from time to time in Indonesia and the Philippines. The Overall Picture By and large, about half the world’s petroleum prospective Nations use licence/concessional systems and about half use PSC arrangements, though many of each of these are strictly hybrids involving features of one regime and the other. No particular petroleum regime is superior to any other and much depends on the degree to which the host Nation wishes to promote or reduce exploration investment according to the terms applied. Sometimes, the IOC will tolerate a slightly tougher regime, if they know that it will be stable and well-implemented in a professional and organised manner. Good subsurface prospectivity and a consequent high chance of finding accumulations of oil and gas can often be spoilt by self-imposed surface risks. Factors that may induce surface risk are Governments that: successively make petroleum regime changes, politically drive or make unqualified determination of fiscal and commercial terms without regard to the ultimate take to each party in the case of success, and the poor governance of the sector in general leading to untimely and late decision making. Indeed, a good regime whether it be a PSC-type or a licence/concessional one, will depend on the enforcement of its terms and conditions and the values agreed for those terms and conditions that determine economic outcomes.  The great difference between PSCs and other arrangements is that PSCs keep control over the produced oil and gas and its sale and disposal with the State, whereas licences and concessions leave such matters and the fate of the industry more to the will and imperatives of the corporates.  The intrinsic control of a contractor by the NOC under a PSC means the Government has to be better equipped, more efficient and more knowledgeable to operate such a regime than under a licence or concessionary regime. The State or its representative (usually its NOC) needs to make the PSC work in its favour as it is the manager of the entire enterprise and needs to lead the way. Any failure to step up to such challenges will result in a poorly planned development of the industry with delays, unrealised synergies leading to lost production, and overall loss of value from the resources. No matter what regime is applied to the development of petroleum resources, there is no doubt that resolute and appropriate petroleum policy formulation and firm and fair administration of the sector will pay dividends for any host Government willing to invest in such. The definition of a petroleum regime is not a new game; it has been done many times across the world by many Governments and there is very sound collective advice on the subject which is relatively inexpensive to access compared to the enormity of the task and the value of managing a Nation’s petroleum resources optimally. Figure 7: The IMF has some excellent specialists in its Fiscal Affairs Department who advise Governments on resource regimes and it has often commissioned books and studies on such matters as in the excellent handbook on Administering Fiscal Regimes for Resource Industries by Jack Calder, formerly of the Oil Taxation Office of the UK, ex libris McWalter.    

The National Cancer Services Papua New Guinea has officially resumed Brachytherapy treatment ON January 16, offering renewed hope for cancer patients across the country. This milestone marks the return of the second phase of radiotherapy treatment—Brachytherapy, also known as internal beam radiotherapy—at the ANGAU Memorial Provincial Hospital in Lae, Morobe Province. The first patient to receive this life-saving treatment was a female cervical cancer patient who had undergone external beam radiotherapy last year. She is now receiving Brachytherapy as a crucial follow-up to her treatment. The National Cancer Services PNG extended its gratitude to external partners, particularly Kumul Petroleum Holdings Limited (KPHL), for their support and financial backing. As the major funding source, KPHL played a pivotal role in ensuring the timely restoration of this critical cancer service. Acknowledgment was given to contractor Siyol International for the successful construction of the new Brachytherapy facility. Engineers involved in installing the treatment source, enabling the facility to become fully operational, also received thanks. This achievement reflects a collaborative effort between ANGAU Hospital, KPHL, and the Morobe Provincial Health Authority to improve cancer care services in the country.

The Papua New Guinea Chamber of Resources and Energy (PNG CORE) is proud to announce its Highly Commended Recognition in the Best Use of Technology (500+ category) at the 2024 EventsAir Innovation Awards. This year’s awards saw a record number of high-quality submissions, making the judging process highly competitive. Despite the strong field, PNG CORE stood out for its exceptional use of the EventsAir platform, which has greatly enhanced event management and engagement across its operations. “We are grateful to receive this recognition,” said Mrs. Pansy Taueni-Sialis, Chief Operating Officer of PNG CORE. “This award highlights our commitment to leveraging technology to connect stakeholders and in streamlining our operations. The events Air platform has been integral in delivering more efficient, engaging, and impactful events that drive growth and innovation in Papua New Guinea’s mining, oil and gas sectors.” “The platform has played an enabling role in organizing and managing successful conferences, workshops, and seminars, enhancing communication, data management, and real-time engagement for more dynamic events.” “We thank the Innovation Awards organizers, our dedicated team led by Manager Events Sheryl Peter, and partners who continue to drive our digital transformation,” Taueni-Sialis added. “This recognition encourages us to keep adopting new technologies to strengthen the resources and energy sectors and contribute to the sustainable development of Papua New Guinea.” “PNG CORE remains committed to advancing the industry and promoting innovation and collaboration in the nation’s resources and energy sectors.”