More young people between the age bracket of 25 and 40 are taking up positions of mandated leadership in politics and other areas.

This is part of a gradual shift in the composition of leadership from the top at the Parliament and the Public Service (bureaucracy) down to the wards in the local level government areas.

The shift is taking place as the members of the generations that took us from the formative years of Papua New Guinea from the 1960s, through to the 1980s make way through retirement, ill-health or death and circumstantial attrition especially in the political offices.

The pace at which the changing of the guard in leadership has taken place in some areas and categories of mandated political leadership in particular, is telling.

In politics at the local level government (LLG) membership level, some people younger than 25 have been elected into office as ward councillors in some of the districts across PNG. I have been keenly observing the enthusiasm of our young men in particular, whom we often label as “youths”, to contest for the ward councillor seats in different districts and win since the provincial and local level government reforms took effect in July 1995.

The trend as continued throughout the 2000s and 2010s. What has happened is a complete opposite to the pre-July 1995 era. Back in those days, young men would not care about contesting a ward councillor’s seat. The ward councillor position was viewed as an extension of the traditional village elders’ roles as chiefs and headmen for the rural and remote districts and in the urban wards, it was reserved for elderly community leaders.

As the provincial government and LLG reforms took effect on July 1995, it donned on me that the youths’ newfound interest in the ward councillor positions was to do with the improved regular allowances for the positions and privileges of leadership at the LLG, District and Provincial levels than the role at hand to lead. Ward members who were elected as Presidents or Mayors of their LLGs automatically became members of the provincial assemblies and the competition for these positions increased in each election since 1997, the next national election after the reforms took effect in 1995.

The reformed system allowed the Members of the National Parliament for the districts to lead the LLGs and they automatically provided the political leadership and planning oversight as chair of their District Development Authority (previously Joint District Budget and Planning Priority Committee). The Provincial (Regional) Members who assumed the role of provincial governors as members of the National Parliament also became chairpersons of the provincial assemblies and provincial executive councils and oversaw the budgets and planning for the provinces.

The post-reform MPs, which included the governors, found themselves to be in direct contact with the political discourses at the district and ward levels where they could engage with the LLG ward members or councilors. This new dynamics of leadership accompanied by the opportunity to be in charge of the

budget saw the MPs courting the members, which were the councilors and the LLG presidents or mayors, to gain support and popularity in the districts and provinces.

As for the ward council members, the opportunity to rub shoulders with the National MPs in the DDAs and provincial assemblies and be involved in the planning and budgeting meant a heightened interest for election to these offices.

At the same time, the quest for the National Parliament seats in each district and province also witnessed increased participation of younger candidates – which was a change from the days of the domination of established candidates with status and wealth.

In the 1997 National Election which took place in the wake of the Sandline Crisis, many young men and women contested and some ended up unseating seasoned and long-serving Members of Parliament. Some of these young winning candidates were straight out of university and entered Parliament.

In the following national election in 2002, the same thing happened and among the young candidates was a Tari young man named James Marape who had just finished university few years prior and contested the Tari-Pori seat under the People’s Progress Party (PPP) banner. It is reported that the young Marape based is hope on the youth barracking for him and the youths in term nick-named him “16 Marape” (with 16 years old as a turning point for youth into adulthood) during the rallies on the streets of Tari and in the outlying villages and hamlets of the district. While “16 Marape” did not win in 2002, he and the younger candidates like him in different electorates left a mark of what could happen in future elections - that is, and avalanche of young candidates competing for the seats against the established and traditional ‘big men’ candidates was on the cards. Sure enough, Marape won in the subsequent election in 2007 and has been in Parliament since.

Marape entered Parliament with a number of other young leaders and in the 2012 and 2017 elections more young candidates contested and won. The young candidates who won in 2012 and 2017 are now among the dominant members of the government led by Mr Marape as Prime Minister.

Mr Marape made it quite clear upon assuming the position of Prime Minister on 30 May 2019 that he woul like to work with the young first and second term MPs to break away from the old style of ‘big men’ leadership.

Many saw Marape’s views and conviction to populate his cabinet and Parliamentary committees with the youth as a breath of fresh air. Others saw Marape’s favour for the youth as a risky undertaking given that with youth comes inexperience and the danger of underperformance and making mistakes.

The writing his now on the wall – young people without heaps of money in the bank, assets and ‘big name’ are willing to make a play at leadership. We saw that really play out in the recently concluded by-election in the Moresby Northwest.

Nobody can stop the young leaders who meet the age requirements and other minimum standards to vie for leadership position. My main concern would for them to do so with the right intentions. We do not want to see a repeat of a few cases over the last several elections where a number of young leaders straight of university or in the first few years of employment ending up in Parliament and enriching themselves and ignoring the people that voted them into office.