Comments

Mr Kaiku this is an excellent piece of advise worth considering by our Government and development partners. I believe that the five national goals and directive principles were divinely inspired by God to our forefathers who wrote the preamble of our National Constitution. The Five National Goals & Directives Principles were comprehensive and whole inclusive of what national development challenges were ahead of their time. They are relevant to our present time. It is therefore incumbent upon the current Government or any future Governments to annually review and reprioritize our current development trajectory based on these important directives and guidelines. I applaud the author of this paper who outlined the importance of the five NG & DP and their need to be made relevant again. The main challenge now is the rapid phase of globalization that is somewhat impeding our national goals - to become globally relevant while keeping PNG ways and traditions. There are other challenges such as the introduction of big data or the internet of ways and AIs which places our national goals and directive principles to meet the needs and requirements on how we fair as a independent sovereign state but at the same time become an effective member of the global community of nations. Overall, the writers call is a timely reminder to all Papua New Guineans to become active participants of nation building so that collectively we build a stronger, prosperous, wiser and smarter nation.

Thanks Minister for emphasising that Australia's development policy now is to include: "stronger monitoring, evaluation and learning". Given that the Australian Centre for Evaluation is now being developed in Treasury, how will you embed the on-going practice of evaluation in DFAT and our development policy? There is a significant difference between "implement" and "embed", especially if you plan to increase public support for our aid by highlighting the results from it.

Well synthesized

A good piece, tankyu tumas Kiery for this analysis.

The Minister drew parallels with the ambitions of the referendum question. ‘… genuine partnerships based on respect, listening and learning from each other’ is the approach used effectively in successful domestic First Nations activities. As one of Ninti’s First Nations leaders says ‘it takes a palette to paint a beautiful picture’.

If anyone has the depth on SI and the reach with stakeholders, that person is Dr Transform Aqorau. SINU however does not have the luxury of resources so he and his team will need all the support he can get. One thing however is certain, that a Honiara Seminar will be lively and engaging. Wishing the leadership all the best.

Splendid idea, Dr Transform. Look forward to hearing how this progresses.

Colin, is it the same everywhere in the Pacific Islands lease is an instrument of land alienation just as the lease income is an agent of dependency without any real development for land owners.

Thanks Namos for these thoughtful and insightful remarks.

What if the locally owned and operated Consultancy Companies are, simply, bad? Is it DFAT's role to build the capacity of that local private sector?

Dr. Aqorau's proposal is truly commendable, evoking memories of the highly successful Annual Pacific Updates once hosted by the ANU Crawford School throughout the Pacific Island nations in bygone years. These events, generously supported by DFAT, garnered enthusiastic local receptions. What distinguishes Dr. Aqorau's proposal is its potential to elevate SINU to a leading role in this endeavor. The opportunity for donors, including DFAT, to contribute to this promising initiative is both exciting and promising.

Hi From a Melanesian perspective, I believe that policing our societies begins with upholding our ethical value that governs individual morality. Traditionally the ethical values that governs our society had a great impact in the peoples way of life. However, this is not the case nowadays due to culture shock and the inception of globalization that changed the peoples way of life. Hence, our traditional system of policing our society was very effective in a way that it control the behaviors and attitudes of the people. The policing system that is now practiced is more institutionalized and it is design to protect the so called wealthier and higher class people. Therefore, when a simple person from the society is involved in a crime or a offence he/she gets bitten up badly whereas the higher class is more of a respect and good questioning. What is the difference here? Is the government policing system created to defend humankind and constitute laws that will govern individual morality or is it becoming an institution that protects the higher class more than general public. Hence our traditional ethical principles were based on respect and integrity, although some practices were evil in nature but they all contributed one way or the other to maintain peace, unity and a good common relationship with everyone in the society.