Comments

The writer ignores one critical element in this disaster. Most of the money that was borrowed for development projects have been stolen and syphoned off by politicians and high government officials acting together. So, very little of the money actually went into the projects themselves. The costs of most projects appears to have been inflated two or three times the actual cost for the express purpose of syphoning money off. The Global International Integrity Project in Washington has estimated that between 2005 to 2014, 19 billion dollars have been taken out of the country illegally. That is far more than what the country needs to service the debt and for all imports in a given year.

Hi Satish, I think you are referring to the case of the SWP worker who appeared before the Senate Committee recently. It is important to note that this worker received $100 after deductions for just one week, and that their average weekly earnings for their contract period was in fact $394. The $100 minimum has been increased by the employer concerned (MADEC) to $200 a week. Maybe $100 is too low even for a single week. But unless you are going to get workers to pay their full airfare there are going to be early weeks of low pay after deduction. And the occasional week of low payment wouldn’t explain absconding. For our Pacific Possible project with the World Bank we had to compare the net earnings of seasonal workers in Australia and New Zealand, and they was actually slightly higher in Australia (based on Gibson and McKenzie numbers). More than a few workers have absconded: last year it was about 10%. Two key differences between NZ and Australia are the one Charlotte highlights: the absence in NZ of non-scheme employers and intermediaries trying to persuade the workers to leave; and the non-availability in that country of protection bridging visas as de facto work visas. Regards, Stephen

You were a seasonal worker, so you know how hard it is when you come to Australia. The change I would like to see is the reduction in deductions and the debt that the workers arrive in Australia with. Really if these workers are coming to Australia to do a job that Australians don't want to do, should they be charged an airfare? Clothing - they aren't equipped with proper clothing for climate, yet they have a clothing allowance for work gear. Accommodation - inadequate in lots of cases, 3 people sharing a room and paying $200 each a week, to share a room in a backpacker overlooking Sydney Harbour for 7 nights is $138. Then they are charged for transport to and from farm. By the time they get their first pay, they have hardly anything to live on. Food in Australia is expensive now. So if any change should be made, it should be to the deductions that are costing these seasonal workers grief. Please consider this when implementing change.

Nice Blog! Thank you for sharing the information regarding anti-money laundering regulations. As it requires providers to implement a risk-based approach (RBA) in implementing global AML/CTF. AML penalties worked for AML& monetary violations consistence professionals, organizations and regulators for checking AML occasions, cases, and activities.

I am an Ni-Vanuatu having facing the challenge and achievement as an SWP in 2009 now wish to become an agent or direct recruiter to contractor in Aussie or NZ. How do I obtain the list of Australia an NZ Vanuatu contractors to negotiate and request an approved employment letter of sponsorship? Please provide me some contacts I believe in implementing some agency policy to cater for convenient access to join SWP and a formal way of better communication systems with contractors and employees while I Vanuatu.

Thanks for this informative post Charlotte, and for the helpful comments Dan. Pacific seasonal workers leave home to earn income, and they are told before departure of the large sums of money they will save while abroad. Those on RSE remit enough, even when on lower wages than some of their SWP-counterparts, because costs of upkeep in New Zealand are generally lower than those in Australia. We cannot blame the few SWP-workers for absconding if they received $100 in their bank account for a week's work - amounts insufficient to pay for food for the week. Not all SWP-workers are paid these paltry sums and not all abscond, but those who do deserve a sympathetic ear on their reasons for leaving.

Reading this again after the creation of 7 seats. Two additional points: 1. Since the formula for creation of new electorate relies on population size, it becomes troublesome (legally) when redistricting is done based on outdated or unreliable census data. 2011 census was a mess, so it’s 2001 then. That would be outdated, and may become a legal question on whether 2001 numbers can be used for redistricting. 2. Though MPs cannot part of the EBC, they can form a parliamentary committee to scrutinise EBC proposals. Not sure whether parliament had a committee to look into the EBC proposal (the proposal for Heal/Jiwaka were rejected twice by parliamentary committee before it was accepted). 3. When EBC proposal is presented, there is a risk that parliament can cherry pick which proposal to accept, which is what they have done. 4. Gerrymandering is not possible in PNG. With no commitment to party, MPs in the new electorates can switch anytime. The government cannot benefit from new districts if numbers were what they were interested in.

Thanks Cameron - two comments (1) the foreign aid budget needs to be protected from any Government's domestic priority of a "balanced budget". Governing is a lot more than an annual accounting exercise and any reference to the dollars in the aid budget is just the start of why Australia gives aid. (2) it's to be effective in demonstrably reducing poverty and improving the lives of people in the recipient countries. So I agree that the Office of Development Effectiveness needs to be re-created. It would be the next step in embedding the practice of evaluation across the Australian Public Service. This is now making a comeback, after the former "managing for results" era disappeared after 1996. In December last year, the Finance Department operationalised this welcome development, with its Resource Management Guide 130 "Evaluation in the Commonwealth". https://www.finance.gov.au/government/managing-commonwealth-resources/planning-and-reporting/commonwealth-performance-framework/evaluation-commonwealth-rmg-130 It's a good guide to undertaking program evaluations, but such practice needs to be both implemented across APS Departments and embedded in long-term practice. A good start would be in our aid programs.

This is a good summary and echoes what I have been saying for a few years now. I recruit for both Australia and NZ and there are several noticeable differences between how the respective governments have handled the situation. 1. NZ Government takes a very hands-on approach with community groups and RSEs. It is quite common for government reps to speak directly to workers. This is virtually unknown in Australia. 2. The various sending country governments have constant dialogue with their NZ counterparts, and the feeling is one of diplomacy and cooperation. One gets the impression that they are all on the same page – unlike what happens in Australia which for some countries tends to be more antagonistic. On a personal worker level, just ask the workers! When I ask the RSE workers why they don't abscond like the SWP/PLS workers, they will unanimously say that they have no need to because (a) they are treated like family and feel welcome. (There is strong rapport between employers and their workers) (b) they earn good money, despite a lower hourly rate, the end-of-week earnings are typically and regularly higher than their SWP counterparts, because (c) the employment conditions and regulations encourages and rewards those who want to make money – there is none of this nonsense 38 hour rule for example, and finally (d) NZ workers do not face a barrage of negativity from media, community do-gooders, a growing expatriate community, diplomats, unions that constantly tell them they are exploited. This latter factor is a key reason and those making these spurious claims of exploitation comes from ulterior motives – and the workers believe it! In a nutshell, RSE workers know they are onto a good thing and see the advantages of remaining in the program far exceeding any advantage in absconding. But at the end of the day, the NZ Government is proactive about things, while the Australian Government has a largely "unimportant" approach to the situation.

Very well stated on the importance of the NGDP Thank you

Important reflection to be shared widely

I find this interesting in the approach being undertaken, with particular focus at the local level. This is an area that require more attention, hopefully such steps as these paves the way forward in giving shape to development thought and practice. The concept of "participation" needs to be rethought, a theme that remains at the heart of any development discourse. I have a lot to share but would keep it short. This is an area I am passionate to learn and contribute, hopefully in the near future towards the development of our beautiful PNG. I will leave with few questions here: It is widely acknowledged that development encompass a growing set of interrelated themes such as technological choice, the environment, basic needs, human development, and participatory research and action, etc ... what really is the purpose and direction of development? Will a new direction ever be set if the generality of PNG citizens be considered mere beneficiaries of projects rather than the real protagonists of development? And can this change come about in the institutional vacuum that characterises the life of such a vast number of human beings? Why the enhancement of institutional capacity among rural populations and the inhabitants of poor urban neighbourhoods has been neglected by so many development plans in PNG is a question for which I have never had an adequate answer. I would be happy to learn from these kind of development efforts, the nature of the development thought and practice and what possible next steps can be taken in our country.