Comments

We all witness the luxurious lifestyle of many politicians and it's our guess that they robbed public funds... But it's not proven so it cannot be quoted in a professional writeup... Overall a comprehensive analysis of what happened to Sri Lanka....

Absolutely right. The place was ransacked by Rajapakse’s and the money was corruptly siphoned out of the country until it broke its back. These idiots thought the money supply was unlimited

This is a good exposition of a difficult story. Essentially bad governance and lack of accountability is the source of the problem. These problems did not start in this century. They predates at least to 1970's when the democratic system started its reform process that transferred power to an Executive presidency and took away instruments of public accountability and scrutiny. This followed a significant brain drain and severe lack of absorptive capacity at present, that has led to excessive mismanagement to the extent that managers themselves do not consider that there is a problem. I fully agree with the comment "The pandemic can be seen as the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’ rather than the cause of Sri Lanka’s woes". The Pandemic just exposed underlying structural weaknesses that remained unaddressed over several decades. I cannot think of any quick fixes unless effective democracy can be restored and accountability brought to bear. That is a long bow. Hopefully, the current sad state may pave way to some welcome changes. It is unconceivable that it can get much worse.

Illegal money transfer is a major problem mainly in developing countries. UN estimates the amount of money transferred from African countries is 86 billion USD per year. The corruption index is almost same for all developing countries. The writer's analysis is well balanced view of what happened since 1977 when the economy was opened and successive governments wanted to balance the budget using foreign loans and aids without improving the export market and local industries.

I would like to receive regular post from the Development Policy Center on this. I would really like the PNG Govt to seriously look deeply into these before rushing into signing MOU’s with the Australian Govt.

Utterly myopic kakistocratic government whose sole aim appears to be a wealth generating exercise for the benefit of one family. The need of the hour is to defenestrate the incumbents and appoint a national Government to bring calm and stability to a volatile desperate situation, engage with the IMF and restructure the debt, restore integrity to the financial system by appointing qualified people to crucial positions, ensure the Judiciary is independent, and appoint credible politicians to the various ministries.

Sounds great, BUT THE TWO COUNTRY GOVERNMENT NEED TO PAY VANUATU ROYALTY.

Knowledgeable, analytical, logical and based on good theory. Well presented as well.

This is a good analysis over the situation and the regarding the tax cuts gave this crisis the boost it needed

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.