Comments

From Peter Graves on A new era for Australian aid: the ‘cautious consensus’
Lest anyone think I'm over-emphasising outcomes, as the spender of our foriegn aid, DFAT is required to account for the performance of our aid budget, under The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act of 2013, which specifies in part: "39 Annual performance statements for Commonwealth entities (1) The accountable authority of a Commonwealth entity must: (a) prepare annual performance statements for the entity as soon as practicable after the end of each reporting period for the entity; and (b) include a copy of the annual performance statements in the entity’s annual report that is tabled in the Parliament. ........ (2) The annual performance statements must: (a) provide information about the entity’s performance in achieving its purposes; : Resource Management Guide 134 provides details: https://www.finance.gov.au/government/managing-commonwealth-resources/annual-performance-statements-commonwealth-entities-rmg-134 "Achieving the purpose" of our aid doesn't get much publicity - but it needs to.
From Sitiveni Takaetali Finau on All change in Tonga
I find Mr Invarature's piece on Tonga's recent election displaying the same bias as the Kiwi and Aussie mass media churned out over the years against a political system with a monarchical head of state. Which is a pity coming from an academic institution. Headlining "change" and devoting most of the article on the PATOA losing out at the election implies the baddies are still in charge. Ho hum! How condescending to describe a free democratic election who spoke with their votes. Tonga have enjoyed a peaceful transition with the 1876 Constitution that guaranteed freedom from bondship, religion, press, etc, even though such freedoms were not understood by the general population, but equally protected by the legislative, executive, and judiciary bodies. Of course there were shortfalls, but remedied over time.
From Peter Graves on A new era for Australian aid: the ‘cautious consensus’
The "cautious consensus" may be better phrased as " what does Australia's aid achieve - demonstrably and effectively" ? The abolition of the Office of Development Effectiveness in DFAT last year needs much greater awareness amongst our federal MP's, as does moving well beyond how much aid is given. It's not the dollars allocated that matter or spent (so much) as their demonstrable impacts on the recipients. The clarion call "all aid is wasted" remains unfortunately very attractive in certain quarters of Australia. About 9.2% of the world, or 689 million people, live in extreme poverty on less than US $1.90 a day, according to the World Bank. Their lives matter. It would allay public suspicions if the Government actively promoted the benefits Austrealia's aid delivered. It's been quite some time since the Foreign Affairs Minister did this. Much less the Minister for International Development and the Pacific.
From Rohan Sweeney on A new era for Australian aid: the ‘cautious consensus’
Thanks for the great post Ben and Tamas. Really interesting to hear some of the thinking and motivations for aid policy from inside Parliament. I'm also interested in one of your last comments, that moving forward , any increases in aid will be more focused on our national interest "...... and be implemented by a department with less expertise and capacity in aid programming." Could you expand on this a little? I don't know much about the skillset make-up of DFAT's workforce. Do you have thoughts on the implications of this reduced aid programming capacity for how Australian aid is delivered.? eg. more tied/audited aid vs more aid inline with aid-effectiveness principles? Thanks again.
From John Burton on Papua New Guinea’s revolving door
The authors say "There are no electorates for which we have detailed case studies that would enable us to assess the reasons why incumbents either retained or lost their seats in each successive national election since 1982" in the full discussion paper (p. 7). Well, no, but Joe Ketan and I explained what goes on in Hagen (1987) and Dei (1992) pretty clearly (refs in DP96). Because the issues in Hagen don't change that much, and Dei only a little more, it would be probably rather tiring on the patience of readers to repeat our analyses election after election. Same plays, occasionally different actors. Spoiler alert: electoral politics in Mount Hagen (even though Ketan's paper was about Dei in 1997, he called his paper "Electoral Politics in Mount Hagen") is to be read through the shifting coalitions of tribe and phratry structures that persist over centuries. Of course, our style of presentation wasn't to everyone's taste. I remember the editor of the 1987 election volume saying he supposed there was a place for my analysis in it but that it wasn't what he was expecting. I grudgingly got in as the last chapter ... Re-reading Ketan's paper just now, I am transported back in time to the soundtrack of Hagen life, always on continuous loop, playing in the street, in the house, in the back of cars, everywhere three and four decades ago as today. Ketan writes "What appears to outsiders as bewildering makes perfect sense to Highlanders and one only needs to ask the people themselves". For the way he writes, and I hope I cloned some of it in my study of the previous election, is this soundtrack! I have to correct him on two points. "Highlanders" is too broad a category. We were discussing specifically Mount Hagen. Jiwaka is a bit different, Simbu different again, Eastern Highlands different again. "One only needs to ask the people themselves" - not really. You can't get a word in edgeways, let alone a question, for the constant stream of political gossip, speculation and corrective information for all to hear. Will so-and-so run? Who will give their block votes to whom? Which tribes will split because of internal strife? No, it can't be that because (long explanation of history and tribal alliances follows). Sorry we can't help with the other 109 electorates ...
From Sepesa Rasili on Localising Pacific consulting
Refreshing article....localisation!!!
From Shailendra B Singh on New terrain, old problems: identity-based conflict and extremism in Asia, 2021
This write-up reminds that identity politics continues to be a problem in some Pacific countries as well, such as Fiji and the Solomon Islands, even if simmering beneath the surface, with social media exacerbating the situation, and governments cracking down with harsher media laws, which in itself become a civil rights concern. It's a vicious cycle. Conflict prevention and peacebuilding need to be ramped up in the Pacific. RAMSI is a strong indicator that prevention is far less costly than the cure, in both in human and monetary terms.
From Charles Scheiner on Timor-Leste will soon be running on fumes
Obrigadu, maun Jose. As to how much money had gone to Chinese contractors, see <a>http://www.laohamutuk.org/econ/ChinaInTL26June2021NotesEn.pdf</a>, especially page 22. It totals about $1.3 billion, which is about 40% of what TL has spend for major infrastructure projects. As to the Strategic Development Plan, the government has been talking about reviewing it, but I haven't seen anything serious yet.
From Peter Poulsen on Tasmania’s ban on Tonga’s SWP workers
I understand that some Tongan workers from South Australia are moving to work in Tasmania having completeted their work in SA.
From Taylor Scrybe on Challenges starting a business: a personal account
Great article Dinuk! One thing that really accelerated my career was having a Mentor! I use www.lisnic.com to connect with mine and would definitely recommend joining the platform if you are looking to scale a start-up or small business!
From Agro-commodities on What is the future of work in agri-food?
Stunning post! Thanks for sharing with us.
Subscribe to our newsletter