Comments

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.

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.

I understand that some Tongan workers from South Australia are moving to work in Tasmania having completeted their work in SA.

Great article!

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!

Stunning post! Thanks for sharing with us.

Excellent piece. Loving seeing more and more Pacific consultants step up!

I totally agree with you but still want to see the budget constrain and IC of these things please.

Thanks for sharing these valuable insights and spotlighting Pacific capacity.

Great post Joel and valuable comments in response. Australia would do far better in protecting us all - both in terms of national and human security - if we worked collaboratively with countries in the region and partnered with them in making everybody's lives and livelihoods more secure. While offering extra supplies to countries in the region should be welcomed and extended further, it's sad to note that GPs in Australia are currently destroying doses of Pfizer that are not being taken up as rapidly as predicted given our now high aggregate rates of immunisation. (There remain of course a number of situations in which access to and uptake of vaccines has been limited and inequitable; this needs to be urgently addressed.) Australia could do so much better by partnering generously and in solidarity with others - at home, in our region, and globally.

The SWP `a tightly regulated alternative' patrolled by the Australian Border Force (The Australian 10/11/2021 "Australia's 'Slave Trade' Disgrace"). `Less exploitative than' even in your own terms still means exploitative. Minister Littleproud defending farmers and labour hire firms is to be expected: some critical analysis of the conditions faced by SWP and other casual short-term contract workers might be expected from what purports to `provide a platform for the best in aid and development analysis and commentary'. For example, why does the ABF, the local equivalent of the most obnoxious repressive apparatuses found world-wide, become involved in what purports to be a market in labour? Might this have something to do with SP workers being forbidden from self-organising to reduce their exploitation in wages and working conditions? Might walking off the job and taking up better pay and conditions, including in urban areas suggest something about whom the SWP's tight regulations favour? Simple answer of course: the SWP and similar labour-hire schemes are not in any sense `free' but involve taking workers from countries where living conditions have been attacked for years and transporting them to another form of unfreedom, underpinned by the ABF.

There is a lot of optimism in Prof Negin's argument but one which would fall on deaf ears in Canberra and amongst bureaucrats generally. It is the realm of political decision-making rather than scientific based advice that is currently driving global politics of Vaccine Nationalism and protectionism in terms of sharing R&D in this domain. From my limited understanding of mRNA technology development, whilst revolutionary in its potential to cure many modern-day diseases, it has been highly unstable in the production zone. The only country which could potentially partner up on an equal playing field from the region's democracies would be Japan. India, which has its own well-developed pharmaceutical industry, has been quite protectionist during earlier stages of the pandemic and has entered into its own agreements with the global pharmaceutical giants. Indonesia, whilst in dire need of additional Western-made vaccines (it already has access to Russian and Chineses vaccines) would have a limited value of mRNA vaccines. Being an archipelago country it simply does not have the deep storage facilities required for such vaccines. Only "mainland" areas surrounding Jakarta would be benefiting from those vaccines. For Indonesia, it makes absolute sense to have a much greater access to Australian-made AZ vaccines. Perhaps that technology could be shared in an agreement its CSL but in reality, this would be highly unlikely. As for Vietnam, it would make more sense for them to cooperate with Cuba (as they have already started on the vaccine front with Cuba having been a leader in biotech from the developing states in the Americas due to their cooperative model of biotech development). Our other options would be Thailand, with its perpetually unstable leadership which would make any private investment more unlikely, then Malaysia and Japan. My bets would go to the latter, and it would really require bold leadership from within the university sector as well as their govt partners to embark on such a proposal. What do you think Prof Negin, would Japan be a likely partner in this regard?