Page 271 of 822
From Allen Red on International development research impact: 10 key insights
Hi. Your blog is very nice and informative. Thank you for giving information regarding 1. Partnerships should be at the foundation of international development research.
2. Meaningful participatory processes enable local actors to inform the research agenda and be involved in the research design.
3. The best funding arrangements support long-term partnerships and research co-design from the outset.
From Greg Westwood on ASEAN ag visa makes no sense
Ask why Aussies won't do this, because the money is crap. Once you pay for your accom and food, there ain't much left. Don't forget tax, might be lower now? They want to save a bit and also send money back for their family. These people will soon realise they can't save money and will look for other work or disappear.
From Terence Wood on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Thank you Ness,
Good point: in Vanuatu, as in Solomons and PNG, numerous parties in parliament (plus independents depending on rules) lead to coalition politics, and coalition politics contributes to instability and transactional politicking.
Laws designed to reduce party numbers are tempting, but may backfire, or have limited effects, and -- as you rightly state -- are worryingly anti-democratic. They probably aren't the pathway to change.
Thanks again for your comment.
Terence
From Richard Leren on Cross-border trade: Indonesia and PNG
What is the control at the moment with the presence of pandamic at the border of trading goods and services?
Is it still operating with at least some operative measure?
From Ness Karr on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Your point about the differences in Vanuatu society such as the anglophone/francophone divide spilling over into the political arena is spot on. Another impact of these divisive elements is that they breed too many political parties which promote differing Policies concerning national issues and these parties when elected into Parliament, don't have the capacity to form a one party Government since none of them have the capability to command the majority of the 52 seats, thus giving rise to the Coalition Government which has been the status quo in Vanuatu since the 1990's. A Government of such nature is fragile due to the differences harboured by these political parties and this is evident by the fact that there had never been a Coalition Government in Vanuatu that lasted it's entire term, apart from the Coalition led by Former PM Salwai which was the first to do so. However, that was not the case from 1980-1991 when there were only two prominent political parties in Vanuatu which resulted in an 11 year period of Governance by the Vanuaaku Pati, a fact that prompted some to call for Legislators to reduce the number of Political Parties in order to facilitate a healthy Political outcome, an option which some analysts pointed out is contrary to democratic principals.
From Terence Wood on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Thank you Greg,
That's a very interesting observation. The same discrepancy exists Solomon Islands, where I've had the chance to witness parliament in action - a small number of MPs have a clear interest in national issues, and capacity to address them, and they engage a lot. But most MPs don't.
But in Solomons there doesn't seem to be a trend of improvement over time. If you're witnessing change in Vanuatu (even if it's just a trend in potential performance), that's interesting, and possibly significant. Presumably it stems from voters placing more emphasis on candidates' capacity to address national issues?
Terence
From Greg Nimbtik on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Very interesting insight Terence. One of the emerging trends in Vanuatu observed in last legislature and current legislature is the quality of debates in Vanuatu's parliament which seems to silence many who enter the parliament with limited experiences of politics and understanding of how government administration operates including general knowledge of global development issues and challenges.
There are now many young experienced politicians in parliament who are well qualified. Once the parliamentary debates become more evidenced based and hold both sides in scrutiny then we expect people to realise the potential of voting someone with high calibre. Already you can tell the differences of quality of leaders in parliament by listening to them during parliament session. I personally see a possibility for leadership transformation.
I thought this is one of potential observation.
From Kavaikiknow on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
The bad news is in Vanuatu they MPs work for a few masters, the generous donors sometimes cleverly disguised.There is nothing sacred about political democracy and certainly not political parties. If their offer - their Ballot - is unacceptable to customary Values, then don't accept it. Politics is for kids,and for the west. How did Trump win with lesser popular votes loving loyalists: stop immigration to preserve white identity, tarriff on China goods to revive manufacturing in USA.This can't be overlooked! Sounds like everyone in American politics.
Well Trump was divisive but that didn't lead to the 2020 election having low turnout.😀
From Terence Wood on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Thank you Anna for a very thought-provoking comment.
I agree with much of what you say, I'll just note two points of potential disagreement for discussion's sake.
Point 1:
You're certainly correct that politics in a country like the US (or Australia or NZ) often involves people or organisations acting for the sake of advancing their own interests (usually financial interests).
The crucial difference between the US, Aus, or NZ, and countries where clientelism is prevalent though, is that in the US, Aus & NZ, engagement usually occurs with a view to changing national policy. For example, wealthy people striving to have tax rates lowered. Or, to give an example from New Zealand, farmers trying to stay out of our emissions trading scheme. This differs from clientelist countries. In clientelist countries politics usually hinge around actors trying to gain personal or very localised benefits.
Point 2:
The question of proximity is very interesting. Jack Corbett has a paper on it in which he argues that proximity makes Pacific politics very different. Interestingly though, in larger Pacific countries, like Solomon Islands (which I know best), MPs actually often end up surprisingly remote, and their connections to communities are mediated through one or two sets of intermediaries. It's a common complaint in Solomons that people can't get access to their MPs.
It would be fascinating to survey Pacific countries and see where proximity between politicians and voters really is strong, and where MPs are actually less accessible.
I do definitely agree that OECD countries have only limited lessons relevant for most Pacific countries though.
Thanks again for an excellent comment.
Terence
From Anna Naupa on What political crises in Vanuatu and Samoa tell us about their past and future
Thank you for the analysis Terence. Two key points emerge for me: (i) the homogeneity of a state (one language, one culture) makes national cohesion a somewhat simpler exercise than highly multicultural, multilingual states …. both Samoa and Vanuatu have key high-level customary institutions but as the article states, one has more influence over politics blurring the separation of state, (church) and custom governance, while the other has a more pronounced separation similar to other democratic systems around the world. (ii) Political patronage (which is common globally, see for example the USA where political patronage is institutionalized and even encouraged through political financing) at the expense of platform-based, programmatic electoral politics has been a persistent trend, most likely due to scale. Comparisons with larger, more populous states are possibly redundant given the greater proximity of political leaders to people in smaller states like those we have here in the Pacific. Is it a simple equation of political proximity + patronage = clientelist politics + less national cohesion? I would argue that for small island states like ours, OECD lessons in electoral politics are interesting to know, but fundamentally we should be aiming to reframe democratic/political practice to our realities. I would aim for systems that foster political proximity + strategic issues-based politics + public accountability to build national cohesion.
From Satish Chand on Yesterday’s regional visa announcement: the end of the PLS?
The design of the proposed Ag Visa will "consider permanent residency pathways and regional settlement", something that both the PLS and SWP strictly disallow. It may be time to consider the creation of a single temporary worker visa, or better still to use the existing Temporary Skilled Shortage (TSS) visa, with the same conditions for workers regardless of their nationality. The above could then be complemented with national quotas as is being practiced with WHMs now.
From Ian Anderson on PNG’s plummeting vaccination rates: now the lowest in the world?