Comments

I would like to thank the author for this article, as it gives another opportunity to shine the spot light on an epidemic that continues to infect our society today. Yes, the root causes should be identified and dealt at the root level. Unfortunately identifying the root causes might require immense time and resources because there may be many root causes contributing to violence against women. Identifying one or two significant root cause contributor of violence against women and addressing it in areas of significant occurrence might have more impact in dealing with this issue. On another note, I appeal to the government to consider addressing this issue more specifically in PNG's long term (Vision 2050), medium term (MTDP III & DSP) and short term (Sector Plans) development goals. That way, resources could be allocated specifically for addressing violence against women and not just for covering a broad topic such as "gender inequality". The government budget (in line with fiscal objectives) can allocate funds as well to identify root causes of violence against women and address one-off expenditures where it is reasonable to do so. Involving the equal participation of women and promoting the empowerment of women can contribute to PNG's economic growth and development however, issues facing women such as violence against women and other forms of oppression will first need to be dealt with.

Obrigado barak Michael. It is really SAD that the basic needs of the the people in Oecusse are put aside in the name of "megaprojects" - which is not even a dream but an illusion far, far, far from the realities of Oecusse. There is a HUGE contrast between the "megaprojects" (building a Luxury hotel (with swimming pool), constructing costly residences for local leaders, and international airport) and the lives of the 'ordinary - mortal' Oecusse people, whose houses are mostly constructed with 'talitahan no piku'. It is good to have big dreams but it has to be based on the reality of a given context, otherwise it is simply an illusion. It is even SADDER to see that some of the Oecusse people would believe in those 'megaprojects' and that one day oecusse would be like Singapore. But I am also aware that those who are into these 'megaprojects' are simply trying to survive in life. As an Oecusse oan, I could only hope that the genuine and goodhearted individuals, groups, organisations, who care (in many different ways) for the people of Oecusse, will continue to do so. It is in these genuine and goodhearted people that the people in Oecusse hope to have a better life in the future. Again, thanks Michael.

Great article Michael. We hope one day someone will be held accountable for all this wasted money while basic services have not improved across the country. Perhaps the responsibility doesn't rest with one group or party, but rather the whole political class.

Thank you Amanda. Indeed the situation has been solved leading to my financial ruin and public disgrace. So far nobody from the University Council has contacted me to apologize, and nobody has offered any kind of reparations. You are right that anybody in PNG can be accused of "false pretence" regarding academic credentials, and there seem to be no way to disprove them. Nobody should expose themselves, and knowledge workers should stay away from the country when they can. None of the universities offer independently or internationally accredited programs, and they are in no position to do so. There is no longer reliable internet on the campuses, so foreign academics can not communicate with their families. There is also inadequate security and no fumigation against malaria mosquitos. On the whole, they offer negative social value. Stay away.

It was all a political witch hunt instigated by the infamous and fantastically corrupt regime of Peter O'Neill, which did not like independent, foreign vice chancellors. In fact, Professor Warren was pushed out shortly after me. The six month long Sevua Inquiry in 2013 cleared my off all allegations of false pretence regarding my academic credentials, and concluded my appointment was legitimate and regular. Several times, I submitted my credentials to the University Registrar, the Department of Higher Education and All this was accepted by the University Council, which in fact renewed my term in 2015. In 2016, I received a positive evaluation on my performance as Vice Chancellor, which included my active internationalisation policy started in 2014. I negotiated and as legal representative signed over 30 international agreements beneficial to the University. From 2014 to 2017, 77 faculty and staff members went abroad to pursue higher degrees or for training. Personally I traveled no more than 70 days per year (less than 30%), meanwhile chairing over 60 meetings per year and answering over 1,100 emails per month. I set up strict cost-minimization, mission approval and reporting procedures, which personally I followed diligently. All this has been extensively documented. The only court case for "false pretence" has been thrown out by the courts on 29 January 2019, because since 2012 my accusers have not been able to produce a shred of evidence. They should be ashamed of themselves. So far nobody has communicated with me to say sorry, or offer any form of reparation. The damage to my health, my family, and personal finances of this episode has been enormous.

Thanks for the insightful comments Sarah; there have been many calls to 'do development differently' over the years (<a href="https://www.ids.ac.uk/projects/the-big-push-forward/" rel="nofollow">Big Push Forward</a> and <a href="https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/resource-documents/11199.pdf" rel="nofollow">doing development differently</a>) and of course the lifetime work of Robert Chambers, who you rightly mention. But it seems to me change in the sector is stubbornly resisted. I think it helps to call out the power dynamics at play and support reflective work, as you have done here, so that helps change. Thanks for your contribution to important conversations, and perhaps change!

I support you 100 % on three points you raised: 1. For continued support in capacity building and institutional strengthening for leadership and good governance. 2. International NGOs to not compete with indegenous NGOs for funding. How do you ensure this does not happen when DFAT, especially, works through third party contractors who are mostly the same few companies it has been working with forever, it seems. Maybe we can have a list of PNG based national NGOs who have directly and successfully received direct funding from DFAT and are facilitating for other indigenous organically grown NGOs? 3. Men's involvement in violence against women program. I see positive change in the effort by civil society supported by INGOs (and others) through trainings attended by Police and Village Court magistrates. This effort needs continual funding support. I attended a few court cases in two Districts and witnessed magistrates standing up for wives of co-workers and Police who sought redress from the courts against abusive husbands who are law enforcers. I attribute this change to trainings conducted on human rights, law, and referral support system. A gap I see: too many international trips taken by leaders of organisations 'to show face' about good work they are doing with support for the international development partner. Who gets credit, and who gets funding? How can this 'friendship' idea be supported 60% for indigenous NGOs and 40% funding to international NGOs? I am of the view that donor aid gives less than 5% to groups they support and much of the slice goes to institutional strengthening for themselves.

Thank you for the blog Sarah. It explains some of the issues that face women's NGOs and women's leaders so eloquently. It is great that you have shared these experiences. It is definitely time for donors to be doing development differently, I agree wholeheartedly. If we want effective outcomes, more thought needs to be given to the many issues you raise by multilateral agencies, bilaterals and INGOs. It is a challenge for the sector, and it is something that needs to be front and centre in all development debates, conferences and policies.

Very interesting analysis of the two prime ministers.

I share your scepticsm regarding international donors and their use of funds. On the other hand, resources can obviously be helpful to strengthen and accelerate transformative processes. So gold standard would be to provide funding in a way that avoids the power money has on shaping and prioritizing the development work, with respect for the concerns and the energy of the people Is that possible? I think so.

Vanuatu is not alone in this.

Very much so, Michael - when they come to the UK from Timor, their extended family network comes with them! One agency told me that they can't employ Timorese interpreters to do work for some clients like police forces or courts because they know the people they're translating for from back home, so there's a conflict of interest. My joke is that Oxford (or Blackbird Leys) is twinned with Lospalos and their children speak Fataluku as well as Tetum despite having been born and raised here.