Comments

Thanks James, Great comment. I don't doubt you're right, the lion's share of the RAMSI spend would have fallen under the category of governance. (As an aside: I was curious how much of that went to policing, and wanted to give you a more data intensive response here, but I've just wasted an hour on the OCED's CRS website trying to workout how much of the RAMSI spend went on policing, before giving up in frustration.) The end of RAMSI, however, didn't have to necessitate a fall in governance spending. Much of the work started under RAMSI in a range of sectors was handed over to the bilateral aid program. There's clearly a need for better governance in Solomons. A governance focus, albeit with less emphasis on security, could still be at the centre of Australian aid work in Solomons. Indeed, in 2017 governance was still the largest sector by a clear margin (see link below). This will no longer be the case. I don't think that's a bad thing per se, but I do think the best approach moving forwards would be driven by a combination of need, what other donors are doing, and likelihood of success. My guess is that we're probably not in disagreement on that? And my end I'm very happy to acknowledge the importance of RAMSI's impact on sectoral spending. Thanks again. Terence Those interested Australian spending by sector in Solomon Islands over time can see the chart here: https://twitter.com/terencewoodnz/status/1135319281032355840/photo/1 which is based on OECD CRS data.

Can PNG become richest black nation within 10 years? Nation, sure. People, no. Given huge Papua "New Guinea" resources, almost as vast as "West" Papua, tax haven status will no doubt be used, misused and abused exactly the same as other tax havens - to enable massive corruption. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/21/manus-island-to-become-corporate-tax-free-zone-says-png-prime-minister Amazing how quickly a tax law came up with the new government, after years of criticising the old government for endless corruption. Astonishing that DevPolicy published this article, referring to top tax-havens in its list, without actually spelling that out. Disappointing.

Amazing article! you explain very well and this infographic is amazing. Blockchain is the new name for the world of technology. Blockchain is used in many sectors like banking, finance, automobile, healthcare or retail or now even IoT and many more.

Sir, you have made a valid point. I do believe in what you have discussed. I'm one of your Ex-Student at St. Xavier's High School back in 1982-85.

Terence - thanks for an interesting piece. The heavy emphasis on governance spending by Australia between 2003 and 2014 presumably reflects the costs of the RAMSI commitment (particularly but not only on the policing side). With the wind down and then conclusion of RAMSI in 2017 we should not be surprised to see a fall off in spending under the broad heading of governance since then, and a return to a more balanced portfolio.

One comment as a postscript to this. I was intending to write solely about aid, but at a colleague's suggestion I included a line on labour mobility, which is important. However, thinking about it now, if I was going to include policy options other than those directly associated with aid I should have also included climate change, obviously. This is crucial for the Pacific -- not just sea level rise but also broader changes in weather patterns. Any donor country government that is failing to take serious action on climate change is failing the people of the Pacific. Climate change will be change, but of the worst possible sort.

Wow! what a nice story. Thank you for sharing.

Thanks Stephen. The point on decentralisation is a key one - confusion around the direction in this area is the key determinant of a failure to convert core reforms (in PFM or in service sectors) and enhanced budgets into sustainable service improvements. It is also - besides resources - one of the main issues shaping the current transition. Perhaps the current energy and broad coalition can drive resolution of the key debates around districts and provinces - whatever the system chosen, successful decentralisation requires clarity above all else.

A useful effort …….. thanks Michael (fatason). Present analysis shows a trend, perhaps you may look at past governments for comparative purpose to develop insights into their role in regional and party politics.

Hi Francis, you’re right. Due to word limit requirement (1000 words or less) I couldn’t go into the motives & reasons behind MPs’ movements. I hope to do it later as a follow up.

Good day Micheal, an interesting piece, indeed. The analysis appears to be a descriptive one. What is missing is the political motive that led to a political outcome. Politics is all about strategically maneuvering the game to achieve power. I hope this could be more clear in this analysis.

Hi Francis, the Southern (Papua) region having lower portfolio allocation under O’Neil era is consistent with the conclusion that regions with lower number of MPs are given proportionally less portfolios. Momase’s case may be explained by what you suggest. Perhaps most of Momase MPs were in the opposition. I didn’t think about that the time of writing. Party numbers and regional considerations plays a big part in portfolio allocations. We know this because O’Neil said on at least two occasions (both after government formations in 2012 and 2017) that they allocated portfolios “fairly”, meaning, they considered regions. Some take that to mean portfolios are/should be equally divided among the 4 regions. Data shows it’s the number of MPs from each region that determines “fair” distributions. Number of party members plays the main role in how many portfolios each party gets. It is possible that, after portfolio distribution is agreed based on party numbers, the actual allocation then is based on the region they represent. For instance PNC had 46 MPs, 20 portfolios were allocated to PNC. The highlands region then gets most of the portfolios allocated to PNC because the region has most number of MPs in these parliament? Worth investigating.