Comments

The rural community fall victim to a selfish Government! Australia Aid needs to be delivered tangible to the rural communities.

Thanks for the link Jo, I missed that article. And yes, it is so dispiriting seeing the situation worsen on every front.

This is a belated comment on “Vanuatu’s seasonal workers: where are they from?” The blog analyses an important data source for understanding the current profile of seasonal workers. Congratulations to Rochelle on unearthing it. I want to highlight though a finding I have noted from the same data source but for a different time period. This is that if the seasonal workers’ ‘usual island of residence’ is used as the indicator of current residence, then a different picture emerges of where seasonal workers are recruited from. The question of where workers are currently living when recruited is important for several reasons. One is that if workers are currently residing in Port Vila when selected, rural residents are missing out. The information on their island of origin, as reported in Rochelle’s blog, overstates the degree to which workers come from the areas more distant from Port Vila. Second, employers prefer workers recruited directly from rural areas because in the words of one employer recently relayed to me: ... rural recruits are more job focused and productive than those that live in a city area. Our workers live every day growing, gardening, building and walking - this gives them a wonderful mindset for the work on our farm, they are already used to labouring to feed their families, if they don't grow it or hunt it they don't eat. These are the best workers they are already fit and healthy. I have recently completed an assignment for the Government of Vanuatu’s National Taskforce on Labour Mobility. My report on the options for a new labour mobility policy was based on extensive consultations with key stakeholders, such as recruitment agents and workers as well as employers and government officials involved in overseeing the recruitment and briefing of workers. I too was given access to the two databases called the Employment Services Unit Seasonal Workers Monitoring Sheet for the Seasonal Worker Program and the Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme respectively. I focused my analysis on a category called ‘usual island of residence’ included alongside ‘home district’, ‘home island’, ‘home village’ and ‘province’. My analysis of the 2018 profile of SWP workers (January to October 2018) shows that Efate (which is where Port Vila is located) is given as ‘usual island of residence’ of two-in-three SWP workers (67 per cent). This compares with the one-in-three share (33 per cent) Efate has of the total population aged 15 and above. However, for the RSE, the pattern was very different. For the same period, Efate's share of workers recruited for the RSE was the same as its share of the total population aged 15 and above. This substantial difference shows that SWP labour hire firms and their recruitment agents are more likely to recruit from Efate (notably Port Vila). RSE employers, on the other hand, are more likely to recruit directly from areas beyond Efate. As we have discussed, I look forward to combining our analyses to look into these issues further.

As with Stephen’s blog of 14 February, I’d like to suggest another angle – the delineation of responsibilities between DFAT, managing the Government’s foreign-policy relations including development assistance, and Efic as the Government’s agency providing commercial finance to support Australian exporters and overseas direct investors. It’s clear that the amending legislation will take Efic into an enlarged sphere of operations, and I agree with Stephen that the Australian Government has an associated responsibility to ensure the interests of the countries in which Efic helps to finance infrastructure projects are respected. But it’s not clear how much of this responsibility should lie with Efic and how much with DFAT. DFAT’s supplementary submission to the Parliamentary Committee’s inquiry described (in section 7) how DFAT and Efic will cooperate in assessing projects proposed for AIFFP financing. DFAT noted that assessments of the development merits of projects will be undertaken by DFAT and the AIFFP Board, while Efic will provide technical and expert financial advice, portfolio management and operational support, and “contribute to a rigorous due diligence process which incorporates a careful assessment of credit risks, country risks and environmental, social and technical risks.” That submission does not refer to the infrastructure financing enabled by the amending legislation but separate from AIFFP projects. In respect of these other projects, Efic would be required by its legislation to undertake a similar due diligence process. But this does not fully correspond to Stephen’s question, whether the policy framework in the country concerned is such as to afford confidence that projects approved, whether publicly or privately financed, will be genuinely in the country’s interests. It strikes me as likely that DFAT will be consulted at the stage when Efic has identified a project which is prospective in the way described in the Explanatory Memorandum, being in Australia’s interest by promising future commercial or financial benefits or a strengthening of regional relationships. Whether such consultation between Efic and DFAT should be prescribed in legislation is debatable, but in my opinion it would be wise for Ministers to insist on it as proper practice.

Because of selfish minded people who think of personal gain/benefite pushing away the quality people like Schram. What a pity for PNG future elite.

Hi Erin This is a great piece - really clearly outlines the 'unsexy' but critical elements of what it takes to support adaptive, locally-led development - the only kind that works! I love your emphasis on 'invisible' effective program management support and the all important trust factor. Thanks so much sharing - Anna

Hi Molong, Thank you for your comments. As I note in my response to the comments made by Moses Sakai, this is a very contentious issue and everyone will have their own unique story and perspective on the topic and rightfully so. I was very interested to read that you contested public office. Was that in Australia? I really look forward to hearing more about it. You must be one of very few PNG women who have stood for elections outside of PNG and definitely this is something many can learn from. I am also very interested to read that the history of women’s political participation and representation in countries like Australia has also involved a long struggle. For example, I came across this website that after ‘a decade on struggle’ involving resistance against entrenched social and traditional values women in South Australia became the first in the world to vote and stand for parliament. That Bill was made into law in 1895. I feel like it is important for us to know these histories about how our mothers and women before us fought for women’s political participation and representation. It is also sad to see that women in Australia still face immense challenges to get into national parliament and in parliament once elected. It must be even harder for women who are not white to stand for elections in Australia. In PNG, I have immense respect for women who have contested elections. Personally, I have never contested elections and it is highly unlikely that I will ever contest elections. I have been privileged to witness my mother’s journey in this space in Manus and PNG and I know it is not for the faint hearted and the personal costs to women who contest elections are great. I have also had the privilege of witnessing and participating in some of the intense dynamics of the debates and advocacy in the national debates during my work with UNDP in PNG. I think one of the reasons I feel passionate about advocating in this space is because I know that our privileges today have been hard fought and won by women before us. If writing about this issue lends a small voice to this process then I am happy with this contribution. Indeed, this is a collective effort and as I note in the blog article, everyone has a role to play – researchers, activists, politicians, young people. Above all, on PNG soil, the leadership and the desire to fight for this issue will come from our mothers, sisters and daughters and families in PNG. At the end of the day, only history will tell us what the best road is, and only history will tell us whether and how women participate in politics. I remain convinced that there is a need to advocate for women’s political representation at the national level because in some ways it provokes debate at the highest and hardest level of political power. I look forward to hearing more about your journey.

Hi Moses, Thank you for your comments. This is indeed a contentious topic everywhere and especially so in PNG. First, let me say that I was very happy to read the recent news that the Prime Minister of PNG, Peter O’Neill seems to be putting this agenda back on the political table. An article reporting about his position on this matter can be found at this link: https://postcourier.com.pg/pm-propose-seats-women-parlt/. It is also good to see that this topic continues to be debated in PNG. Let us hope that the PM and our brothers in the PNG parliament will back the women’s fight for reserved seats or other affirmative action. History has shown that the difference between another media statement and pushing this agenda into a sustained national debate depends on many factors lining up. These factors include: political leadership or championship in parliament, a strong advocacy and lobby movement led by Papua New Guinean women, and funding support. Sadly, funding support is usually from donors which means that donors are highly influential in this space so when their own national interests shift this might change the priority they accord to women’s political representation. We witnessed this alignment of stars over the period 2007-2012. Let us also hope that leading up to 2022 the stars will line up for a sustained debate and hopefully running of the bill through parliamentary debates etc so it can be passed in time for the 2022 elections. It will need funds though. I agree with you that political leadership must not be given but it has to be taken. I understand ‘taking’ political leadership to mean contest which includes earning a place of leadership through hard work and earning people’s respect and support in democratic elections. Indeed, politics and political representation is about power – it always has been and it always has been taken. Democratic power is taken – fought, ideally, metaphorically - through contested elections where all citizens are supposedly equal. That said, sadly, it is well documented that women in PNG face daunting challenges to reach political representation. For women, the contest can be more than a metaphorical fight. It can be violent and costly which reflects the day to day challenges women face in many aspects of life. This is largely shaped by norms, cultures, and customs in PNG in which women generally are subordinate to men. Given this situation, I am sure that there are many people in PNG who will agree with your view that the whole proposed bill for 22 reserved parliamentary seats for women is rubbish. However, I also know that there will be many people who will think that this is something absolutely worth contesting or ‘fighting’ for in order to help women take a fairer share of the political power in terms of parliamentary representation. One way of looking at the 22 reserved seats is by using your argument that political leadership is taken not given. If political leadership is taken, then indeed the 22 reserved seats is precisely about women taking a fairer share of political representation. For women to take a fairer share of political power, they will need to advocate, lobby, convince, debate, - or in other words – fight – to win over the support of the all-male parliament. They, and their supporters, will also have to be opportunistic. For example, when the Prime Minister of PNG makes a statement like the one reported in the above referred recent article, women will have to ride on this window of support. This is politics and this is leadership. This is what women have been doing forever whether it is to secure a home for her family, climb up the corporate ladder, fight for a space at the market, or taking a powerful seat in the PNG national parliament. As I mentioned above, however, in PNG this will need some help to align the stars – the PM’s support, a strong advocacy movement, funding and a sustained national debate. Viewed in this way, the 22 reserved seats for women is not giving anyone power on a golden plate but it can be seen as a contest by women to take a fairer share of power. Finally, somewhere out there is a young girl who will one day take a place of power in the national parliament. Her journey, her contest, - her fight - will be her unique story. Certainly, no one is going to give that power to her on a golden plate. But under the current situation, her fight to take power will be multiple times harder than her male counterpart. My fight - my contest - is that by keeping the conversation alive, by hoping for change, by even daring to debate and discuss the 22 reserves seats in itself as process of taking a fairer share of power, we might help keep the fire burning for this girl and future powerful woman. Here’s to hoping the stars align leading up to the 2022 national elections so that we will see a sustained, lively debate and advocacy for more women to take a place in the PNG National Parliament. Let us also hope that there will be funding allocated to enable this to happen.

A compelling piece. This is where democracy fails miserably. Seven hundred languages and 1000 different cultures, like it or not, you need something more stringent, more controlled, precise and tough to get things moving in the right direction for the benefit of all.

Thanks for your timely and important insights Martha. I really wonder how to maintain visibility on this human catastrophe. And beyond that, how to get action out of visibility. I published a piece on the PNG health/medicines crisis in the New York Times late last year, figuring that the APEC moment was ripe to put these into the frame. The story set out to join the dots between corruption and the total breakdown of the medicines and medical supplies systems, and the shattering human consequences of that. Which were and are absolutely explicit (under underlined by some punchy quotes from Stephen Howes joining the dots on Australian political squeamishness and Manus). And it got ... zero traction. (Story was here fyi https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/world/asia/papua-new-guinea-apec-polio-health-crisis.html)

Terrence Wood, Great piece, it accurately reports the system and how the governments of both PNG and Solomon Islands have deteriorated post-political independence. For us to see changes, these countries must vote new and educated leaders with a new way of thinking and with respect to the rule of law and to accord respect to the sanctity to parliament itself and the responsibility it must hold for its citizens. Having said that, both countries must start to do away with pre-colonial leaders who have somehow used politics to amass wealth to mismanagement of states assets and funds. The core of this problem is the system of government these countries have adopted or were forced to adopt (Westminster system of government), for example in PNG'S case -- and I assume the Solomon Islands -- is no different. I have lived in both countries and I can remember some of our leaders, like Sir John Guise, clearly preferred a system of government that decentralised its powers to the provinces and local level governments. This was to address the vast diversity of peoples of PNG and make them more accountable. However, in PNG'S case, the Australian government was advocating a system like their very own where Canberra is in charge. Eventually that was the system adopted by PNG. Both countries also suffer from a form of pre-colonial influence. Australia must learn not to meddle in PNG'S affairs especially in the area's of minerals and its resources where there is basically next to no policing of the environmental damage by its company, Rio Tinto and others under different names. In the system of government proposed by Sir John Guise, aid would be sent direct to the provinces and their government for their original intent and purposes. This would stop the current Prime Minister and his gang of robbers from laying their hands on it. All they would get instead is a piece of paper saying the funds had been received by the province and being used for their purposes. This is where the decentralised system would have worked for PNG not the system we have. But I guess Canberra wanted this system so they could still keep a colonial presence asserted through economic partnerships. The one big negative to that is the Ned Kelly's in Waigani have worked out a way of diverting aid into their own pockets. You don't have to look far. Starting from the founding leaders (with due respect) right across the board. How did these people become overnight millionaires? They have manipulated our system, using that clientelism you mention to their advantage, proving that system does not suit the Melanesian way. The Presidential system perhaps is the one for us? Anyway, it is great that a postmortem has been done on these countries, the challenge now is in fixing them and definitely not with more aid to Waigani or next to the old G Club in Honiara. Peace.

Great post Adela and Warren, and really good to hear about these plans. As someone who just returned from a wonderful holiday to Vanuatu (spending time in Vila/Efate and on Santo), I was really impressed with the ease of travelling in Vanuatu, the high level of safety (especially as a single female traveller on my own), the friendliness and welcoming nature of Ni-Vanuatu people, and the accessibility of beautiful natural attractions. On Santo in particular, I was also really impressed with the commitment of local communities (Port Olry being one example) to environmentalism and keeping the natural environment clean and pristine. So everyone in my circles is hearing about how great Vanuatu is for a holiday! One thing that as a development-conscious traveller that I would have liked to have been able to do more of would be to support locally-owned and operated accommodation providers. Having spent many years living and travelling throughout Indonesia, I was surprised that everywhere I stayed in Vanuatu was expatriate-owned, with all but one venue managed by an expatriate as well. No doubt this still creates jobs and supports the economy so these accommodation providers are still making a positive contribution. But there are travellers looking for ways to better support the communities they visit. So it would be good if there was a way for travellers to identify Ni-Vanuatu owned/operated accommodation options, tour providers or restaurants. I also noticed the demographic of travellers to Vanuatu from Australia was on the whole a lot older than Indonesia or SE Asia (just from observation not data). Cost might be one issue (a hard one to overcome) but I think some of these proposals around soft adventure and eco tourism would be of particular interest to the younger demographic — promoting these to the right groups in tourist-sending countries will also be really important.