Comments

The problem about trying to provide aid in areas where tribal warfare is allowed to happen is nothing new. The real problem is that those who allow tribal warfare to happen are just too unconcerned to prevent this misery because they are either profiting from it or just too disinterested while they persue personal wealth and prestige. The people who are suffering don't have any alternative since the outside world is just too disinterested and won't publically denounce those political leaders who either aren't capable of containing the fighting (they simply don't know how), or just couldn't care less now that they have attained the new pinnacle of PNG wealth creation, a position of MP. The most amazing of all these aspects is the total lack of recognition of this state of affairs by Australian political leaders. It's as if PNG, the next door neighbour, doesn't actually exist. It's not surprising however since the Australian media seem to be myopically blind to what is happening in PNG and therefore the Australian political leaders don't therefore have to care. What would be a far better alternative effort of behalf of the PNG people is that all the aid donors and volunteers should be actually attacking the root cause of this problem. Instead of describing the situation to those few who are already interested, start publically rubbing the collective noses of Australian and PNG governments in this mess. To use the old proverb, 'When attacking a snake, you don't attack the tail of you'll simply get bitten. You must attack the head.' Well intentioned aid donors will keep some basic services going while those who really should be doing the hard yards after the recent general election will be left alone to have a great time as the new age 'big men' for the next five years.

Great fact-based analysis. Many challenges ahead. If the new government is serious about real decentralization, then focusing on school parent/community linkages rather than the district (DIEC) will be important f0r quality education outcomes.

Nilima, this is very interesting and thank your for entering the debate: but of course most of the so called new donors are not new donors at all. Emma Mawdsley notes that in 1977 OPEC provided 30% of all bilateral aid. China has been in the game since 1956, and even earlier if you counted its support to its communist neighbours. The other point is about burden sharing. China is probably the most generous donor which adjusted to per capita GDP, a figure that get lost in the debates. The amount of aid China provides is a research field in itself. China likes to downplay it to avoid a domestic backlash, but when the more or less commercial FDI is washed out, and technical assistance, students, and loan forgiveness factored in and valued it sits around $12-14b per annum. The commitment to development is interesting. South-South donors are very much invested in notions of mutuality as against 'charity', and reject many of the DAC principles on the grounds they are paternalistic among other things. It is hard to argue against China's eight principles of foreign aid from 1964 (which it still more or less follows or claims to), which may have more resonance than the DAC principles of 2004. Southern donors are driven by quite different world views. So on your last point 'the ultimate purpose of becoming a donor is to act like one'. Then does that mean the DAC donors should move to China's eight principles. China (and the South) has roundly rejected the DAC view of the world and how donors should 'act'.

Thanks for this Carmen, I think you've raised some very important points, especially about the need to expand the conversation and research agenda. For a similar perspective that it is largely focused on the Vanuatu context, you may like to look at <a href="http://dailypost.vu/news/listen-carefully-or-risk-killing-the-golden-goose/article_da1d5352-e22b-56ef-955d-413e986b9018.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">this item</a> I wrote earlier this year. Since then we have seen the governments of Fiji and Samoa move to restrict participation in SWP by 'punishing' villages further to misbehaviour (including overstaying) by members of their communities. The constitutionality of measures of this sort is questionable I would say but it does not seem likely that this will be tested in the courts of those countries. On receiving the bodies of 3 SWP workers killed in a RTA in Northern Queensland, the Minister of Internal Affairs in Vanuatu stated that if more workers were to die whilst working in Australia, he would put a stop to the scheme. All of which adds to what you have put forward here and should be alerting all concerned to the various strands of complexity that operate in this area and go way beyond economics.

I'll vote for you Jo.

The requirement for employers to sign off on the 88 days work was removed in Dec 2015. Acceptable evidence now includes payslips and other items that are non-discretionary

Absolutely agree, Stephen. Poor journalism from The Guardian.

The present government of PNG in its 2nd Alotau Accord has indicated something on Economic Empowerment through Agriculture. Please find out from the next Agriculture Minister

Thank you Gure. I have set up this concept for the sake of our people, the future of our children. Now I'm waiting for someone, a donor ageny or a visionary PNG govt to fund so we can take the necessary steps to provide real help as per village coffee website to millions of coffee growers.

Thanks Stephen – it sounds like this experience was a refreshing reality check. It was interesting (and wonderful) to hear their comment that the CARE-supported NGO club ‘gives them fun’. I often wonder about how happy people like these six Vietnamese women are. So, a bit like your comparative figures on incomes and poverty, I did a quick search of general national happiness indexes (... with all the qualifiers ...) and I found that Vietnam ranked way above Australia in one report (UK think tank the New Economics Foundation) and far less happy in other reports (e.g. UN).

Thomas, I am currently researching UNDP's Human Security - people-centred approach. I would like to be in contact with you to discuss the 'human-centred' approach.

Well said Richard, thank you.