Comments

Hi Richard, Thanks for this update. The movement away from a scholarships model to a hybrid whereby students pay for part of the education they receive seems sensible, but also runs the risk of prohibiting those without the means to pay for their education up-front. Was there any consideration of a HECS style loan system to negate this risk? Or does that provide too many complications for a scheme that appears to be going through some significant restructuring in phase 3? Cheers, Jonathan

A terrible, ongoing problem which needs a more radical approach, rather than pussyfooting. Maybe the time for political correctness is over and a straightforward discussion around the question of whether 'PNG is the most dangerous place in the Pacific to be a woman' (as the literature suggests). It admittedly doesn't sound as fancy as 'National Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gender Based Violence and Sorcery'. But the 'Action Plan' is mired in inaction, anyway, as indicated by: 'response from national leaders and influential actors' to this medieval practice is muted. After the initial shock (if the killings still shock) leaders return to their merry ways. Indeed, the article raises some serious questions: if there is no public outcry, is the population too becoming numb to such atrocities? Women appear trapped in a cycle of violence and death —even modern educated women suffer in silence until the end. Is inaction by the state emboldening men to bully, imprison, abuse and murder women almost at will? The article suggests that like government, media attention is also fleeting. It seems PNG women are on their own. Trapped, hounded, beaten, enslaved and murdered in gruesome manner — for good measure — with little, if any hope, and no escape in sight.

That's right Terence, most NGO's don't provide a clear advertisement on the transformations that they create through child sponsorship. Every sponsor has the right to know what changes does their contribution makes to the orphan/un-privileged children and they must know. Hope there still exists the NGO's like ActionAid that are transparent to their sponsors providing the complete transformation.

When you say "energy" you mean "electricity generation" - as none of the Pacific NDCs include targets or commitments for the energy used in the transport sector apart from Marshall Islands - despite the transport sector being single largest user of fossil fuels and arguably largest source of emissions. And all the donor funding to date has been targeted to electricity generation with only one exception (again project in RMI)

It should also be noted that the CDI is essentially a ranking of commitment and not a scoring of commitment. This can mean that large changes in commitment can result in relatively small changes in the final scores. For the CDI absolute levels of contribution are generally standardised (converted to the number of standard deviations above or below the mean) in an effort to equally weight the contribution of each component. For example in the case of the Aid component, the 31% decrease in the ODA/GNI measure from 2013 to 2017 (from 0.36% to 0.25% of GNI) has resulted in a reduction of just 8% in the final score for the aid quantity component. In the 2017 CDI, Norway with an aid volume of 1.1% of GNI makes 4.5 times the effort of Australia's 0.25%, but its standardised CDI aid quantity score is just 1.7 times greater than Australia.

Current Prime minister Peter O'Neil is is most corrupted one. Because he is finding all means and ways not to submit to the law of this nation. Sooner or later he should be removed from the office and his government will not be remembered by the next generation as a legacy but corrupted leader.

Thanks for highlighting Australia's results in the Commitment to Development Index Camilla. Without such comparisons across countries we could be convinced by our politicians that Australia is doing a great job in supporting poorer countries. No index has the perfect assessment, but the CDI at least highlights the wide range of policies that support development and provides a transparent assessment process using the limited resources available. It is a useful basis for discussion about how rich countries can lift their game. Certainly Australia has a lot of game-lifting to do. Our overall position of 18th is way below our relative level of wealth and capacity to assist and should drive DFAT and the minister to do more, especially given our commitment to achieving the SDGs and their 13 year time horizon.

It's great there is a new focus on health security. It is not great that there have been huge cuts to support for basic health services. Given the importance of basic health services to international health security Australia appears to be taking one step forward and several steps back.

Yes. Let's have many more Australian aid projects which support long-term partnerships that respond to the concerns and needs of the least powerful people.

Not in this article, but it is there in her speech and the press release. Indeed, MDR TB seems to be a major motivator for this initiative.

That's a really good question. The old oil wells are running out, the gold mines never seem to pay tax, the PNG LNG project is not paying tax, and I'm not sure about Ok Tedi. Either it is not paying tax now because it shut down as a result of the drought in 2015 and/or because it is investing in a mine-life extension. It would be really good to see some more research on this topic though.

How is it possible that extractives revenues have disappeared when copper and oil prices are comparable today to 2006, gold has doubled in price, and a new gas industry has been developed?!