Comments

Thanks for the great post! I've also been exploring the website these past days. What I haven't found yet is the section on "Business Opportunities" where AusAID / DFAT used to post preliminary project designs (incl. for comments), announced upcoming important industry briefings, etc. Much more than just serving aid businesses, I also always found the section quite informative on emerging developments in focus and strategy.

I am not surprised. Julie Bishop concocted the idea at a cocktail party in Suva. It was conceived in haste and put to PM Bainimara who said "yes". That was a Pacific Islands "yes" which is usually made up of a many "no's". In other words Pacific Islanders generally would never say "no" outright to you!

The Indonesian government could certainly play that card, as the Suharto government did with the Netherlands decades ago, but I suspect would not do so unless there were a disproportionate cut to the bilateral aid program, along the lines of scenario 1 above, which they perceived as retaliatory in intent. No matter how much offence they might have taken at the ex post conditionality implied in the Prime Minister's recent remarks, they, like successive Australian governments, tend to take a long view of the aid relationship because they see aid as a stabiliser in what is regularly a tempestuous bilateral relationship.

Thanks Robin. Interesting scenarios. Do you think that Indonesia might just stamp its sovereign foot sometime very soon and say 'you know what, keep your aid'? And perhaps in light of the 'koinuntukAustralia' push it might not be that far away.

Margaret's thesis that there are already enough players in the eye health field and we don't need the Commonwealth to duplicate has some validity. The difference between us arises because I did not explain the role of QEDJT adequately in my initial contribution. They have been very aware of the need not to duplicate. They have in fact been a much appreciated source of new funding for existing players such as Sightsavers and Fred Hollows Foundation and very powerful advocates for eye health actions by the member governments of the Commonwealth. I appreciate their efforts both as a citizen of the Commonwealth and as President of the International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness, through whom QEDJT has coordinated with existing providers. The Trust is proving an asset without duplicating efforts and have acted in accordance with the spirit of the aid effectiveness principles.

Thank you Prof. Negin for your article. For your information, the WHO updated the DALYs estimates on June 2014. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates/en/index2.html

Hi Carmen, thank your for positive message about our country. Although there is no much negativity about its law and order problems, there is so much this country has to offer. I guess you will have to live in it to experience the truth about PNG, we are not that bad. I hope your enjoy your stay here and look forward to hearing more of your adventure in PNG. God bless!

Thanks for this post, which provides some useful insight into one part of this issue. I think there is an ongoing concern that the challenges of 'Whole of Government' approaches can lead to important things falling between the cracks and the issue of pastoral care is one such item (maybe it's just me that has that ongoing concern although I doubt it). Attention to pastoral care (which I think can be extended to include pre-deployment training and post-deployment mentoring on investment) is important and needs to be mandated and monitored. There are significant reputational risks in not addressing pastoral care issues as demonstrated recently in relation to a (generally flaky) news item relating to alleged mistreatment of SWP workers from Vanuatu which made it from Yumi Toktok Stret to the Prime Minister's Office in a matter of hours if that.

I hate to disagree with my former good-guy MP Bob but I do feel quite strongly that, as important as the subject of Trachona is, that it is not the role of the Commonwealth to buy into such activities. I am speaking from the point of view of someone who worked in a number of Commonwealth countries and who did gain an appreciation of that colonial heritage, much to my surprise. But I think its role ought to be restricted to what it does best, and where no other organization operates ie stick to the heritage of British governance systems, including those related to parliament and law. Joel Negin's terrific chart in his article in the same volume clearly illustrates the plethora of agencies which exist - and remind of the need to be focused, and stick to what one has the mandate for and the related expertise/skills/resources. There is already much overlap between agencies and some are spread very thin, providing quantity not quality. I would suggest that the Comm. should stick to what it does best, and if there is no need for those types of interventions, it should be dissolved.

Thank you Carman... appreciate your excellent piece of writing which demonstrates your worldly experience.

Totally agreed Paul. So much work has been done to upgrade the Company Haus website, which has become a beacon of hope for private sector development in Solomon Islands.

I agree with you Robin that poor quality programs are likely to make up much, much less than 20% of the current program, however in a constrained funding environment I think it makes it even more important to systematically identify and prioritise those activities which have the biggest poverty reduction impact per dollar invested. Of course, in reality, other criteria such as Australian political and strategic interests and contractual obligations will also apply, but I would hope that DFAT will be working to ensure that this 20% cut to aid program funding will result in a much smaller reduction in the aid program's poverty reduction impact. This will require more than just giving the program a hair cut, but assessing each of the individual strands of hair.