Comments

Sir Mekere is living testament and a role model for young leaders and politicians. He is the Political tycoon responsible for Institutional and Orginizational reforms that he implemented during his short time of Prime Minister. As a result of these reforms, successive governments have been able to reap the dividends and enjoyed political and economic stability. Yet, our so called young leaders need a thorough review of their leadership style and are yet to prove themselves to the citizens of this nation on the national political arena. They need not to have development goals and investment plans within their respective electorates and provinces but must have long term Goals, Visions, Aims, Passion and Purpose for the country (PNG). Being a national leader means more than your mandated electorate or province. They need knowledge to move the nation forward. We need visionary leaders like Sir Mekere, who can forecast the future before making decisions and government policies that can have an impact on the unseen generation of PNG. I strongly support Sir Mekere's view on the establishment of the Independent Infrastructure Authority to overlook the Infrastructure services of School, Universities, Hospitals, Ports, Airports and major government institutions and departments. Transforming resource wealth into basic infrastructure development that will improve the living standard of the citizens of this country is vitally important. Young leaders are yet to prove themselves to the people of PNG. Sir Mekere, your style of leadership and governance is still needed. You are a great reformer. We salute you.....

Julia, I also agree that the idea of giving MPs more money to disperse with 'strict conditions' is problematic not only for the reasons you identify but also because if (or when) the strict conditions are not complied with, what is the means by which the conditions will be applied and by whom? There is no shortage of rules about who can spend public funds on what but in the absence of meaningful enforcement procedures they are largely ineffective and simply adding more does not improve things and quite likely makes it worse

Thanks for a very interesting blog which raises a number of valuable insights. I would like to comment on your fifth and sixth points. It is difficult to see why ‘giving $1 m to an MP with strict conditions’ will be any more effective than giving many millions into departmental budgets and trying to apply strict conditions. Although there may be some value in spreading the money out more widely. We know that when our strict conditions aren’t relevant to local ways of operating, they will be subverted. Given that MPs already get around $5 million through DSIP, it would seem an extra $1 million with 'strict conditions' may not be that attractive. It also seems to play into the 'winner takes all' mentality which is part of the problem. Thanks for raising the option of CDD, this deserves greater prominence in aid to PNG. CDD can directly support the the interests and aspirations of disadvantaged communities. There is also a good evidence base on the value of supporting inclusive participation where women and men, poorer families and wealthier families agree on priorities for development and how they will hold each other accountable for progress. You suggest CDD is bypassing government systems, but it shouldn't be. It is about creating an environment where communities have the opportunity to build responsive and accountable local governance within the country's systems and policies. CARE Australia, with funding from AusAID, is piloting a range of community driven approaches in remote and disadvantaged areas in PNG. We are optimistic that this program will provide a good base of experience to tackle some of the most entrenched poverty in PNG. We are not bypassing government in this program, but engaging local, district and provincial government as appropriate. The “fundamental purpose of Australia’s aid program is to help people overcome poverty", this should be the starting point for any aid expenditure.

Thanks Graham for this post which I found thought provoking and which I am sure will prompt numerous comments. I agree with you that a 'more of the same' approach is not what is needed in this context (if indeed it is needed in any context) and also, as someone put it to me very succinctly the other day, 'the state is not the main game in town'. However, further to Terence Woods post on Making Bureaucracies Work and discussion following, it seems to me that what is missing from this analysis is a recognition that state mechanisms can indeed be supported (by identifying and supporting normative champions who can then develop normative communities around them) through flexible, agile and nuanced activities grounded in meaningful relationships as nurtured over time - surely this is the key to 'building on what's there'.

These are interesting findings, and deserve to be taken seriously. I wonder if it would be useful for PICs to consider internationalising some of their internal positions - sharing key personnel by either time-sharing, as Tess notes above, or the establishment of transnational institutions that could house this technical expertise. This would entail a loss of sovereignty and is unlikely to be taken lightly, but could be worth the gains.

The main small-country reason why PICs don’t manage their public finances the way outside observers think they should, is that in PICs the political governments are so close to the management action and so prone to intervene. Passage of an annual budget through parliament is commonly a near-meaningless formality. What matters is the daily flow of formal and informal, recorded and unrecorded directions to finance officials from the PM, the Finance Minister and persons close to them. The usually unspoken context is ‘Do it this way or you’ll be sorry—good financial management means doing whatever we have to do to stay in office’. MPs are silenced by pay-offs that help them to get re-elected. Donors are afraid to criticise in case they lose their place in the inner circle of ‘high-level consultations’. Something like this happens in bigger countries too, but there the effects are not so immediate or pervasive, and improper pressures are more likely to be exposed. What PICs need is a way of electing political governments that understand, believe in and will practice good financial management. Anyone who knows how we can do this, please share the secret. Tony Hughes

Thank you Tobias, David & Dinuk for this extremely cogent post. The points you make are extremely pertinent and apply in a number of areas of development in our region. Interestingly, in some fields the capacity constraints you have highlighted appear to have been acknowledged and accommodated in policy decisions and donor support - e.g. specialist medical teams who spend periods in Pacific island countries, or a visiting Court of Appeal. I particularly support the point you make about providing capacity support within line agencies to enhance service delivery and for me this is the big message here. It aligns with one of the concerns raised in the recent review of AusAID work in relation to law and justice - that the implementation of 'capacity building' exercises led to the beneficiaries being those whose capacity was being built and not those who sought to access law and justice services. Capacity support - in whatever form it takes - needs to have as its starting point and end point (and assorted reference points along the way) how it is going to (better) deliver what people need.

My family and I live in the Gulf province and what you say is very true, unfortunately. As a registered nurse I have a clinic, Kunai Health Centre, near Kotidanga. We provide all medical services to about 1000 per month. Frequently we work with the CHWs to provide a continuum of care, and we at times help supply the government aid posts as well. We are a church agency (Baptist). I am open to suggestions on how to "fix" this situation. So very sad for those who live in Gulf Province.

Talking about illegal... I have worked for Anna on an orchard picking cherries and me and several (almost 100!!!) other backpackers have still not been paid! We worked for her over 5 weeks ago and tried everything from calling texting and emails but no response...

Hi Paul, Thanks for an interesting comment. Just a couple of quick thoughts in response. I agree with you about the need for aid transparency and think that aid doors could do more to educate publics in recipient countries as to how much money their governments receive (I even wrote a blog post on this on this site a couple of years back.). It's more or less true that PNG would be a better place with more trade (more or less because some forms of trade - the arms trade; logging - aren't beneficial) but the trouble is the country simply isn't at a level of development where more (good) trade is an easy ask. Plausibly aid has a role to play in helping overcome this. Even if it doesn't, other than a slight possibility of Dutch Disease, there is no good reason to think that aid impedes PNG's very wobbly path towards pro-poor export industries. I'd like to see the OECD countries give more aid, but definitely agree with you that quality is of critical importance. Thanks again Terence

Thanks Dimitri, I guess the Greek case shows that conditionalities (assuming they are the right conditionalities) are another tool donors have to promote reform. However: 1. My reading of the research on aid conditionality is that it often isn't very successful in prompting reform except when the recipient is on the edge of crisis (the Greek situation). And yet unfortunately times of crisis are often the worst times to try and reform for other reasons (while there's a good case to be made for trying to trim Greece's civil service, the last thing Greece needs right now is more unemployed people. 2. Even when conditionality might be a tool which we can use to bring about high level change it probably lacks the reach to bring about low level change (to organisational culture, for example). That being said, while it's track record isn't great, and while there are limits to what it can do, it is worth mentioning as a potential tool. Thanks for raising it. Terence

Terence, a wonderful article, especially after having spent the past four months living in Bosnia where the public service in dire need of reform. What is your take on a country such as Greece, whose recent bailout packages (aid) have been conditional to it's own (painful) institutional reform? Greece seems to be the exception rather than the norm (at least in Europe) as far as the conditionality of aid is concerned. Again, thanks for a wonderful read.