“Pacific leaders are reassessing the costs of Australian patronage”, are they? Let’s hope that they find that they can do without Australian patronage altogether. Let’s also hope that the Australian Government will do its own reassessment and stop giving any assistance at all to corrupt tin pot states in the Pacific.

The countries Australia has naively tried to help are run by grubs; grubs who are in it for themselves to the detriment of their people. Yet Anderson, and those of his ilk, find Australia’s expectation of good governance (for the ordinary people) in exchange for aid ‘insulting’ – this, even though he admits that little of the aid gets to the people. All Australia’s fault of course. Nothing to do with the grubs.

Let’s leave the lot of them to go under in their own way. Then we will not be upsetting anyone, including Anderson. The resources and money can be better used in Australia for Australians.

In an over-populated world, only those people who can look after themselves and keep up with change should survive.

Lets hope Australia stops pushing the interests of Jakarta and the Bechtel corporation upon our other neighbours. Bad enough that we allowed Bechtel to colonise West Papua with Indonesian troops so America could build the world's largest mine which over the pass 25 years has increased its theft of Papua's gold & copper so that today it dumps over 300,000 tons per day of waste into OUR Arafura Sea and Oceans.

People wonder WHY are the Barrier reef and our fisheries dying? Could be something to do with the hundreds of millions of tons of copper rich waste Bechtel and Freeport McMoRan have dumped into our ocean.

Bechtel's quest for our region's minerals and to promote nuclear energy in the US and here are just as sick as Bechtel's reconstruction job in Iraq and attempt to buy all of Bolivia's water. Time George Bush and John Howard stop pushing the agenda of Bechtel and its "US Indonesia Society" lobby.

"In an over-populated world, only those people who can look after themselves and keep up with change should survive" posted by Leigh.

Yes Leigh, by this reasoning the government should also stop 'wasting' it's money on drought relief for the country. If drought has made your town inhospitable and unproductive you should be left to your own devices - if you can't keep up with the change you don't deserve to survive. Same goes for those people whose jobs are moved offshore by companies taking advantage of Howard's liberal economics - change and get a job or don't and die, so long as you don't expect help from us.

It is an interesting position you adopt Leigh not surprsing but interesting - - I wonder what it takes to get you to go the next step - with those those not deserving to live I mean - do you really let them die out - or as a man of expediency offer them a helping hand?

Nathan Joel,

Correct. Taxpayers money should not be going to unviable farmers. But there is a safety net in civilized, democratic countries like Australia that gives them an out – just like any other business people, who can sell up and get the dole until they find alternative employment. Same as people who have lost jobs in any other industry. I did not say that we should not be looking after our own. I was referring to ungrateful, backward people who want to continue swinging in the trees and treating their constituents badly, while feeding off Australia.

As you say I should not expect any help from “us”, am I to take it that you are not Australian? If you are, you are a miserable example of one.

Your swipe at “Howard’s liberal economics” (don’t you mean conservative economics) is the silliest thing I seen for a while.

Sneekeepete,

Oh, I believe in natural processes. They haven’t given me the authority to knock people off yet. I wouldn’t want it, either.

Just how long do you think we should go on propping people up? Until we have nothing left ourselves? It’s clear that the recipients of charity never amount to anything, so there is no end to it.

If you and others want to hand over money to corrupt politicians in foreign countries, use your own money

Leigh,

Not that it should matter, but I am Aussie born and bred, sorry mate. I find it interesting that you say my comment on liberal economics was the silliest thing you have seen yet do not explain why it is silly. Howard supports liberal economics (i.e. free trade - I am not an economist but I believe this is pretty much the opposite of conservative, protectionist economics) which enables movement of labour to the most efficient (read cheapest) market. My comment was not a swipe at Howard, but at media and public outrage at companies shifting jobs overseas when this is exactly what the government's economic policy has encouraged. To his credit (although I have to say I do not support him) Howard recently said as much, telling people to stop whinging and that job losses are inherent to global right-wing economics as the market redistributes industry and labour to wherever they are most productive.

And as a taxpayer mate, that is my money going overseas. Did you ever consider that Australia is promoting it's own agenda by providing aid? Letting countries 'go under' brings about a whole lot of other risks, such as refugees, drug and people smuggling, and opportunities for terrorists to hide out and train in failed states. It is not in anyone's interest to let a state fail, and while it may be nice to think foreign aid is given purely out of generosity of spirit, this is rarely the case.

Your attempts to insult me rather than respond to my comments constructively demonstrate a poor grasp of the concept of debate and reasoned argument.