“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.

I wish I could endorse all Tim Anderson offers in this clear eyed but tunnel visioned review of Oz-Pac relations. But it is what he omits that troubles me. He states that Honiara residents are keen to see the back of RAMSI. Can he say the same for those outside the capital? I don't doubt his arguments on the mis-dynamics of Australian aid or even the misbehaviour of our high commissioner. And the Moti farce and diplomatic fall out are the acts of a bully.
But the UN has questioned Mari Alkatiri's role in East Timor's troubles which I suggest makes that situation more complex than the author writes. And while the Moti affair was ridiculous, it has exposed some strange compoundings on the part of Michael Somare's government. The man who thought he was above the need to remove his shoes is showing all the signs of a south seas potentate. All these small state leaders should join howard's mob in a cold shower and perhaps a bit of third party mediation. Is Helen available?

Leigh: "I'm alright Jack" (well, that's what his posts generally amount to).

His deep understanding of Australia's political and historical relationship with our Pacific neighbours is almost indescribable.

Like his compassion for our farmers, and his expressed humanity towards NESB Australians.

As a Pom, I bet he's proud to be an Aussie citizen.

CJ,
Leigh just suffers from self loathing which he then projects outwardly to compensate for his lack of personal and emotional success. Poor bugger.

PS. Go the Greens!

Tim Anderson advances a slanted perspective of the Australian Aid Programme, presumably to support a specific partisan objective. That is a pity, because the subject of his thesis deserves, indeed needs, to be debated rationally and free of resort to invective. The subject of this debate, the people of the Pacific islands deserve nothing less.

The weakness of Anderson's opinions is that he fails to acknowledge that the bulk of Australian aid money to PNG since 1975 has failed to reach village levels directly as a result of PNGs own political and civil bureaucracies' actions, or should that be inactions. At PNGs insistence the bulk of the billions of Australian taxpayers dollars has been delivered as untied aid in cold hard cash, most of which has never been applied to the provision of basic services to the village people in the provinces.

If Australia is to be condemned at all it should be for failing to take a harder line against corruption back in the 80's and 90's when it was still in its infancy - and today these "chickens" have come home to roost!

Travel outside of PNGs provincial headquarters and you will witness the decrepit condition of community infrastructures, roads, schools, hospitals, police posts - it is heart-wrenching to meet ordinary village people whose standards of life have regressed because not one level of government functions in the way it should to give them security, education and health services, all of which are so vital to a developing nation.

Ask any ordinary Pacific Islander today what she or he thinks of the tougher stand over Australian aid being taken by Howard and Downer and I feel certain that the response will be overwhelmingly in the affirmative!

It is hard to believe the above comments by Tambu are the genuine opinions of any person. However the deception and misleading claims certainly do need to be addressed. PNG certainly does have problems, and those problems are the direct result of Canberra imposing a government based on European culture and incentives without any regard to the Melanesian people and culture whom it expected to become mimics of this alien and in my view foolish western lifestyle.

Too many village children see visiting westerners with cars or aircraft and camera and a host of exciting looking toys, and they are told that if they come to town and work for a few months they too can have all these things. The empty promise helps break their traditional community values and when they do go to town and find unemployment and then gangs to become bully-boys. You point your finger and say it is because of poor Papuan management and that Canberra is not responsible.

Canberra uses PNG and the Solomons to try and paint a picture called "arc of instability" to scare the Australian public from supporting West Papua's human rights to decolonization from Jakarta.

A perfect example of this bias, SkyNews in April reported the Solomon PM stepping down due to public protests over his accepting Chinese bribes as "Mob rule wins"; but, for Nepal they said "Victory for People power" where 21 people had been killed during three weeks of violence. You have to see through the political spin and look at the facts.

John Howard has been using the Melanesian States as a punching bag all year in defense of Jakarta's hold to West Papua, and you are foolish to imagine money and the US corporations are not behind this.

You don’t wish to debate, Nathan. You merely want to tell me that I’m wrong and you are right. If you think that, fine. There is no point in telling me about it. I’m sure of my beliefs and opinions as, I’m sure you are of yours. Best to say what you think, not to criticise what others think. We have enough people here now who never make an original comment of their own, who do preach to people who do express their opinions as a way of getting the dirty water off their chests, and expressing their frustration.

Pointless and pathetic, really. Contributors, not posters, submit their ideas for comments. I’m not the slightest bit interested in what other posters think of my posts and what I think, and I certainly don’t expect people to agree with me.



C.J. Morgan,

“As a Pom, I bet he’s proud to be an Aussie citizen”?

Grammar, please!!

You worry about the historical relationship with our Pacific neighbours if you wish to, and I’ll concern myself with the present, which is full of do-gooding, bleeding hearts like you who are a menace to Australia

Daeron's assertion that all of PNGs problems "are the direct result of Canberra imposing a government based on European culture and incentives without any regard to the Melanesian people and culture whom it expected to become mimics of this alien and in my view foolish western lifestyle" is arrant nonsense, and raises questions about Daeron's knowledge of Australian administration of Papua New Guinea from 1945 to 1975.

PNGs local government system, developed in the 50s and 60s, was adapted from successful models in colonial Africa, and while there were obvious deficiencies, these laid the foundations for universal suffrage and parliamentary elections at both provincial and national levels. It is also important to remember that Australia acted strictly in accord with guidelines prescribed by the United Nations in which the new emerging nations in Africa played a pivotal role.

To blame Canberra for the current state of affairs in PNG, the massive corruption, unrest and high crime rate, not to mention other chronic problems such as the uncontrolled spread of AIDS, as is often implied by critics, is likewise absolute nonsense. PNG has been an independent nation for 31 years, the conduct of government processes has been in their hands exclusively, without any involvement from Canberra beyond supplying bucketloads of unaccounted budgetary assistance.

I take no comfort from this scenario because I have a close affinity with many good people in PNG - but to suggest that Australia is the culprit for deeds beyond its control is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Grammatical deficiencies aside, I can claim some firsthand experience from some years working in the region, backed up by extensive documentary research. On that basis, my view is somewhere between that of Anderson and Dearon on the one hand, and that expressed by Tambu on the other.

I don't think I'm any kind of "bleeding heart" - if anything I'm something of a pragmatist. Neither Australia's nor our Pacific neighbours' interests are being well-served by the Howard government's current bully boy tactics.

Claiming "PNGs local government system, developed in the 50s and 60s" is a silly thing. Even the Americans know that is not true, as the 1957 joint Australian Dutch statement (see http://fandom.net/InfoKit/Src/NYT/19571107joint.pdf ) made clear, Australia was still only suggesting self-determination for some time in the future. It was only West Papua that since the 1930s had graduate teachers talking about a need for a national identity and government. That's why West Papua was able to vote for a national Parliament installed into power 5th April 1961. Not that the concept of local people having control of their nation's mineral resources was popular with the Bechtel or Freeport corporations.

As for your logic that Australia should use African government systems in Melanesia, not only shows your complete lack of any awareness of Melanesian cultures, but also shows you have nil knowledge of the entire UN Decolonization process. 1514 and 1541 are written specifically to prevent arrogant colonial powers trying to design other people's government and society.

This is not a forum where you can buff your way through.

The Australian governments did the wrong things for very stupid reasons, they mistook aberrant US pro-Jakarta Diplomat actions as proof of some secret US pro-Jakarta agenda and assumed they should get PNG off its hands ASAP. If Australia had had the gumption to publically ask the US government if it had a pro-Jakarta agenda, the resulting investigation would undoubtably have exposed Bechtel and its associates and their vested desires to mine and otherwise profit from the region via a proxy Jakarta colonial government. And we wouldn't be struck with either the "US Indonesia Society" or the "Australia Indonesia Institute" trying to bend us to their po-Jakarta agenda.

LOL, this clown Daeron is so hilarious. He has such deep hatred and paranoia of Indonesia, he somehow managed to concoct in his imagination that Indonesia is somehow to blame for the collapse of law and order in the failed states of PNG and Solomon Islands.

Fact is:

1) East Timor, PNG, and Solomon Islands became failed states because their tribalistic people lack the civilisational sophistication necessary to develop the modern concept of "nation-state".

2) Australia tried to be a bully-boy because these three countries have been sub-contracted by USA into Australia "sphere of influence". Instability in this area would make Australia look like an incompetent buffoon in the face of its master USA. However, the local leaders would prefer their countries be failed states rather than allow Australian "re-colonisation".

3) Papua became integrated to the glorious nation of Indonesia because such is the iron will of Indonesian people (Trikora / Triple People's Command). Such is also the will of native Papuan people (Pepera 1969). USA under President JFK was willing to go head over heels to make friends with the great Indonesian people, hence they supported our just cause.

4) As for Australia, whether you agree or disagree with our integration, won't make any difference since Indonesia is way above Australia's league. Basically, weakling Australians can scream begging for us to take notice of your complaints until your throats are dry, but it won't even shift the iron will of mighty Indonesian people even for one mm. Heck, even tiny Solomon Islands couldn't care less about what Australians think lol.

Tim, your mention of the term colonialism brings to mind of John Howard's increasing persona since elected of that of a 19th century colonial statesman. Indeed, he is apparently doing better than GW Bush, and might be the only one left successful out of the Anglophile trio participating in the neo-colonialist debacle in the Middle East.

Nevertheless, one feels that Howard's attempted role of an imperialist deputy sheriff in the Sou-West Pacific area, going by what has been happening lately, might indeed be his undoing

Tim Anderson has successfully hit the nail firmly on the head.
As a Papua New Guinean, this assessment is the most objective and honest commentary that I have seen for a long time.

Australia must know that:-

1. He is dealing with 21st Century Papua New Guineans (PNGeans).
The era in which agendas were shoved down the throat is no longer
applicable today.

2. Singing songs and dances about the 20% (useful in PNG's conext) on
Australia's so-called AID is superficial and doesn't cut.

3. PNG and the South Pacific Islands for that matter WILL NEVER SINK
in the South Pacific ocean when Canberra puts an end to its overly
publicized AID package. Our way of life is completely different from
the imperialist world. That is why we have survived long generations
and generations ago and we will continue to survive. Your insistence is for purely self-interest. We haven’t seen an inkling of generous offer.

4. PNG and the other Pacific Islanders are fed up of lectures that
amount to nothing but empty cymbals. Reassess your foreign policies
on AID, Green House Effect and greed for economic resources and a
quick litmus test to see if they’re in consistent with your
so-called Australian values.

5. PNG's nationhood is merely 31 years. This is merely a whisper in the race of time. We will manage and improve at our own pace with the education and training that we've managed to acquire in the last 31 years after deliberate attempt by Canberra to keep us ignorant and illiterate for the greater part of Australia's colonial era. (1890's - 1975)

6. PNGeans don't live off other people’s opinions', perception and
stereotypes. We will chart our own course in destiny.

7. Oh, by the way, I was not a recipient of Australia’s Scholarship
assistance to PNG. I was born, bred, raised and schooled in PNG (my paradise).

Thank you Forever Optimist PNGean for that eloquent statement.
I know many Australians who have lived in PNG have told me the people in Canberra did not listen to people in PNG and failed to understand. I regret that the Australian Commonwealth government was not a better friend and neighbour in the pass, but I hope in the future the Commonwealth will one day learn to listen and mature enough to appreciate its wonderful and diverse neighbours.

Daeron,
You're welcome!
What I have uttered is ground reality. Those who aptly coined terms such as "failed states" to suit their purposes and the unfortunate who have gullibly jumped into that bandwagon are on the wrong. The blind borrowing of words to label and make assertions of whatever they see fit don't stick.

PNG is a thriving democracy with a steadily improving economy.
http://www.islandsbusiness.com/ [Politics: 31 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE - Where is PNG heading? ]

Nobody in PNG is committing suicide out of desperation and destitution. The bulk of our population (90%) live happily in sustainable and humble subsistence communities. The absence of flush toilets and lightening in village settings is a far fetch expectation.

We certainly have not sent anyone to the moon yet but, slowly we’re making our mark in the world. Thirty years is too short a time to expect too much too soon

Dear Forever Optimist PNGean
nice to hear some thoughtful input here from someone at 'ground zero' so to speak.

Leigh makes a rather important point, though in a kind of vulgar way.
Regarding the leadership being 'grubs' looking after their own interests at the expense of the people. I don't think this is the case across the board, but I have had experience in tribal economics and it usually goes like this.

1/ I'm the traditional head man, and all 'aid' comes to ME for distribution as I see fit. (which might be primarily on my own cocoa, rubber, oil palm or cofee plantion, then if any left over ..for the ordinary folks, usually he will do something symbolic, 'for the village' and tout it as a great breakthrough) He will praise the government and urge the village to vote for them next time.(So he can continue to benefit)

2/ Aid not coming to 'my'people is wasted. But as long as I get my slice (Timber concession Licence maybe) its not that important.

So.. the nobility in tribal societies is often not so noble.
Just as our own nobility is selling us down the drain as Nathan Joel points out by 'global re-distribution' of labor and capital.
I still recall one local Bornean head mans wife who wanted to use the mission plane flight to go down and do 'shopping' while a medivac case was attempted to be sidelined.

I'd be interested in the education of your mum and dad. Was it through Australian government schools or mission schools ?

Are you aware of how many PNG languages have been protected and preserved by translations of the Bible into written language by basically volunteer individuals in the mission context ?

My basic understanding of Pacific and any local leadership is that it tends to be 'tribal' looking after its own interest and 'nobility centred'.
Cash aid is usually used in very 'policitally' beneficial ways i.e. handouts to 'one-talks' and relatives :)
rather than infrastructure.

Some one needs a hug Leigh! - cmon big fella - I think it is you. I thought your level of embitterment had reached its nadir - but you seem to get more curmudgeonly with every passing day - and now those who receive charity will never amount ot anything! it is clear you say!

Rather a wide sweeping assertion - but then if you can, sight unseen, define Nathan Joel as a miserable Australian you can make such assertions I guess -

Just was is a good Australian Leigh? lets start a list shall we? first there's you; then we have ........... C'mon Leigh help us out here. I am at a loss

We are not over populated nor are we under resourced we just dont use what we have with very much intelligence - we are selfish is what we are - Donald Horne was right we are a Lucky COuntry led by idiots - or words to that effect - it is not that the concept of over seas aid is flawed it is in its application -

like the proslytising missionaries of the past(and present) who want to convert every one we are keen to convert every economy with the teaser of foriegn aid into one like ours and on our terms - we are an insightless supersillious pack of bastards really.

I guess I am a miserable Austrlian as well - I am certainly no patriot

I think Proud to be Indonesian is Marilyn in a burq, sounds the same.

Boaz,
I appreciate your sentiments.
I have to be frank as I am a straight shooter so I like being brutally honest. It’s my sincere hope that, no one takes offence
That said; let me get back to your assertions.

Firstly, the notion that Leigh is cooking up is unfortunately the vivid reflection of the truncated view that the so-called Pacific Islands Saviour have the Australian public believe, largely heralded by the singularly dimensional view of Australian media. Sadly, I have to add that some unlearning is in order. That will greatly help.

The ground truth is; Australia doesn’t give a blank cheque to Waigani. Canberra has her outposts in Port Moresby that pens the invoices. If facts and statistics don’t lie, then a quick glance at AIDWATCH indepth publications would help.

Self extravagance and unnecessary siphoning off of these funds to serve as window dressing and "feel good situations" that really does nothing more than a smokescreen that is cleverly engineered to distract the real evils behind the schemes of serve self-service, suppression of local intelligence and ability and exert the age old dependency syndrome on us is as good as nothing. 31 years of lesson is more than enough.

Australia has advanced in practically everything that there is to pursue, but unfortunately John Howard and his crew have been overdosed by an expired foreign diplomacy pill that that is sadly making them look more and more foolish each passing month. The sooner the 21st century cupboard of pills is exploited, the better it is for Australia. Otherwise, prepare not to despair.

My mum and dad have zero education. They’re subsistence farmers but they had that intrinsic wisdom and tact to educate me. They don’t depend on me to look after them now but they continue to live off the land like they have been for years. There’re many good schools in PNG that are run by Missionary agencies. Not all are Australian run.

We’re also indebted and appreciative of the work of missionary volunteers in translation and preservation of our local languages. We certainly do not dismiss that.

The Radio Australia interview below seems relevant to this topic.
Radio Australia, 31 Oct 06

Businessman says Australia 'over lectures' PNG on governance

Last Updated 30/10/2006, 22:49:03

An Australian business executive says Australia "over lectures" Papua New Guinea on governance when it should be concerned with ensuring its aid programs deliver services effectively.

Australia gives PNG up to $US300 million a year in aid to improve governance and support broad-based economic development initiatives.

The chairman of the Papua New Guinea Sustainable Development company, Ken Baxter, says he feels quite embrassed as an Australian when PNG is lectured on principles of governance.

Mr Baxter says PNG has made significant progress since independence.

He says Australia tends to over emphasise the significance of good governance "when the real problem is getting effective delivery from our aid programs here in Papua New Guinea".

"And I think one of the major issues is exactly the same that confronts the Commonwealth and Australian states... is getting somebody to get off their backside and actually make an agreement and do something," he said.

http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/s1777045.htm