PNG 'dragging chain' on development targets

A FORMER INTERNATIONAL aid chief has accused Papua New Guinea of slowing down progress in reaching United Nations international development targets for 2015.

Several Pacific nations are expected to be highlighted as success stories at an international aid meeting that will address the UN's Millennium Development goals in South Korea.  But PNG will not be among them.

More than 2,000 delegates from around the world, including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and United Nation's Chief Ban Ki-Moon, are attending the fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness.

Former AusAID deputy director-general Annmaree O'Keeffe says parts of the region are making large strides in meeting the millennium development goals, while others are lagging.

"There are some parts of the Pacific, notably Papua New Guinea, which is really dragging the chain on meeting the millennium development goals, " she told Radio Australia.

Source: Australia Network News, 29 November

Comments

[Icarus]

The Nasfund saga was very propitious. I agree entirely that it was well handled. And very profitable it was for all, myself included.

If we can use the same thinking and actioning to achieve results in fields that do not necessarily return any financial rewards, but require instead smarter spending, e.g., health systems, then I would classify that as a real success for PNG leadership - moving the goalposts.

Hopefully we have decent and honest leaders 'Waiting for 2012'.

[David Kitchnoge]

Thanks Phil - I see the Nasfund story as one of a process driven positive development.

We were very lucky to have had an intelligent prime minister who had the wisdom to properly diagnose the problem and the foresight to develop the correct responses to remedy the situation. And the results speak for themselves.

That is the sort of response to our development challenges that I’d like to see. It took time for the results to come through but the correct process will always yield the right results.

[Phil Fitzpatrick]

Perhaps it might be a good idea if you look at Nasfund and a few other success stories and work out how they got it right and then apply the same principles to everything else, including health.

What happened with Nasfund was that a very smart and committed politician appointed a couple of very competent managers and gave them the freedom to sort out the mess.

It might also be useful to look at private enterprise. Every successful PNG businessman/woman knows that it is crucial to have managers with no wantok connections in charge.

In the lead up to independence there was a localisation program. Australian public servants had PNG shadows attached to them who would eventually take over their jobs.

It wasn't very successful because independence was rushed (thanks Gough). If it had begun ten years earlier it might have reaped huge benefits. Unfortunately ten years earlier Australians still thought they would be there for another 20 years at least.

If the PNG government could swallow its pride and bring in expatriate managers for key areas like health things could be brought up to scratch and then taken back over.

But it should be something that PNG arranges. If the government used AusAID or the UN you would just have more expensive consultants writing silly reports.

Recruiting smart operators from overseas is very common everywhere. A lot of the more successful large private companies in Australia have expatriate managers. So do some government organisations.

Occasionally it doesn't work out; Telstra had a bad one for a while but they gave him the boot.

You have to give these people a lot of money and the freedom to operate without hinderance but in the long run they are good investments. Just look at Nasfund.

[Peter Kranz]

If we are talking about externally-imposed and somewhat artificial national goals - then yes I agree.

But you have to measure basic statistics about the quality of life that people have - otherwise how else can you plan to improve services and target areas of greatest need?

The infant and mother mortality stats for PNG are shameful, and no one can argue that this must be a major priority. And they have been getting steadily worse over the last 30 years.

So something's wrong.

[Icarus]

PNG made a commitment to the United Nations after independence. Thirty years and billions of kina later we've lost the plot. Apparently so has the UN.

It is right that we should set our own goals. And there is more than one useful way of using internationally agreed 'yardsticks'.

But, gentlemen, the government and public service that is supposed to set those goals couldn't even complete the national census!

In the absence of such vital objective data about our country, how are we supposed to set appropriate goals with any chance of achieving real impact?

PNG Vision 2050 contains a number of statistics for health and education etc that are to be improved on. An example is to have one aid post per ward area.

How long till we see this?

What are our verifiable indicators, the means of verification, monitoring and evaluation period and when do we do an impact assessment - another five years, of course. Call it a decade if you wish - same difference.

On this issue of MDGs I think we should separate the country from the government. What do the MDGs truly reflect? Is it the capability, the hopes and aspirations of a people or of their governments?

Is it nationalism and pride that makes us want to defend our right to choose our own goals over the MDGs, which no one said we shouldn't be doing?

Or do we truly believe that we're doing a great job and that our leaders should continue on doing their great job and ignore the MDGs?

Sometimes a sound thrashing is a good thing.

If we don't let the government take its beatings, then our people will continue to suffer.

[Phil Fitzpatrick]

With respect Peter, I don't think having Millenium Goals will solve infant mortality problems.

Having honest and dedicated politicians and public servants intent on rebuilding the health system is a better option. Instead of juggling statistics to make PNG look good and being obsessed by one's position on some theoretical global ladder of success is just a mindless diversion.

If PNG must do that sort of thing it can outsource it to AusAID, who are very good at it, and then get on with the practical steps to mend the system.

I bet if PNG made it to the top of the statistical ladder there would still be an unacceptable rate of infant deaths.

Millenium Goals and a lot of other claptrap espoused by the UN are global spin, no more and no less.

They lost the plot years ago. Just look at the carnage wreaked world wide by the World Bank. PNG should ignore them and get on with fixing its own mess.

[Paul Oates]

Gentlemen - The problem about finding the most appropriate or best solution is to first be able to correctly define the problem.

At the risk of being viewed as an outsider looking into the open window, I suggest one of the most pressing priorities is to elect leaders who are competent and capable.

These leaders then need to ensure the government apparatus is also competent and capable of carrying out their responsibilities or being able to dismissed and replaced by those who are.

Many years ago it used to be the burning ambition of government employees to be able to wear long socks and to stuff their pens down the side of their socks.

This indicated (to them at least), that they had ‘made it’. In fact of course, it indicated no such thing.

There is a reasonable expectation that those we elect to high office are able to do the job. The problem is that the real election of a candidate is often made behind closed doors involving deals and obligations.

In most cases, those who are elected then use spin and obfuscation to disguise their ineptitude in the role or simply blame those government officials who they themselves placed in the job.

Other than that, ‘people power’ must be organised to exert sufficient pressure of the government of the day to do what needs to be done.

Organising people power in PNG is not easy given the geographic and ethnic diversities, lack of communications and variable standard of education.

However it can be done as demonstrated by the active opposition to the Maladina Amendment and Walks against Corruption.

Is democracy therefore the best form of government? Sir Winston Churchill reckoned that democracy was the worst form of government, …. excepting all the rest.

What’s the answer? Only elect those who have a proven record of achievement, are honest, responsible and are prepared to be held accountable?

So where do we find these ‘doyens of decency’? If you work that one out, please let me know? We could all use the answer.

[Peter Kranz]

David - I'm saying PNG signed up to the MDGs many years ago and either isn't able to meet them through incompetence or corruption, or someone was lying.

I am also particularly concerned about infant mortality rates - which in PNG are some of the worst in the world, although 30 years ago they were were similar to Australias.

I speak knowing two of my sisters in PNG lost two babies in the last month - both I suspect avoidable given appropriate treatment.

They certainly would not have lost their babies if they had been in Australia with accress to decent health care.

So what price MDGs?

How many unnecessary deaths do you think are acceptable in the cousre of "choosing our own goals?"

"Own goals" is appropriate.

[David Kitchnoge]

You lost your 'sisters', and so have I by blood.

But we must balance our short term needs with our long term development aspirations.

And yes we will set our own goals in the face of adversity.

[Peter Kranz]

Check the statistics before making comments about "setting out own targets".

PNG is one of the worst countries in the world when measured on child and mother death rates (infant mortality):
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/papuang_statistics.html

Don't talk about 'setting our own goals' when two of my PNG sisters have lost children in the past month.

[David Kitchnoge]

Peter – I don’t see them in this country and I don’t know what difference it will make if we “cop out of UN”.

I dare say we won't become another Central African Nation. We will become like them if we lose it and bow to external pressure groups, whoever that might be.

Who is to say we can not set our own agendas?

[Peter Kranz]

I thought PNG was a member of the United Nations.

"The Millennium Development Goals are eight international development goals that all 193 United Nations member states and at least 23 international organisations have agreed to achieve by the year 2015.

"They include eradicating extreme poverty, reducing child mortality rates, fighting disease epidemics such as AIDS, and developing a global partnership for development."

So cop out of the UN if you want and let PNG kids die in the interests of 'setting our own goals.

But PNG will become about as respectable as the Central African Republic.

[David Kitchnoge]

Health standards, literacy, etc, don't just fall from the sky. Someone must deliver them within a system that is ready, willing and able to do it.

It is clear that the current delivery mechanism we have can’t bear the weight of our expectations. The system simply can not withstand the stress levels.

The challenges faced by our public service machinery are not excuses as you would like us to believe. They are real.

How do you expect a public servant living under leaking roof and earning a meagre wage to remain sufficiently motivated and committed to their calling?

The challenges in respect of the physical make up of our country are also real. I would have hoped for them to be mere excuses though.

I’m not suggesting for a moment that our diversity is a weakness, but neither do I think it is a strength at this stage – not yet.

It will be in time but we must first overcome some significant challenges associated with it.

And don’t you think we need to first tame our greed as a prerequisite to attaining the MDGs?

In a nutshell, my angle is that we must focus on the process and get it right. And the right process will yield the right outcomes.

Stumbling all over the process in our haste to get to the outcomes, MDG or not, won’t help.

[Icarus]

Simple answer first: greed.

Defining happiness is not feasible. (And we can't feed on our endorphins.)

So proxies are health standards, food security, literacy and educational opportunities (to free the mind), poverty and employment levels (to keep occupied and with a little money in our pockets) and, hey wait a minute does that sound a little like the MDG's?

Perhaps we should beat the crap out of the people we have placed in charge of the system, the entire public service machinery, ministers and all, who have corrupted it.

Make up your mind folks - it's either the system is f'ed or those in control or both.

'800 languages and social mindsets', 'high rainfall, treacherous topography', excuses, excuses, excuses.

Are you telling me that it is because of all this vast social diversity and physically challenging environments that PNG has such a glaring lack of common sense and good will - is that why this currency is not traded here?!

David, your words are suggesting that diversity is our weakness. Is it not also our strength?
____________

It's great to see two outstanding commentators going toe to toe on such an important issue. I'm enjoying this exchange immensely - KJ

[David Kitchnoge]

Do we know why there is so much unhappiness in this country despite our great economic potential?

In my view, our priority at the moment is to get the fundamentals of good governance right before running around with some big stick and beating the crap out of a system that won’t work regardless of how hard you hit it.

Otherwise we risk rushing at a hundred miles an hour on a narrow minded path just to meet some millennium goal which we can’t sustain.

Are there lessons to be learnt from the poorly thought out OBE education system that was imposed on us?

I share your indignation with regard to wastage of public moneys, which is mostly a corruption issue. Anyone with a genuine desire to see us "develop" would lend us a helping hand to fix this problem first before waving their fancy stick.

With regards to generalisations, where in those tiny specks in the Pacific do you see a country with more than 800 cultures and social mindsets?

Holding together such a diverse nation is a challenge in itself. Where in those tiny specks do you find a country with such unforgiving terrain, high rainfall and treacherous topography?

With our without the so-called MDGs, it is indeed our goal to give our people a happy way of life. And we must do it in ways that we can sustain.

[Icarus]

Comparisons are troublesome, I agree, but when a 'tiny speck in the Pacific' has less resources but a better standard of living and GDP per capita higher than PNG (the largest blob on the rim of the Pacific?), it makes me wonder, wtf we are doing with all our wealth?

Okay, so every country has its own unique set of constraints and opportunities.

David - 'limited resources'? Please don't give us an excuse. We are the wealthiest most God blessed country in the Pacific!

Apart from diamonds in the sand, what mineral or organic resource does PNG not have?

We have ample opportunity to achieve our national goals but for the 'narrow domestic walls' that separate us.

The most important lesson that the MDG's provides is to let ordinary people understand the level at which they can expect their governments to achieve, albeit given finite resources and different social and political environment.

Alright, let's trash the MDG's, where does that leave us?

Whistling down the same old merry little garden path to nowhere.

I expect more and better from our leaders. If they can not clearly and explicitly express exactly where they want to take our country and back this up with palpable results - palpable results at the grassroots level - then I'd like to use the biggest stick I can get my hands on and beat them with it!

[David Kitchnoge]

No one disputes the fact that basic human needs are the same everywhere you go. Of course we recognise that fact.

But we decide how best to prioritise our efforts and allocate our resources that match our own ability to achieve those needs.

Our key objective in achieving those goals must be to sustain them once achieved and not to rush to meet some imaginary timeline set for us by some world policemen.

PNG is a relatively large country with a multitude of competing and complex demands for our limited resources.

And to compare us with tiny specks in the Pacific is, in my view, unfair.

[Icarus]

That's right, we have set our own bars: does that refer to Vision 2050 which appears to be smoke from the proverbial pipe or the PNG Constitution, which we have just about trampled to death?

Perhaps we should consider what the 'worthy objective' in the Millenium Development goals really is, because from what I've seen of the world people are the same everywhere i.e., we have families, we live in communities, we are concerned about our health, food, work, wealth etc.

But any generalisations we make have to be approached with great caution because societies have developed different ways of expressing their individuality - how they choose to live their lives.

In short, we can ignore the statements made by foreigners who perhaps have no real appreciation of life in PNG.

On the other hand we should focus on the core question that the MDG's allows us to ask - are we really doing the best we can to provide our people with those common basic needs?

I'm afraid the answer is too obvious.

[David Kitchnoge]

Spot on Phil.

We set our own bars thankyou!

[Phil Fitzpatrick]

The Millenium Goals are a big stick that wealthy countries and the UN use to chastise the so-called developing nations.

It is a method of oppression, much like colonialism, designed to ensure they keep control of the world economy.

The development they espouse is just another way of saying we want you all to look and talk like us.

Papua New Guinea doesn't need those sorts of pressures. It can sort its own problems out. The UN and its wealthy friends should butt out.