Dr Satish Chand




The 41st Pacific Islands Forum, a meeting of 16 leaders of sovereign states of the region, is to take place from the 3rd to the 6th of August in Port Vila, the capital of Vanuatu.
This annual jamboree will have its fair share of fun for the participants, and many photo opportunities.
While costing taxpayers millions of dollars, I have doubts on the public-value of these meetings. Let me explain. And let me also campaign for issues that I would like seen on the agenda.
Cairns Compact
Foremost on the agenda will be a stock-take on progress made on ‘Strengthening Development Coordination’.
This was the core of the Cairns Compact signed by the Leaders last year.
Australia, the main sponsor, committed $10 million over 2009-11 to strengthening regional cooperation, security, economic growth and progress on the Millennium Development Goals.
The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat was given carriage of this work. The Secretary-General (SG) will be reporting to the leaders on the above.
According to official Australian government sources, the Cairns Compact is geared to making real progress on the (eight) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
Reducing poverty and maternal and infant mortality are two of the MDGs. A timeframe of two years is too short to see progress on either of the above.
It would take decades to observe discernable shifts in the rates of poverty and infant mortality. Clearly, the Cairns Compact failed to recognise the above.
What was needed then and could be patched up in Port Vila this time are the intermediate targets to signal progress.

Development Effectiveness
The Secretary-General Tuiloma Neroni Slade, explained to this magazine last year that he will be delivering to the leaders a Development Effectiveness Tracking Report which will also be on the agenda.
This report will focus on, among other things, a process of regular peer review of countries’ national development plans.
This was to be done to: “promoting international best practice in key local sectors, promote effective budget allocation processes and guide support from development partners.”
Nauru and Kiribati volunteered for the reviews and were the first cabs off the rank. The SG must have lined up others for subsequent reviews. This is all fine, but what next? How do such reviews contribute to improving development effectiveness?
It would be interesting to hear of the value of these reviews from those having being reviewed, and others who participated in the review itself.
Talking development effectiveness without engaging nations with the majority of its people being poor is less than sensible. Papua New Guinea has not got a mention thus far.
By headcount, it houses the largest population of the poor of the Pacific island region. And efforts at improving development effectiveness in PNG may be timely.
The large anticipated windfalls in government revenues from recent resource discoveries could provide the resources for the above.
The challenge will be in translating these increased dollars into tangible benefits for the majority of the population.
For this to have a chance, the government of PNG would have to take the lead in the fight to lower poverty count. Donors and the Forum could help but only with a willing sovereign partner.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has provided technical expertise to the ‘peer reviews’ championed by the SG. While the ADB has expertise in assessing development effectiveness, it is far from being a ‘peer’ in the Forum.
Complicating matters further is that the ADB is a donor to several of the islands nations, thus likely to face conflicts of interest when assessing the effectiveness of aid that it itself dishes out.
And the mere participation of the ADB in these reviews compromises perceptions of domestic ownership of the process.
It may be time that these reviews were staffed and led from within the full membership of the Forum.
The Cairns Compact commits to supporting the Sydney office of the Pacific Islands Trade and Investment Commission (PITIC) to: “develop trade, tourism and investment opportunities between Pacific countries and Australia”.
Let us see hard evidence on the above. I do not have the recent figures on the volume and value of trade between Australia and the rest of the region.
The PIFS and trade officials in member nations would have these and thus in a position to supply them to the Leaders.
The SG could present the bare figures and supporting analysis to test the effectiveness of PITIC on this particular initiative.
The perennials
Fiji, the lone suspended and recalcitrant member, has remained on the Forum agenda since 2007. And the relationship between several members of the Forum and Fiji has deteriorated over time.
Matters have been made worse through the last expulsion of the Australian High Commissioner from Fiji.
She was alleged to having campaigned against PM Bainimarama hosting the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) meeting.
Vanuatu PM, Edward Natapei, the current chair of the MSG, deferred the annual meeting that was to have taken place in Nadi last month.
PM Bainimarama was then to have taken over the chairmanship of this sub-regional group of sovereign nations comprising Fiji, PNG, and Solomon Islands.
Bainimarama was working to inviting other island leaders to this meeting of MSG+. This was to have given him a means to edging his way back into the regional forum.
Leaders of Australia and Vanuatu, the current chair and the next chair of the Forum, may have scuttled the plans of their Fiji peer.
The failure of the MSG to hold its annual meeting is a failure for Fiji and the region. If successful, PM Bainimarama would have chalked a win for him personally.
The region would have had an opportunity to getting Fiji back into the fold. Australia and New Zealand would have had the opportunity to step back and let the other islands leaders take up the responsibility of helping Fiji back into the Forum.

Friend of Fiji
The hopes of the above remain as PM Bainimarama has been able to substitute the MSG meeting with his own ‘Friends of Fiji’ forum.
Australia and New Zealand abstained, while leaders of PNG, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Kiribati participated together with government representatives from several other islands neighbours.
The discussions on Fiji at the Forum in Port Vila will be difficult. PM Gillard of Australia will not be attending this meeting.
Her role as the chair could be filled by PM Natapei who is due to take on as the new chair.
Natapei does not have the best rapport with  Bainimarama.
However, his peers will have messages from Fiji following their meeting with PM Bainimarama just weeks earlier.
The issue of labour mobility and the sick seasonal labour programme will be another topic for discussion.
The rhetoric from Australia on  remains positive, but the success of their ongoing pilot looks doubtful. New Zealand has had much greater success with its own ‘Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme’.
Prime Minister Key could be in a position to lecture to PM Gillard and her peers on this subject.

Climate change
The issue of climate change and its impact on islanders has to remain a standing agenda item for future Forum Leaders Meetings.
This is so for four reasons at least. First, the effects of climate change are already being felt in many islands communities. Second, it is hurting the poorest the most.
Many lack the means to mitigate or escape the consequences of climate change. Third, those worst affected are innocent victims of the pollution from afar.
Most remote island communities live a very basic existence; and nearly always in harmony with their environment. Thus, their plight is not of their making.
Third, their voice will be heard within the global forum only if voiced by their leaders and in concert with their peers. On the last, there simply is no substitute to the Forum Leaders Meeting.
Finally, will this meeting be any more effective than those of the recent past? I have my doubts which stem from two concerns: (i) Fiji, a significant party to the Forum, remains isolated and likely to remain a significant distraction and potentially a source of disunity; and, (ii) forthcoming elections in Australia and Solomon Islands and contestations for the position of the PM in PNG will detract the minds many from the pressing issues for the region.

Leaders retreat
The Leaders at this annual retreat are expected to provide a collective vision for the region and share their wisdom on what works and what does not with their peers.
Several of them will be concentrating on domestic issues given their approaching elections. Australia and Solomon Islands will be just days away from holding their national elections.
And PM Gillard will be conspicuous in her absence. It may even signal the demotion of the region in the policy-priorities of a government, if led by her.
There is little escape from the fact that a more effective Forum is in the collective interest of the Pacific region.