part of life?

Letters

Aid, a natural part of life?

THE article written by Futa Helu (Aid aiding corruption PIM, October, 1991) is

timely because foreign aid,

whether it is bilaterally pro vided by one country to another, or part of a regional assistance programme, is an essential ingredient in the economies of all Pacific Island countries.

There is all too often an obtuseness surrounding the processes by which aid is ob tained and delivered. The jar gon of international aid agencies does not lend itself to easy understanding of the processes involved, or necess arily, the value of the product which is provided at the end of the line. We can and should change that by demanding plain English.

It is probably impossible to answer in general terms Futa Helu’s question on who benefits from aid; the theory is that everyone does. The donor wins political points, and a stronger and more stable trading part ner, and the recipient receives cash, services, or goods which assist national development.

The South Pacific has two major regional aid agencies of its own. The South Pacific Commission, which was estab lished in the early 1950 s by the then colonial powers as a bulkwark against future Japan ese military, or other alien national expansionism in the region, and the South Pacific Forum, which was established several decades later to assist the economic development of the newly independent South Pacific Island nations.

Cynics would argue that the Japanese have obtained what they want by peaceful commer cial means, and the cold war no longer exists, so why continue the South Pacific Commission?

Similarly it could be said many South Pacific Island nations will never become economi cally independent because they lack adequate natural re sources. The reality is that both organisations have played vital roles in both social and econ omic development and filled gaps in national infrastructures which did not exist in colonial, or early post colonial times.

Both organisations deal in regional programmes and are largely uncompetitive with each other because they pro vide different services in specific areas such as health, education, telecommunications etc.

These days the Forum is regarded as the supreme re gional organisation as its poli cies are set by the Heads of Governments of independent countries, at the annual Heads of Government Forum Meet ing.

The delivery of bilateral aid is very much a concern of the two countries concerned, the donor and recipient nation, and providing both nations have democratic political sys tems, the governments con cerned are politically answer able to the public on expendi ture.

Obviously it is possible for a donor nation to help support a friendly government in a recipi ent country. All it has to do is provide funding for a pet proj ect of that government which is likely to buy votes or favours for it.

The ending of the Cold War may make this practice less common as the Western Camp now has little to fear from communism. Any trade-offs in this area may in the future be more to do with buying com mercial concessions within the developing country or votes within the United Nations on matters of national interest.

It is unrealistic and naive to say this does not happen, or will not happen in the future.

There are, however, many persons of high integrity within international aid agencies, and national bureaucracies, who tend to fight against such things and the power of the bureauc racy should not be underesti mated when it comes to manipulating politicians.

This is not to say that bureaucracies are any more honest than politicians, as many are not, but society, both

at national and international levels has its own checks and balances.

What Futa Helu is probably striving for is an adequate system of checks and balances on foreign aid so that the public at large can police the extremes of corruption in this area.

In some of the more open democratic societies freedom of information acts and the nor mal Westminster parliamen tary system does give reason able opportunity to check and control aid provision and re ceipt, particularly where bilat eral aid is concerned. The situation does become a lot foggier with regard to regional and major international aid programmes. The United Na tions is an open forum where issues can be discussed and recorded for public benefit, but that does not eliminate politick ing by pressure group nations for programmes suited to their needs but not necesssarily use ful to others. The UN can also be ineffective in blocking many things which are harmful to developing nations, such as deforestation, because devel oped nations require the re sources.

If we look at our own two regional institutions, the South Pacific Commission and the South Pacific Forum, there is probably a greater account ability to governments of this region, both donor and recipi ent, than with the UN or other international bodies. It is prob ably due more to the intimacy of the region than to any in built public accountability measures.

The Forum Heads of Gov ernment meet in private and most of the regional meetings held by the Forum Secretariat are not open to the public. This makes it difficult to impossible for members of the public to trace the dollars and cents through the system.

What percentage of each aid project is used up in adminis tration for example, and is all

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR must include writer’s full name, address and home telephone number. Letters may be edited for clarity or space. They should be faxed to (679) 303809, or mailed to; Pacific Islands Monthly PO Box 1167 Suva, Fiji Islands

the expenditure justified? Or why should one regional devel opment project be handled more efficiently or given greater priority than another?

I doubt if there is any serious corruption but there may be justification to seeking answers in the other two areas.

The South Pacific Com mission is a more open organ isation. The press are invited to attend its meetings, but it does not deal in the heady stuff of regional policies at Heads of Government level.

The irony is that few media representatives bother to cover the commission’s meetings, but they do tend to line up to cover the closed Forum Secretariat

meetings.

I sincerely hope that both Rowan Callick’s and Futa Helu’s articles prompt greater public interest in foreign aid.

The lives of millions of Pacific Islanders are so dependent on it that they have every reason to know where it is coming from and who sets the priorities.

Even in so-called developed nations like New Zealand there is a lasting need for the public to keep track of its international financial dealings. New Zea land for example has not been a recipient of international foreign aid but it has, during the last few decades, been the recipient of huge foreign loans.

This has been money bor rowed excessively and without due public attention, or con cern, until too late now the New Zealand economy is in full recession trying to square the books.

Pacific Islanders have to be eternally alert that political strings are not too demanding and that the cost of administer ing the aid by international and regional institutions does not dilute the aid to such an extent that there is little left in the coffer for the actual task.

It is not necessarily the “white faces” sitting in the aid agencies who will “milk-off” aid money in the form of excessive wages and salaries, there are plenty of Pacific Islanders who are both experi enced and adept at this game too. At the end of the day all forms of corruption are a hu man affair and no particular race of human beings has a form of exclusivity in this area.

Roy Vaughan Auckland