Letters
pp. 8-9 · Read in the full issue
Peace crisis THE peace crisis that is spreading throughout the earth is causing grave social consequences and the scientists of the world are probing in depth as to the cause of it.
The sale of armaments have come to an abrupt end and the unemployment rate in the anti-ballistic missile industry is alarming! Some scientists believe that a madman has poisoned the water sup plies of the world with peace germs.
Unless a solution is found soon, peace will pervade the planet and discord will be totally eliminated.
A world political crisis is imminent!
Earth is headed for a total revolution!
Can the politicians of the world stop it?
Martin Leo
Otahuhu, Auckland
Aussie aid
ROBERT Simms’ article, So who is real ly on the gaining side, (PIM July 1995) adds to an ongoing and at times vigorous debate in Australia about the sectoral focus and commercial returns in Australia’s overseas aid programme.
While Robert Simms makes a num ber of good points in his article, some of his criticisms and assertions about Australia’s aid performance in the health sector and how the assistance is deliv ered lacks objective and informed analy sis. Australia recognises that in promot ing and supporting the sustainable eco nomic development and advancement of
people in developing countries, signifi
cant resources need to be directed to both public health and population-relat ed problems. How well these problems are handled hinges in large part on coun tries establishing and implementing the right policies to cope with them. This also involves difficult choices in apply ing resources to a wide range of compet
ing priority development needs. In the 1994- Australian aid budget, Mr Gordon Bilney, Minister for Development Co-operation and Pacific Island Affairs, announced a four-year $llO million health initiative, nearly doubling AusAlD’s spending on health aid programmes in countries in South East Asia and the South Pacific. In that year over $l2 million was spent on health activities in the South Pacific region amounting to approximately 9 per cent of total Australian aid to the South Pacific. This exceeds the target of 7 per cent recommended in the World Bank’s 1993 World Development Report. Nearly $l7 million has been allocated for health-related activities in 1995- In response to requests from Pacific Island countries, these funds will be spent on a wide range of activities including a $2 million building pro gramme at the Fiji School of Medicine; a $1 million ‘Health Islands’ health pro motion programme $3 million to support the delivery of a wide range of tertiary health services to the region; a number of maternal and child health care pro jects; and development of a $lO region al vector borne disease control pro gramme.
Contrary to Robert Simms’ claim, most of these activities are integrated regionally, precisely to avoid the pitfalls he refers to lack of cohesion and frag mented programmes. For example, the vector borne disease project will assist South Pacific countries to reduce mor bidity and mortality through medical and environmental health programmes as well as vector control mechanisms across six Pacific Islands countries.
On the general issue of commercial benefits and returns to Australia from the aid programme, Australia’s aid pro grammes are effective precisely because
goods and services are generally provid
ed in fields where Australia has a com parative advantage in terms of both price and quality. It would not make sense for Australia to support projects and activi ties which other donor countries or agencies are better placed to assist. It should also be noted that AusAID has
forged strong links with a number of Australian health sector professional societies and institutions which, in many instances, have offered the services of their members to work in the South Pacific on a largely voluntary basis.
Robert Simms correctly points out that Australia does derive substantial commercial spin-offs from its aid pro grammes, but these are unforced and not, as he claims, one of Australia’s
prime objectives in providing particular
kinds of support to developing countries.
Critics who see this benefit to the Australian economy “as running con trary to the basic concept of humanitari an aid” overlook a number of other fac tors which need to be considered. These include, for example, the value derived by the recipient country from a transfer of technology, such as in-Australia scholarship programmes, as well as the more quantifiable economic and social benefits generated by physical infra structure, research programmes, and community based projects sourced from Australia. In this context, it is also worth nothing that Australia’s $1.5 billion aid programme is provided entirely in the form of grants.
Bruce Davis
Deputy Director General, Pacific and International Programs Division, Australian Agency for International Development
Rising seas
IN the article entitled, Commercial Sense or Sheer Madness, (PIM June 1995) the author states that: “The high est point on its (Marshall Island) atolls is just 10 metres above sea level. A 50metre rise in sea level would make the Marshall Islands uninhabitable, the 1994 Barbados conference of Small Island States was told by the Marshall Island Gorvemment.”
With a highest elevation of only 10 metres, a rise in sea level of 50 metres would most certainly render the Marshall Islands uninhabitable. While the error is undoubtedly a minor editori al one, I feel it would be useful to pro vide your readers with current predic
tions of sea-level rise due to climate change. Scientists working under the auspices of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predict that a 25-30-centimetre rise in sea-level will occur between now and the year 2050. Further increase due to global warming will lead to a rise by the year 2100 of about 50 centimetres.
While rising sea-levels are accepted by the majority of climate scientists, the exact figure does remain open to debate.
This is principally due to the uncertain ties in determining the response of the polar ice caps. The release of liquid water due to melting bought on by high er air temperatures will certainly raise sea-levels.
However, increased snowfall over the poles caused by air being warmer, but still below freezing, will store some of this water back onto the ice cap.
Unravelling this complex feed-back sys
tern will eventually resolve much of the uncertainty, but at the moment scientists have a less than perfect understanding of this particular aspect of the problem.
A rise of 50 centimetres will certain ly render much, if not all, of the small atolls of the Pacific uninhabitable.
Rather than inundation, the cause of this will have more to do with human needs for habitation.
Rising sea levels will significantly reduce the available fresh water in
underground acquifers, upon which
human life on atolls depend.
More frequent and devastating occur rences of storm surge and sea flooding,
particularly during cyclones, will affect
human settlements, coastal lagoons and coral reefs. In this way agriculture and fishing activity will be impacted to the detriment of future human survival on atolls. The impacts above, while certain ly affecting human habitation in the
Marshall Islands, are also important aspects to be considered in any proposal such as that discussed in your report.
The implications of sea-level rise will adversely influence any facility built to store nuclear waste on the atolls of the Marshall Islands. It is hoped that any decision made in this regard will take into account the effects on sea-level rise due to climate change.
Neville Koop
Meterology and Climatology Officer, South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme
Letters to the Editor LETTERS should be addressed to: The Editor, Pacific Islands Monthly, PO Box 1167, Suva, Fiji. Fax: (679) 303809. They should contain the writer’s full name, address and telephone num ber. Letters may be edited for clarity and accuracy.