Melanesia – Pacific Institute of Public Policy http://pacificpolicy.org Thinking for ourselves Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:48:07 -0700 en-GB hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.17 The long journey – political acceptance of women http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/03/the-long-journey-political-acceptance-of-women/?&owa_medium=feed&owa_sid= http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/03/the-long-journey-political-acceptance-of-women/#comments Tue, 01 Mar 2016 22:12:33 +0000 http://pacificpolicy.org/?p=9337 My journey started in 2008, when I sought the endorsement of community leaders in my home island of Tanna to contest the Vanuatu provincial elections. I didn’t get their approval. I was told it is against kastom for women to be in parliament, and that I wasn’t prepared to take up such a challenge. I tried again in 2012, this time paying my candidate fee without the approval of the community chief. When the community leaders learnt of this, they organised a meeting to stop me from contesting. They asked that I give up my candidate fee to a male candidate of their choice, promising in return that they would support me in the 2016 national general election. I respected their decision and gave my ticket away. Their male candidate failed to win.

In 2015 cyclone Pam devastated Vanuatu, with Tanna being one of the worst-hit islands. Women bore the brunt of the devastation, forcing them to seek out new ways to survive. A realisation began to dawn that it was time for them to stand up and speak for themselves. After numerous meetings with women groups, the first ever Tanna Women’s Forum was held in October 2015. Over 1,200 attended the meeting where women demanded change to a political system that held them down, tied them in poverty, and gave them no opportunity to speak out. It was a breakthrough moment as many of these women have lived under threat all of their lives.

we shall continue to seek the empowerment of women to a level where they can think and speak for themselves

The women put their heads together and agreed it was time someone took the lead. I was nominated. The women agreed that I would contest the next general election scheduled for late 2016. Just days later the government announced a snap election, effectively wiping out our time to put together an election campaign. We moved ahead anyway with membership numbers now standing at 3,700. We had much confidence that we would secure one of the seven seats in the Tanna open constituency.

With very little time to prepare, I took on the challenge with much confidence. That as a solid membership of women we could succeed, and that even if we failed to win a seat, we would learn valuable lessons from the snap election experience that would better prepare us for the next general elections in 2020. I had so much confidence. I wasn’t thinking of losing; our hopes based on the registration figures signed by women across the island.

Crossing controversial territory

The first obstacle was informing community leaders of our decision to field our own candidate – a woman. Working with a chief that I have close ties to, a community meeting was arranged whereby I would declare and launch my candidacy. No one uttered a word, except a female friend who stood up, and much to my surprise, said ‘I am not in support of women being electoral representatives in parliament, and I am also against the policy of reserving seats for women’. I took this understandably as coming from someone speaking from her heart, but it also confirmed that the notion that women ‘do not belong in parliament’ were not held by men alone.

With no financial backing (other than two small personal contributions totalling 15,000 vatu) I had to dig into my own pockets to fund the campaign. I must say the election process is very expensive, with transportation in Tanna costing 20,000 vatu per day. We hired six public transport vehicles for the campaign.

We managed to visit (and revisit in some cases) 19 communities, speaking with roughly 700 men and women. Our slogan was Hemi Taem! (It is time!).

Taking centre stage during the campaigns was the most challenging. The questions and comments raised by communities were not difficult to answer, but there were also tricky ones coming from those who perceived us to be defying kastom.

‘You have not killed a fly or an ant, how can you prove that you can work like men in parliament. You are nothing but a woman.’

‘Our custom and culture perfectly points out your place – which is to look after the children, and mine (male speaking) is to do the talking. Where is your respect for this kastom? Are you from Australia that you don’t know our kastom? Who has given you this right to contest?’

‘Maybe we can vote for you in the provincial council election, but not to parliament.’

‘Our fear right now is the domestic violence law; we do not want our women to take those laws into their own hands.’

‘We don’t want to vote for women, because we don’t want women to have the right over us men.’

‘We don’t want our women to vote for women. If they do, we will divorce them.’

In a lot of places, prior to our campaign meetings, there would be community meetings most held in the nakamal where ‘consensus’ was often reached for all community members to vote for a particular candidate. In some cases, I wasn’t allowed to go and campaign – even to speak to just the women. In one case, some women called me and said, ‘Mary, please don’t come to our community as you will not be allowed to speak here’.

Discrimination and the threat of violence

The campaign revealed that culture is a main contributor to the limitation of woman’s influence in politics. I’ve seen how a lot of people are reluctant to vote for a woman. We did not receive discrimination from men alone, but women also. The discrimination we received was more on emotional violence. Discrimination against women in the society was very obvious at the time of campaigning and we observed how discrimination was somewhat based on a woman’s age, her marital status, her level of education and economic status. And as such, a woman may not be considered to be valuable or worthwhile if she does not fit the collective representation of both men and women.

Personally, I was able to endure a male-dominated political campaign period, but stories of threats of violence experienced by some women have just been unbearable. There are many of such accounts, ones that I share with a sad heart. This is one woman’s account of the threat she received from her partner the night before the poll.

I was already in bed pretending I had fallen asleep for some hours, but my husband came up and woke me up. He held a knife to my throat and demanded that I tell him who I was going to vote for. I was so afraid, I did not speak. He told me to speak or else he would beat me. I started crying. I was short of breath and was shaking. I cried out, “please help me … someone listening outside, please help me!” But nobody came to my rescue because they were afraid of my husband. He pushed me down, punched me again on my stomach and head, and said he was giving me a chance to speak or else he would beat me up. He knew of my intention to support women in this election. I begged him to let go of my throat or I was going to die, and I promised him that I was going to vote for the candidate of his choosing.

Another woman also had a similar story.

I saw you talking with those women, but I have stated clearly stated my rules and you have to follow them. We are going to vote for a male candidate and not for any woman. If you fail my words and I find out the numbers at our polling station, I will make you pay for it.

Other women were reportedly threatened by their partners to show candidate photos after they had casted their votes to prove they voted for a particular candidate. In some polling station, men threatened to divorce or physically torture their wives if results showed a significant number of women’s votes from that particular polling station.

A way forward

Political parties, as we know, are the most important institutions affecting women’s political participation. Even though our group knew we could have more support (moral and financial) from political parties if we ran under one of them, we still made the hard choice of running as an independent candidate. We had a few reasons for this, with the main one being that bigger political parties filed their candidates in advance, leaving no space for women to contest under their ticket. Secondly, women still have a long way to learn about the processes and lobbying involved in politics.

In spite of the challenges women continue to face, I see a new generation of powerful women flourishing in Tanna. Women with a strong sense of identity and power. Through our journey, many have come to understand that participation in the electoral processes involves much more than just voting. It is time to exercise the democratic rights that have either been ignored or violated over the last 36 years. Through our journey in politics, many have come to appreciate that through political participation women can have the freedom to speak out for the first time in the island’s history, which they’ve done through campaigning, assembling, associating and participating.

I have seen the power of ordinary women who have stood up against injustices to say they are tired. I have seen the faces of those who shed tears because of so much ill-dealing and threatening within their homes and communities. We have started a journey where we will continue to celebrate the united power of women who have taken the first steps to uncovering the multiple forms of discrimination and injustices. We shall continue to seek the empowerment of women to a level where they can think and speak for themselves.

]]>
http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/03/the-long-journey-political-acceptance-of-women/feed/ 4
Dare to dream, but in PNG it’s not enough http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/02/dare-to-dream-but-in-png-its-not-enough/?&owa_medium=feed&owa_sid= http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/02/dare-to-dream-but-in-png-its-not-enough/#comments Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:59:39 +0000 http://pacificpolicy.org/?p=9314 There are many people commenting online on the impacts of decisions taken by the current Papua New Guinea government. Many express their feelings about a looming fiscal crisis, these range from fury to indifference. In the haste for change once again it is easy to assume that a new crop of freshly elected leaders in a newly constituted PNG parliament after 2017 will miraculously create the change PNG needs!

We must not forget that the same laws will apply in the same national parliament and provincial houses of assembly. In the same national and district courtrooms, case law will grow and precedents will continue to be set in the absence of the hard questions that may never get asked about the blatant breaches in our society and adopted system of government.

our broken service delivery system and our overheated economy will need more than elected candidates with tunnel vision.

From 2017 our leaders will (more than ever before) need the knowledge, political will, grace and patience to restore integrity, democracy and the rule of law as a national emergency in order for all else to be rebuilt without exception. The truth is a new government in 2017 will inherit inter-generational debt, a massive deficit and redundant parliamentary rules/standing orders governing important decision-making processes. Not to mention the crumbling sanctity of the National Executive Council (NEC) or cabinet.

They will realise that legislation set up in principle to provide robust governance mechanisms have been misunderstood or ignored by their predecessors. In 2017 a newly elected parliament will discover an exhausted public service, a manipulated police force, an angry defence force, and many broken Papua New Guineans with drought and income starved families and disrupted livelihoods.

Those elected Members of Parliament will find very drained state-owned enterprises, institutions and agencies incapable of operating with only a steady trickle of public funds to deliver wages, health & education or district support according to policies and promises of the past and present. They will find that the much promised revenues from oil and gas have been committed to paying off the current government’s unilateral decisions and therefore debt for unauthorised loans for generations.

New leaders in 2017 will need to navigate a global economic downturn of epic proportions with PNGs development and economic interests at heart. Our new leaders will discover that our broken service delivery system and our overheated economy will need more than elected candidates with tunnel vision.

Those elected will need to be legislators, not aspiring millionaires or public finance managers. Newly elected leaders will require an understanding of serious fiscal discipline, tax and industrial relations reform and economic modelling that reflect PNG’s economic conditions and our revenue-earning potential in sectors other than petroleum and energy.

PNG will need MPs who are humble yet extraordinary thinkers to guide monetary/fiscal, social, cultural and development policy simultaneously to aid a new-look holistic reconstruction strategy focused on understanding that our vast natural resources should never again be left to a single individual who knows no institutional, spiritual, executive or national boundaries. Those new MPs should be held to the universal promise that candidates seek election (and re-election) to be servants to their people not master manipulators of their resources.

All the hopes in online commentary revert to a single assumption that PNG will inevitably have free and fair elections next year. If all we do is dare to dream it’s no longer enough because we will inevitably get what we vote for yet again.

Photo: Sepik Wewak Urban Local Government facebook group

]]>
http://pacificpolicy.org/2016/02/dare-to-dream-but-in-png-its-not-enough/feed/ 2
Must Melanesia globalise to succeed? http://pacificpolicy.org/2015/12/must-melanesia-globalise-to-succeed/?&owa_medium=feed&owa_sid= Sun, 06 Dec 2015 23:50:00 +0000 http://pacificpolicy.org/?p=8864 A closely contested grand final saw Vanuatu come away with the trophy for this year’s Melanesian School Debate, arguing against the motion that Melanesia must globalise to succeed.

The audience and esteemed panel of adjudicators were impressed by the high standard of debate, especially considering participants only had one day to prepare for the grand final topic. Jonathan Guyant of Vanuatu was particularly persuasive, putting a personal face to the topic and what it means to be ‘successful’ in Melanesia. He was awarded Best Speaker for the grand final debate.

Below is the transcript of his presentation.

The affirmative team quote Kofi Annan, and praise the effects globalisation may have on countries all around the world.

Now I could say I disagree – but don’t take my humble student word for this. Take this quote from the Nobel prize winning economist – yes an economist, we are talking about the economy here – and he states that ‘globalisation as it is, is not a force for good. People should govern markets – markets should not govern people. Globalisation and its drawbacks have led us to cross roads and it’s high time we changed direction’.

Distinguished guests, adjudicators, chairman, members of the opposing team, dear audience, a very good morning to you all. We would firstly like to thank PiPP for organising this debate competition. The motion for today’s final is that Melanesia must globalise to succeed.

My team and I find fault in this. We believe the Melanesian countries do not necessarily need to globalise in order to succeed.

do you wish to preserve the identity of your beloved Melanesia? Or do you want to be just another random face on the ever-expanding international body of this globalised world?

My name is Jonathan. I will define the key terms in the motion, introduce our team and the points we have come up with. I will also present our first point, concerning the economic setbacks that globalisation could bring to our Melanesian nations. Kali, our second speaker, will offer a rebuttal on the points given by the opposing side. She will look into the environmental impacts that accompany globalisation and will elaborate upon the fact that globalisation will be a threat to Melanesian culture and it’s custom. Aleesha, our third and final speaker will be the one to summarise all the points raised by our team and conclude our argumentation.

IMG_4463

Jonathan Guyant presents his statement at the Grand Final of the 2015 Melanesian School Debate

Now let us take a closer look at the key terms in our motion. We feel that the affirmative team has overlooked these key terms in the motion; must, globalise and succeed. So starting with must. Must has a number of definitions, but the one that seems the most relevant to the motion, and most pertinent to us was the one stating that must describes an imperative need or duty that you are commanded to carry out. This would imply that globalisation is an imperative need or duty for Melanesia. But is it really?

Let us all reflect on Melanesia’s current status in different fields. Starting with the economy. We may refer to Melanesia’s economy as a ‘traditional economy’. This means that our countries suffer little from global financial crises’ that conversely greatly affect the wealthier globalised nations. Here in Vanuatu, 80% of the population live in rural areas. In the Solomon Islands, 78% live in rural areas. In Papua New Guinea the number goes up to 87%. And finally Fiji – yes Fiji – still has 47% of its population living in rural areas.

Ladies and gentlemen, this means that over half the population in Melanesia live in rural areas and rely on this traditional economy.

The next term is globalisation. The Financial Times define this as a process by which national and regional economies, societies and cultures have become integrated through the global network of trade, communication, immigration and transportation. This signifies that all of those things are facilitated though the opening of borders between countries. At first glance, one might think that it holds the answers to many of the worlds needs. But we would just like to clarify that the way you phrase a sentence can have different meaning and influence any given person’s opinion. What I mean by that is, opinions vary form one person to another, sometimes very drastically. It all depends on your perspective.

For instance, if you look at globalisation from the eyes of a money-crazed giant, trampling the forest beneath its feet, searching for ways to enrich itself at the expense of poorer countries, all the while totally disregarding their local culture and customs. Then of course you’ll jump on the globalisation bandwagon. What could the consequences possibly be? If you’re the giant that is.

What I’m trying to say is – globalisation is located in the giant superpowers of this world. The US, Western Europe and increasing emerging countries like China who are all main actors in this race to the bottom.

Consider what huge economic setbacks globalisation could bring to Melanesia. One of them is free trade. It’s supposed to eliminate unfair bias to newcomers and raise the economy in both developed and developing countries. But does it really do so?

Maybe for rich countries, just maybe. But not for us. Let us instead consider fair trade. When we open up markets without regulations our own key industries and businesses may suffer, for example sugar cane, copra or garment industries. Our livelihoods will suffer at the profit of a multi billion-dollar corporation. Also this lack of regulation leads to substandard working conditions and low pay. People, this happens when you cut costs at the expense of human rights.

The recent Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement and PACER-Plus are suppose to offer an opportunity to help Pacific countries benefit from enhanced regional trade and economic integration. But do they do this for Melanesia? They encourage competitiveness yes, but do not create a level playing field for the countries that are involved. These economic policies can also lead to labor migration. When there are fewer employment opportunities at home, people will move away in search of jobs. This decreases the labor force and can also lead to a brain drain of our young educated and talented people.

The third and final term that I will define is success. Once again, success can be defined in many ways. But success cannot be measured – you cannot rate success in any way shape or form. This term is defined by the Merriam Webster online dictionary as the correct or desired result of an attempt. Now see we disagree. Others may say that success is the absence of failure. Again we disagree. Today, my team and I want to win. If we loose will we have failed? I don’t know yet, because success is a feeling. Success is the love that you see in your family and friends eyes, and the love that you give back. Success is the smile on your lips as you shrug off the defeat. Success my dear friends is anything you want it to be, and is discarding Melanesian ways, customs and traditions the path to success? Do you think that in the future you will be able to buy success at the next KFC or Adidas store they open in town? Do you really want to sacrifice your Melanesian identify just for the sake of globalisation.

To conclude my team and I believe that Melanesia must not resort to globalisation. But ladies and gentleman, what do you think? Do you wish to preserve the identity of your beloved Melanesia? Or do you want to be just another random face on the ever-expanding international body of this globalised world.

Photo credit: National Geographic

]]>
Debating for success http://pacificpolicy.org/2015/08/debate-it/?&owa_medium=feed&owa_sid= Wed, 12 Aug 2015 21:50:04 +0000 http://pacificpolicy.org/?p=8360 “Don’t raise your voice. Improve your argument” said the Nobel Peace Prize winning Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Mahatma Gandhi claimed “an honest disagreement is often a sign of progress.” Gandhi employed peaceful resistance as his modus operandi against British rule in India, which ultimately gave way to India’s independence.

Many of the worlds great leaders know the value of debating and reasoned argument. The Pacific too is a natural home to debate, given its strong oral tradition. Chiefs are often chosen on their ability to speak eloquently and balance opposing arguments in any village discussion. But it has only been recently that formal debating has begun in Pacific schools. We now have a Melanesian Cup debating competition for the high schools across Melanesia and it is hoped that in coming years Polynesia and Micronesia will join so that we can create a truly region-wide Pacific debating competition.

The Pacific Institute of Public Policy (PiPP) has long advocated for informed and inclusive debate on key regional policy issues. Over the years it has provided various platforms for debate and the exchange of ideas. To this aim, we have worked tirelessly and passionately with policymakers, academics, regional experts, university students and the general public to identify home grown solutions to our development challenges.

I have been following the Vanuatu schools debate competition, the country’s national debate rounds ahead of the annual Melanesian Cup which will be a showdown of the best speakers in Melanesia.

IMG_1687-650x450 IMG_1852 Visale school, Sol Is, Parl.School Outreach Tour.

The debate series has seen an intriguing display of potential leadership talent.

George Worworbu, a debater in the 2014 Melanesian school debate competition in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, wants to be a diplomat when he grows up. He says: “I have gained so much confidence. It has changed my life”

As the school debate series unfolded across Melanesia, it was clear that exposing students to academic debates at an early stage does train them to ‘think on their feet.’ In a region with much discontent for the current status quo, national education curriculums in Pacific island countries would do well to actively promote debatting to toughen the oral and analytical skills of emerging leadership and encourage critical thinking.


A future Prime Minister of Solomon Islands? Denmark Pahu makes his mark in the Melanesian competition

A future Prime Minister of Solomon Islands? Denmark Pahu makes his mark in the Melanesian competition after winning the overall Best Speaker award.


For the second year running, PiPP is hosting the Vanuatu Schools Debate Competition. Despite disruptions from cyclone Pam, twenty secondary schools from the SHEFA and SANMA province were registered for this years competition. Students’ performance this year has significantly improved due partly to workshops with teachers around the basics of debating, debate rules, structure and importantly the dissection of the judging criteria. Now equipped with sound understanding of the debate process, teachers have the foundations to initiate debate competitions within their own schools.

Debate is defined as a method of formally presenting an argument in a disciplined or formal manner. There are different debate styles, which include Parliamentary debates involving legislatures; debates between candidates of high office such as the U.S presidential debates and then there are competitive debates, which is the type of debate that is used to train and educate young people.

Debating can be traced back to the philosophical debates of ancient Greece including Protagorus, the ‘father of debate.’ Modern forms of debating and the establishment of debating societies occurred in the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century, which saw a culture of debating emerge in London society and the great universities of Oxford and Cambridge. Public debates were a popular form of entertainment in an age before television and radio.  The first student debating society was the St Andrews Debating Society, formed in 1794. The oldest and continually operating debating society in the world is the Cambridge Union Society. Founded in 1815, it is the largest alliance at the University of Cambridge and has served as a model for subsequent debating unions around the world.

Debates around public policy goes back even further with records of debating even 1,500 years ago in places like Tibet amongst Buddhist monks and in China, where it was known as ‘Pure Talk’, described here:

“[T]here rang out a great chorus of debate. They threaded their way through yin and yang, with literary embellishments sprouting in every direction. Rather than quote from the sages and ancient records, they concentrated on bringing to light the natural order of things. Tzu-ch’un and all the assembled scholars joined the attack, the points and retorts thrusted back and forth like spears. But Lu answered each and every assault with a reply that was more than adequate. They continued the entire day, until dusk fell, without even pausing for food and drink.”

The Pacific too is a natural home to debate, given its strong oral tradition.

Playing the ‘Devils Advocate’ in debate reinforces one’s own beliefs after being given the chance to question and defend them. The term, which is derived from an official position of the Catholic church whereby a ‘lawyer’ called the Devils Advocate argues against the ‘sainthood’ of a candidate to unearth any character flaws, is now used to refer to a process of testing the quality of an argument to identify any weaknesses in its structure.

In the Pacific, formal debating is a new thing. One of the challenges is that in some Pacific cultures not everyone can debate freely. Although there is a long tradition of free speech, women often find it hard to have their voices heard. Debating can break down traditional barriers to civic engagement. Through a gender lens, debating can be particularly rewarding for young women where in many communities, women rarely speak out. Debating provides a platform for young women to express themselves articulately and with confidence. Kyla Niras, a ni-Vanuatu female participant in last year’s Melanesian competition, says: “People listened intently when I was talking. It felt like my opinion does matter.”

IMG_1830 IMG_1886 IMG_1920

According to Bloom’s taxonomy (a classification of tiers of learning created by Educational psychologist, Doctor Benjamin Bloom), debate develops the ‘higher-order psychological functions’ for the reason that it requires participants to evaluate opposing choices and so it trains participants on how to think. Passive learning on the other hand, is considered a ‘lower order of thinking’ because it dictates what to think. Essentially, Pacific educators should be ensuring a balance in the immediate objective of knowledge acquisition with the long-term goal of training the mind to think logically and creatively.


Students of Visale school in Solomon Islands engrossed  in a group discussion.

Students of Visale school in Solomon Islands during a group discussion / Marisa Pepa


Debating also develops confident, but respectful individuals. Academic research reveals that debaters tend not to be argumentative in real-life, but are tolerant of other peoples’ views. Good leaders allow for consultation and debate among their people, which can lead to consensus decision-making which is at the heart of Pacific culture.

PiPP Director of Communications, Ben Bohane, sums it up saying:

“PiPP is proud to support this important initiative which encourages our school students to develop critical thinking, public speaking and research skills, plus build the confidence of students to creatively structure persuasive arguments on any topic. These are really important skills for life and help us to create an atmosphere of tolerance for other people’s views and opinions in society. Now that we’ve established the Melanesian Cup lets hope a similar competition gets established for schools in Micronesia and Polynesia.”

]]>