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.

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.

The appointment process is rather opaque, with an unwritten convention that the post will be rotated through the regions. It’s the Caribbean’s turn, but their vote is split between two candidates. Africa has also put forward a candidate, so the field is wide open.

It is an interesting time for the Commonwealth, teetering as it does on the brink of irrelevance or renewal. Its main value has been as a force of liberal democracy and a platform for small states, but it has never really lived up to its potential, leading some commentators to write it off completely.

Lack of strong leadership is one of the reasons that the Commonwealth has struggled to fulfil its charter and the selection of a new Secretary General is an opportunity remedy this.

Among this group, both of the female candidates stand out.

Dominica’s candidate, Baroness Scotland, has a personal narrative that resonates and inspires.

Born in Dominica, Baroness Scotland migrated to the UK as a child, worked hard, became a QC, and then rose to be Britain’s first female Attorney General, having previously served as a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Her politics are progressive, and she seems to be genuinely passionate about winning the post of Secretary General.

As Secretary General, I would immediately seek to build consensus on a revitalised Commonwealth that is focused on tangible and expanded delivery on its twin goals of democracy and development. Recognising that the Commonwealth isn’t simply about member States, but the people of those States, its work will always be deeply rooted on delivering cost-effective and measurable positive impact on the lives of the people of the Commonwealth.

Baroness Scotland’s main rival is Sir Ronald Sanders, currently Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador ‘Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary’ to the United States. He has the backing of a handful of Caribbean countries and was part of an eminent persons group in 2010 that reviewed the Commonwealth. However his campaign has been tainted by a report that he received $1.4m from an alleged fraud against Antigua’s government.

Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba, the third candidate, may be able to capitalise of the split in the Caribbean, by building on a base of support from African countries. She has served at the ministerial level and did two terms as Deputy Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Secretariat from 2008-2014, so would bring relevant experience to the job.

How will the selection play out?

Caribbean countries are conscious that they have a golden opportunity to win the selection. However their failure so far to unite behind a single candidate has compromised their campaign. In the final hours, they will also need to secure support from other member countries, and this is where the Pacific could play a critical role. The pragmatic approach for the Caribbean would be to unite behind the candidate that can attract sufficient support from other regions. The pragmatic approach for the Pacific would be to support the candidate that best reflects the interests of small island states.

In the event that there is no consensus, the process allows for last minute candidates to be put forward. In recent weeks Australia’s ex Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has been touted by the right-wing press as a ‘compromise’ candidate. Whether he is suitable and would garner sufficient support is debatable. He has a mixed record when it comes to the Pacific, and is not without his controversies. There are of course opportunities for further candidates to emerge.

From a Pacific perspective, Baroness Scotland would be a good Secretary General. She understands the needs and issues facing small island states – recently calling for a 1.5 degree target on climate change. Moreover she has the ability to lobby on our behalf, and would be a welcome and capable first female Secretary General of the Commonwealth.

Whoever emerges as Secretary General, they will face the challenging job of rebuilding the organisation’s relevance in our region and across the world.

Photo caption: Baroness Scotland – a contender for Secretary General of the Commonwealth

Announcing release of the final MDG progress report last week, Forum Secretary General Dame Meg Taylor praised Pacific governments for their ‘substantial progress’ in meeting the development goals, and offered a modest excuse for the lack of performance measured in many areas, particularly in poverty reduction, gender equality, and environment improvements: ‘The MDGs were global goals and applying them at the national level was difficult. In addition many of the MDG indicators did not suit the national context.’

I suggest a different way of evaluating lack of progress on MDGs. Juxtapose the Forum’s MDG assessment with the following headlines: ‘Another PNG MP to stand trial for fraud,’ ‘14 Vanuatu MPs heading to jail,’ ‘Eight sacked over government fraud in Solomon Islands,’ ‘Widespread fraud suspected in Marshall Islands government departments,’ ‘Green light for former Cooks minister to be tried,’ and so on.

It starts from the top and rolls down the line of government workers who view ‘government money’ or aid funding as a pot of money to put in their own pockets. Unfortunately, anti-corruption institutions and enforcement systems are weak in most islands such that there are more government leaders and workers focused on manipulating government finance systems for their own benefit than there are people and resources attempting to enforce accountability and rule of law.

Speaking last week about the Marshall Islands’ membership in the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, Auditor General Junior Patrick confirmed this concern about the reliability of enforcement systems. He said the initial UN review of government systems shows there is a framework in place for preventing corruption. But, he added, he would like to see the UN anti-corruption review go a step further “to see if implementation is effective, what is the time frame for investigations and prosecutions, and what resources are available (for accountability efforts). We have a framework, but is it functional?” For small island countries in particular, where enforcement capability is modest, this is the $100 question.

These same political leaders and personnel in government ministries and agencies—mentioned in the headlines above—were supposedly responsible for delivering performance on the Millennium Development Goals, development plans, and a host of other government services. But when large numbers of government officials are focused on personal instead of national interests, it is obvious their nations are not going to be effectively implementing poverty reduction schemes or gender equality goals.

In an earlier blog in this space, I commented: ‘Corruption comes in many forms: coming late and leaving early but getting fulltime pay, not carrying out the mission of a government office, manipulating tenders and funds for personal interest, and seeing some or all of the above and doing nothing about it.’

From the many corruption investigations, some of which have led to high-profile prosecutions in the region, we now know that leaders in many countries are running government as if it is their personal business. So when people talk about island leaders and saying things such as, ‘Strong political leadership and commitment’ is what is needed to make progress, are we simply kidding ourselves? Political leadership and commitment for what agenda? We simply cannot continue to ignore the fact that widespread corruption is undermining rule of law and slowing progress to a crawl in many countries. The imprisonment of 14 Vanuatu MPs is a landmark anti-corruption development for the Pacific. But over recent past years, penalties in the region for corrupt actions by politicians have been modest to non-existent in many islands, reinforcing a prevailing message, at least at high levels of government, that crime does, indeed, pay.

So eight of the 14 Forum members managed to implement only two or fewer MDGs. In September, all the countries in our region signed onto the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), promising to implement these over the next 15 years. We could not manage seven MDGs and now we’ve got 17 SDGs, with 169 targets—who exactly is going to make these 17 SDGs a reality in our islands? This is not to say that public health professionals, doctors, educators, community development specialists, and staff at the Forum Secretariat are not committed to making improvements in their respective islands. The point is that for them to be successful, they have to have the attention and support of political leaders. Yet many of these leaders appear to be more focused on self-interested business deals or embezzling aid funding than they are on implementing national development priorities.

Only two nations—Cook Islands and Niue—met all seven MDG targets, while Palau accomplished six. These nations should be recognized for this laudatory performance and probably the most helpful development for the rest of the Pacific islands would be for this trio to convene a working group to identify and share the ingredients that allowed for their success so that other countries in the region can see if there is anything in the Cook Islands/Niue/Palau models that would work elsewhere. Still, until corruption is minimized and rule of law is emphasized, getting traction on the new SDGs is going to be a challenge in many islands.

Caption: The Vanuatu bribery case has made headlines across the region (pictured here). The Vanuatu Appeal Court will deliver its ruling next Friday on appeals by 14 MPs jailed on bribery convictions.

While there appear to be far more democracies in the world than ever before, the CPJ’s executive director Joel Simon says there is a sinister new threat.

And this is in some respects more troublesome than the old style dictatorships. Simon describes this new scourge in a recent book, The New Censorship: Inside the Global Battle for Press Freedom, as the ‘democratators’, those leaders who profess to be democratic but are actually subverting their mirage of open governance. As Simon says:

“What are these differences between dictators and democratators? Dictators rule by force. Democratators rule by manipulation. Dictators impose their will. Democratators govern with the support of the majority. Dictators do not claim to be democrats – at least credibly. Democratators always do. Dictators control information. Democratators manage it.”

Simon points out that democratators win elections yet while they may be free, they are not really fair, meaning they are decided by fraud.

He has a growing list of leaders that fit this label, including Latin American “populists” like Rafael Correa of Equador and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, “European backsliders” like Viktor Orban of Hungary and Viktor Yanukovych, the deposed former president of Ukraine, and African leaders such as Paul Kagame of Rwanda and Jacob Zuma of South Africa.

Also high on Simon’s list of media threats is the way terrorism has impacted on how big media groups currently go about their global news-gathering. Conscious of the ever-present threat of ritualised kidnappings and bombings, journalists are sometimes forced to report from bunkers and are less enthusiastic about meeting uncertain sources in case they might be abducted.

Even the appearance of journalists sometimes makes them look like an extension of the military – with helmets, flak jackets and camouflage fatigues. This accentuates their targeting by fundamentalist groups who regard them as an extension of the ‘state’.

China is the elephant in the room when it comes to freedom of information. While China’s leaders embrace the internet, they believe they can, and ought to, control the web. It is clear that China has the technological means and resources to make internet control a reality.

Chinese authorities use monitoring and filtering to keep a lid on the cyberspace “conversation” to prevent repercussions.

United States responses to the Wikileaks scandal in 2013 and the massive surveillance revelations by Edward Snowden encouraged allegations of hypocrisy from critics pointing out that Washington’s commitment to internet freedom dragged when its own geopolitical interests appeared threatened.

Earlier this month, I had the good fortune to be in Brussels as one of the people giving feedback at a stakeholders meeting for a massive European Union-funded research project on the media reporting on six major violent conflicts around the world, including the Syrian civil war and conflict in Burundi.

While there I happened to pick up a new “Euro” style newspaper called Politico, which steered me to a remarkable media development in Spain with the headline “He brings news of the future”

“Who was he?” asks the subeditor in me when it was always drummed into us to have a name in the headline. (The online version changed the headline).

This was the story of Pedro J. Ramírez, one of the leading editors in Spain, who had been in charge of El Mundo for 24 years. But he was sacked by his newspaper’s owners.

Why? Because under his leadership, El Mundo pursued a robust investigation into corruption implicating the governing Popular Party and the Prime Minister [Mariano Rajoy].

When he was fired, Ramírez used his massive €5.6 million pay-out to help fund a new online newspaper, El Español. His pay-out plus record-breaking crowdfunding doubled what had been previously raised by a new Dutch publishing venture, De Correspondent.

Another interesting success story has been in France, where investigative journalist Edwy Plenel, famous for his Rainbow Warrior bombing investigation in 1985 for Le Monde, founded Mediapart.

He has assembled a team of some 60 journalists and his fearless brand of investigative journalism is shaking up the establishment.

Even in New Zealand, where the mediascape is fairly dire with hundreds of jobs cut in recent years—and a loss of 180 jobs in a recent shake-up at Fairfax New Zealand, the country’s biggest news publisher, there are stunningly innovative things happening.

The main independent New Zealand media group Scoop Media – and we at AUT’s Pacific Media Centre have a partnership project with them, Pacific Scoop – has launched a new crowdfunding business model and established a Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism. The inititiative by Selwyn Manning in launching Evening Report web portal has also been significant.

This brings me to the achievements of the University of the South Pacific and its talented new crop of graduates. Close to 200 USP journalism graduates are now contributing to the Fiji and the Pacific region’s media and related careers.

Through its long-standing award-winning newspaper Wansolwara – now 19 years old, surely a remarkable accomplishment for any journalism school in the Australasian and Pacific arena, the student journalists have played an important role in independent, engaging and truth-seeking journalism.

Personally, I shall always remember with pride my experiences with USP and Wansolwara over the five years I was with the campus – the longest by far of any expatriate educator. Wansolwara was founded by student editor Stan Simpson and lecturer Philip Cass. And Pat Craddock of the USP Media Centre was another key person in building up the programme.

One of the highlights for me was the reporting of the George Speight coup in May 2000 by the courageous USP students. They won many awards for this.

It was thanks to the groundwork and experience that I gained at both USP and previously UPNG as a journalist turned academic that I was able to go to the next level at the Pacific Media Centre.

There I have been able to blend some of the best elements of academic media studies and practical journalism that makes a difference.

A tribute too to Dr Shailendra Singh and his team, Irene Manarae, Eliki Drugunalevu and Dr Olivier Jutel. Shailen was recently the first home-grown academic at USP to gain a PhD in journalism at the University of Queensland with the first major survey of the Fiji mediascape for more than a decade. Congratulations Shailen for a very fine thesis!

My concluding message to graduating student journalists is that no matter what government, political or industry pressure you face, you should hold on strongly to your core values of truth, accuracy, honesty and courage in the public interest.

Our communities deserve the best from their media in these deceitful times. University media are among the few that can still be trusted and they should do their best to contribute to democracy with integrity.

So go for it and change the world to the way it should be!

Caption: Pacific media cover a Pacific Island Forum summit in Vanuatu, 2010. Photo: Ben Bohane/wakaphotos.com

Thus it is also an honour to be sharing the event with Monsieur Michel Djokovic, the Ambassador of France, given how important French aid has been for this programme.

France and the Ecole Supérieure de Journalisme de Lille (ESJ) played a critically important role in helping establish the journalism degree programme at USP in 1994, with the French government funding the inaugural senior lecturer, François Turmel, and providing a substantial media resources grant to lay the foundations.

I arrived in Fiji four years later in 1998 as Head of Journalism from Papua New Guinea and what a pleasure it was working with the French Embassy on a number of journalism projects at that time, including an annual scholarship to France for journalism excellence.

These USP awards this year take place during challenging times for the media industry with fundamental questions confronting us as journalism educators about what careers we are actually educating journalists for.

When I embarked on a journalism career in the 1960s, the future was clear-cut and one tended to specialise in print, radio or television. I had a fairly heady early career being the editor at the age of 24 of an Australian national weekly newspaper, the Sunday Observer, owned by an idealistic billionaire, and we were campaigning against the Vietnam War.

Our chief foreign correspondent then was a famous journalist, Wilfred Burchett, who at the end of the Second World War 70 years ago reported on the Hiroshima nuclear bombing as a “warning to the world”.

By 1970, I was chief subeditor of the Rand Daily Mail in South Africa, the best newspaper I ever worked on and where I learned much about human rights and social justice, which has shaped my journalism and education values ever since.

I travelled overland for a year across Africa as a freelance journalist, working for agencies such as Gemini, and crossed the Sahara Desert in a Kombi van. It was critically risky even then, but doubly dangerous today.

Eventually I ended up with Agence France-Presse as an editor in Paris and worked there for several years. In fact, it was while working with AFP in Europe that I took a “back door” interest in the Pacific and that’s where my career took another trajectory when I joined the Auckland Star and became foreign news editor.

The point of me giving you some brief moments of my career in a nutshell is to stress how portable journalism was as a career in my time. But now it is a huge challenge for you young graduates going out into the marketplace.

You don’t even know whether you’re going to be called a “journalist”, or a “content provider” or a “curator” of news – or something beyond being a “news aggregator” – such is the pace of change with the digital revolution. And the loss of jobs in the media industry continues at a relentless pace.
Fortunately, in Fiji, the global industry rationalisations and pressures haven’t quite hit home locally yet. However, on the other hand you have very real immediate concerns with the Media Industry Development Decree and the “chilling’ impact that it has on the media regardless of the glossy mirage the government spin doctors like to put on it.

We had a very talented young student journalist here in Fiji a few weeks ago, Niklas Pedersen, from Denmark, on internship with local media, thanks to USP and Republika’s support. He remarked about his experience:

“I have previously tried to do stories in Denmark and New Zealand – two countries that are both in the top 10 on the RSF World Press Freedom Index, so I was a bit nervous before travelling to a country that is number 93 and doing stories there ….

“Fiji proved just as big a challenge as I had expected. The first day I reported for duty … I tried to pitch a lot of my story ideas, but almost all of them got shut down with the explanation that it was impossible to get a comment from the government on the issue.

“And therefore the story was never going to be able to get published.

“At first this stunned me, but I soon understood that it was just another challenge faced daily by Fiji journalists.”

This was a nice piece of storytelling on climate change on an issue that barely got covered in New Zealand legacy media.

Australia and New Zealand shouldn’t get too smug about media freedom in relation to Fiji, especially with Australia sliding down the world rankings over asylum seekers for example.

New Zealand also shouldn’t get carried away over its own media freedom situation. Three court cases this year demonstrate the health of the media and freedom of information in this digital era is in a bad way.

• Investigative journalist Jon Stephenson this month finally won undisclosed damages from the NZ Defence Ministry for defamation after trying to gag him over an article he wrote for Metro magazine which implicated the SAS in the US torture rendition regime in Afghanistan.

• Law professor Jane Kelsey at the University of Auckland filed a lawsuit against Trade Minister Tim Groser over secrecy about the controversial Trans Pacific Partnership (the judgment ruled the minister had disregarded the law);

• Investigative journalist Nicky Hager and author of Dirty Politics sought a judicial review after police raided his home last October, seizing documents, computers and other materials. Hager is known in the Pacific for his revelations about NZ spying on its neighbours.

Also, the New Zealand legacy media has consistently failed to report well on two of the biggest issues of our times in the Pacific – climate change and the fate of West Papua.

One of the ironies of the digital revolution is that there is an illusion of growing freedom of expression and information in the world, when in fact the reverse is true.

These are bleak times with growing numbers of journalists being murdered with impunity, from the Philippines to Somalia and Syria.

The world’s worst mass killing of journalists was the so-called Maguindanao, or Ampatuan massacre (named after the town whose dynastic family ordered the killings), when 32 journalists were brutally murdered in the Philippines in November 2009.

But increasingly savage slayings of media workers in the name of terrorism are becoming the norm, such as the outrageous attack on Charlie Hebdo cartoonists in Paris in January. Two masked gunmen assassinated 12 media workers – including five of France’s most talented cartoonists – at the satirical magazine and a responding policeman.

In early August this year, five masked jihadists armed with machetes entered the Dhaka home of a secularist blogger in Bangladesh and hacked off his head and hands while his wife was forced into a nearby room.

According to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists in figures released this year, 506 journalists were killed in the decade between 2002 and 2012, almost double the 390 slain in the previous decade. (Both Reporters Sans Frontières and Freedom House have also reported escalating death tolls and declines in media freedom.)

(To be continued next week…)

Caption: French Ambassador Michel Djokovic (third from left), Head of USP Journalism Dr Shailendra Singh (fourth from left) and Pacific Media Centre director Professor David Robie (fifth from right) with the prizewinners at the University of the South Pacific journalism awards. Image: Lowen Sei/USP

Although many of the big Hollywood stars were there, including Johnny Depp, some of the biggest audience cheers were saved for the five actors from Yakel village on Tanna whose custom dance on the red carpet provided a slightly incongruous sight compared to the sleek Dior and Channel-dressed stars gliding amidst the barrage of photography flashes. Photos of the exuberant cast ran front page on big Italian daily newspapers and film magazines – great publicity for post cyclone Vanuatu.

The film – shot in Vanuatu using an entirely local cast – had its world premier at the festival and took home two awards – the Audience Award and Best Cinematographer for Bentley Dean, who shot and co-directed the film with Martin Butler. Both Dean and Butler are known for their acclaimed documentaries and television current affairs for ABC and SBS television in Australia.

Dean first came to Vanuatu in 2003 to work with me on an SBS Dateline story about the John Frum movement on Tanna and the breakaway Unity movement led by the prophet Fred. He was immediately entranced by the place and spoke back then of returning to film something more substantial. It took him a few years but in 2013 he returned with his young family to spend seven months living in Yakel village developing the film.

‘I wanted to do a feature film based on a local story and at the same time give my young children an experience living in the village that would wire their brains differently, so there was a bit of social engineering at work’ he laughs now. He had been somewhat inspired by the Rolf de Heers’ Ten Canoes film, set in a pre-contact Aboriginal community in Arnhemland, which also focused on a entirely Aboriginal cast and local story.

‘I arrived in Tanna with no script and no set story, I just wanted to develop something in collaboration with the Yakel people. For the first three months we didn’t shoot anything, we just talked and negotiated and developed some story lines. But they were keen to participate and in the end they took control of the process. We consulted at every point and showed them the rough cut and final cut for their approval. Perhaps the best compliment they could pay me in the end was when they said “Bentley, this is our film now”.’

The film is a kind of Romeo-and-Juliet love story that focuses on a young couple caught in a local tribal war and traditions of arranged marriage. It is based loosely on several true stories of suicide by young lovers unwilling to submit to custom marriages and which prompted chiefs to begin allowing love marriages.

Tanna is beautifully shot, making good use of the Yasur volcano on Tanna island, and with natural performances from a village of people who had reputedly never even seen a film, let alone acted in one. The story also shows the complexity of those living kastom lives as christianity and modern influences begin to pervade the rest of the island.

The film has universal values, emotional range and subtly avoids exoticising its cast and setting. With more tributes yet to come, Tanna will put Pacific film-making further on the map. There are positive reviews from the Sydney Morning Herald here and the influential trade magazine Variety here.

Four teams from Efate battled it out on stage with compelling arguments for and against the set topic. The schools participating included Vila North, Ecole Francaise, Centreville, NTM and Central School. The first motion debated was “That kava bars should be banned from urban residential areas”, while the second debate topic was “That government has a responsibility to create jobs for unemployed youth in Vanuatu.”

Ecole Francaise won its round on the first topic while Vila North won the second and NTM won its place in the next round due to forfeiture since its opposing team couldn’t show up.

This is the second year of the national debating competition, whose ultimate winners will then go on to represent Vanuatu in the Melanesian Cup. Last year a mixture of outstanding speakers from various schools represented Vanuatu at the regional competition held in PNG, where the PNG team ended up winning the Melanesian Cup for 2014.

The debate competition is an initiative by the Pacific Institute of Public Policy (PiPP) in co-operation with the Ministry of Education and Training.

PiPP’s Communications Director Ben Bohane, who chaired the first debates, said:

“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.”

He thanked Mr John Niroa, representing the Director of Education services for their partnership, Wan Smol Bag and all the teachers and students who worked hard to make the debates exciting and informative.

Mr Niroa said “On behalf of the Ministry of Education I want to thank PiPP and the schools involved for creating this great competition which will give our students so many skills. I was very impressed with the students performances today and our Ministry will continue to support this program into the future”.

The next round for Efate schools happens next Thursday, 23 July, from 9am – 12am at the Wan Smol Bag theatre. The debates are open to the public and the finals and semi-finals will be aired live on radio.

Next week schools on Santo will also begin their first rounds. The final winners of the Santo and Efate competitions will face each other in the grand final. Unfortunately, schools on Tanna which were going to be part of the competition this year have had to withdraw due to cyclone Pam damage and disruption.

To prepare teachers new to the activity, PiPP hosted workshops in Luganville and Port Vila in late May. The workshops aimed to provide teachers with the skills to develop an ongoing internal debate competition within their schools. Teachers came together to learn the basics of debating, understanding the individual roles, debate rules, structure and importantly the dissection of the judging criteria.

The workshops came together with a final mock debate between teachers, who scrutinized the 2014 Semi Final motion that “Tertiary Scholarships are the best way to provide employment opportunities for youth in Vanuatu.” The process was a success one, allowing teachers to put into practice the theories and rules that had been discussed the previous day, and provide insight into the challenges but also great rewards of debating.

Now equipped with sound understanding of debate process, teachers have the foundations to initiate debate competitions within their school, providing increased opportunity for student engagement. It will allow teachers to design their own motions for a debate, which could be based on themes they are studying already, or current issues that arise in the community or national news.

Through the debating process, students will be pushed to think critically about issues presented to them, using research and evidence to support their arguments. The skills learned can assist them in many future situations, including simple conflict resolution in the home, through to analysis and understanding of problems at a community or even national level.

Schools will select their best and brightest to compete against other school teams, to debate topics around education, employment, the environment and natural disasters as well as independence.

Caption: Gavika Viduka from Ecole Centreville arguing his case in support of the motion: ‘The government has a responsibility to create jobs for unemployed youth in Vanuatu’

Franklin, who helped found the United States, is one of the most well-known figures in history for contributions to writing, publishing, diplomacy, innovation and politics.

The most accomplished American of his generation, and arguably of all time, he has provided generations with universal advice on ‘the way to wealth’ through simple values like thrift, industry and frugality. He delivered this advice at a time when America, just like today’s Pacific Islands, was undergoing great economic change.

‘We can easily imagine having a beer with him after work,’ writes his acclaimed biographer Walter Isaacson, ‘showing him how to use the latest digital device, sharing the business plan for a new venture, and discussing the most recent political scandals or policy ideas.’ So, if Franklin visited the region’s market places, villages, resource projects, campuses, businesses and supermarkets, what thoughts would he deliver to Pacific Islanders about wealth and life?

First, I feel his observations would not be loaded with GDP figures or economic charts and tables. Indeed, contrasting most experts, writing report after report about the region’s un-shiftable poverty, he would likely talk about the values – the attitudes, priorities and behaviours – that typically build wealth and fulfilment among people, regardless of where they are and what circumstances they find themselves in.

He would encourage self-agency amid the region’s messy state of governance and public affairs – corruption, power cuts, crumbling roads, poorly stocked hospitals and not enough police.

To those Pacific Islanders awaiting government solutions he would urge focus on what they could do for themselves, to paraphrase his fellow patriot, rather than what their governments could do for them. ‘We are taxed twice as much by our idleness,’ he wrote in The Way To Wealth, ‘three times as much by our pride, and four times as much by our folly, and from these taxes the commissioners cannot erase or deliver us by allowing an abatement.’

He would applaud the commerce taking place in the region’s market places – mostly led by women facing daily violence and working impeccably hard – and the commitment to exchanging, bartering and trading.

In building on his applause he would encourage many of the region’s jobless young men sitting idle on street corners, which number in the millions, to ‘waste neither time nor money.’ He would encourage any opportunity they could get, albeit however slim, to stimulate their minds and work on themselves.

At seeing those who had found work, or the region’s villagers catching fish, he would smile because ‘at the working man’s house poverty looks in but dares not enter.’

He would see that, just by looking at the region’s ports or supermarkets, consumption was increasing. This is strange, he might think, given that per capita income over the past two decades has barely moved in places like Papua New Guinea or the Solomon Islands.

To any Pacific Islander he would urge frugality on spending, regardless of the amount. ‘Wonderfully small trifling expenses,’ he would remind them, ‘mount up to large sums.’

Saving more than you spend, in fact, formed the simple basis to his timeless advice. Not saving, Franklin warned, led to a life of constant wants. ‘A man may, if he knows not how to save as he gets, keeps his nose all his life to the grindstone.’

And more goods, he would warn, do not necessarily bring more satisfaction. ‘Happiness depends more on the inward disposition of mind,’ he said, ‘than on outward circumstances.’

Franklin would not be impressed with everything he saw. He would accept the value of the strange devices in people’s hands but not be overly-enthused by what he saw on some screens (PNG, for example, tops global rankings for internet pornography searches).

He would think the spending habits on demerit items like betelnut, processed food and alcohol are not good for health. The fact that Nauru, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Cook Islands, Tonga, Niue, Samoa, Palau and Kiribati, are among the top ten most obese nations on earth would betray their testaments to industry and frugality.

Franklin would eventually depart from the Pacific by seeing that, just like the hardscrabble 1700s United States, life was incredibly tough for the overwhelming major of normal, everyday people. But he would make the same final point to Pacific Islanders as he would to his fellow Americans – it’s up to people to unlock their own destinies and create their own fulfilment.

Any observations and outside assistance, he understood, would only go so far. ‘We may give advice,’ he reflected, ‘but we cannot give conduct.’ Sound advice, it seems, not just for the Pacific Islands but for their larger neighbours seeking ways to help.

Out of that simple spark rises a complex allegory of honesty and deceit, selfishness and survival, all found in the least likely places. Wan Smolbag’s newest play—one of three in this year’s season—is the most ambitious yet in terms of its story-telling. Director Peter Walker says the play has a bit of a Cinderella quality to it, but here, it’s the rats that are riding in coaches.

Rats and humans have always lived together, we are asked, so how, exactly how do they differ? They have leaders and followers; they all live and thrive surrounded by refuse; they squabble and vie incessantly; and they lust and love—and confuse the two—just as (in)constantly.

So why is it such a big deal then, when the King Rat becomes obsessed with Veronik, a still-pure flower of a girl, living in semi-squalor in Port Vila? At turns charming and menacing, he and his cohort are willing to wheedle, extort, con and coerce anyone in order to win her hand. Despite King Rat’s constant moans of frustrated desire, the solution turns out to be a simple one: Just find enough money to satisfy the girl’s so-called parents, and nothing else matters. Not even the wishes of Vero herself.

The plot writhes from one episode to another as rat and human natures try to come to terms, and as their mutual motivations are unveiled, it becomes increasingly difficult to answer King Rat’s question. And yet… and yet, as Vero’s younger brother candidly confesses, ‘who wants a rat for a brother-in-law?’

Writer Jo Dorras’ scripts have always eschewed happy endings and pat answers to anything, but her story lines are often drawn with an almost fatalistic directness. If we can’t see how the play is going to end, it’s only because we’re not ready to admit it to ourselves. But although the stakes are just as high here as in her other scripts, and the moral landscape is just as bleak, this play’s structure is more playfully built, and the forces are more finely balanced.

This wouldn’t be a Wan Smolbag play if it didn’t feature the simple, ingenious theatricality that lies at the core of the company’s ethos. They are, after all, named for the small bag of props that was all they used in their early days. The set is spare and appropriately garish, and still provides room for top-to-bottom, end-to-end theatre. The actors revel in their space.

The comedic, chaotic pulse of daily life in Vanuatu is another thing that one comes to expect from Wan Smolbag, and this time it’s delivered in spades. Some of the character and casting choices are nothing short of inspired. Historically the company has avoided child characters because of the difficulty and demands involved. But this time, they’ve created some of the most rewarding bits of theatricality ever to emerge from this stage.

Albert Tommy and Michael Maki, each fully-grown and sporting full beard, play Jalz, a darling, naïve, infinitely suggestible boy of about nine years. The tension between their appearance and their astonishing appropriation of the tics and tropes of a young boy draw gales of laughter from the audience. By the time they are called on to unveil the seeds of venality in human nature, they are utterly believable.

And in their heart of hearts, what actor wouldn’t want to play a rat? We revile them, but they remain fascinating for their cleverness, their adaptability, their ability to squeeze themselves into any space, and the utter refusal to leave us alone. Danny Marcel and Richie Toka share the role of King Rat, a nasty, ruthless, obsessively lustful and perversely seductive creature who cannot accept that Rat is in any way less than Human. Though each actor takes his own road to ownership of the role, they are both a pleasure to watch.

Equally enthralling is Olfala Rat. Henchman, hatchetman, bagman, supporter and sycophant, this creature lives by its wits—which is pretty much the only way a rat can manage to grow old. Once again, Peter Pakoa and Helen Kailo take very different roads to owning this character, but each is enthralling. It’s especially nice to see Mr Pakoa back in a key role after years as a stalwart in the theatre company.

There’s no such thing as a ‘normal’ character in a Wan Smolbag play; every single one of them is remarkable in some way or other. And it’s a shame, really, to have to leave out a single name when praising the riotous, hilarious, satirical and achingly honest portrayals that grace the stage. There is not a false note in the night, from Edgell Junior’s charming, soulless rogue of a father to the unnervingly accurate severity of both Evelyn George and Joyanne Quiqui as the mother… all the way down to a charming, hilarious vignette from of aging Rastaman at a public meeting.

Somebody once said of a great actor that he would draw the audience’s focus even if he were third spear-carrier from the left. The same can be said of Wan Smolbag’s theatre company. Every single one of them knows exactly how to tease and squeeze the audience’s attention, pushing, prodding and snatching focus back and forth amongst themselves… and out of the anarchy, they weave a spellbinding allegory of life amid the refuse of living.

Who wants a rat for a brother-in-law? Come to the play and see.

Wan Smolbag’s Kaekae Rat runs on some Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays through the rest of May and June in Port Vila, and for a number of dates in Luganville. Check the posters around town for details, or visit the Wan Smolbag Facebook page. Tickets are on sale in front of the Post Office. Reserve early because shows usually sell out.

He has a team of 17 candidates, himself included, and standing for all 17 seats reserved for ‘People’s Representation’ through his political party called the Democratic Party of the Friendly Islands.

This is the second election under the newly reformed system of government that was launched in 2010 as a “more democratic” system.

The multi-awarded political leader, most known for his tireless effort to make Tonga more democratic in the past 30 years, might just be Tonga’s next Prime Minister.

He would become the first Prime Minister to be elected by the people. The current Prime Minister, Lord Tu’ivakanō is a nobles’ representative. He was elected by 33 of the country’s nobles, and is one of 9 nobles in Parliament. He was not elected by the people.

Even though the 2010 election was more democratic in the sense that all members of Parliament were elected either as people’s representatives or nobles’ representatives, there is yet to be a Prime Minister selected by Parliament who is elected by the people as a people’s representative.

Pohiva’s party claim that if they have the majority to form a government, and Pohiva becomes the prime minister, it would be the first “government of the people” in Tonga’s history.

Pohiva is Tonga’s longest serving Parliamentarian. But his political genius is more suitably demonstrated by his ability to build a resilient peoples movement and has won unrelenting support among the people of Tonga.

He had the largest number of people’s representatives elected in 2010, 12 out of the 17 seats for People’s Representation.

The problem he faced in 2010 which prevented him from forming a government was the 9-noble seats in parliament that are not elected by the people. They are the 9 representatives elected by the 33 nobles, while over 40,000 voters out of Tonga’s 108,000 populations elect 17 seats.

The five representatives who were not part of Pohiva’s team crossed the floor to join the 9 nobles, and thus had the majority to elect the prime minister and form government.

This failure to get the majority to form a government in 2010 was viewed generally as a major setback for the pro-democracy movement. Pohiva and his group, instead of being “the government of the people”, have continued to be in opposition for the past four years.

Pohiva is determined not to have a repeat of the 2010 fiasco. He has never been in government (except for a brief 2-week stint as Minister of Health in 2011), and he has been in opposition far too long. That is why he has assembled a 17-member team whereby each one stands as a candidate for each of the 17 electoral districts. They have been meeting regularly since May to formulate their policy vision, mission and manifesto.

No other party in Tonga has been able to organize and declare their candidates so early. They are also the only ones that have fielded candidates for all the districts of Tonga.

As Tonga faces its parliamentary election in coming days, Pohiva and his team, according to the political pundits, are the front-runners. That means that if all 17 candidates of Pohiva’s team are elected, the pro-democracy party will definitely form the next government. In fact, all Pohiva needs to have a majority is for 14 of his candidates to win. That will give them the majority to elect the prime minister and form Tonga’s next government.

There are 106 candidates registered and vying for the 17 people’s representatives’ seats. The 26-seat parliament also has the 9 seats assigned for nobles, and they are in a sense “a party.”

There were 145 candidates in the inaugural democratic election of 2010. The decline in numbers this year, according to political observers, is due largely to a loss of hope by many because they really did not see much difference in the post-reform government, compared to that before the 2010 reform.

Pohiva and his team have promised to “complete the reform” that started in 2010. By this they mean the 2010 reform was not completed, as they want everyone in Tonga’s parliament to be “elected by the people”. They also want everyone in cabinet, including the prime minister to be elected by the people. One of the key changes they are pushing for is the election of noble seats by the people, if parliament continues to retain specially assigned seats for noble representation.

16 of the 106 candidates for this year are women. This is the largest number of women to stand in any election in Tonga’s history. But only one of those is a candidate for the pro-democracy party: Sipola Havili Halafihi, who is a high school teacher from Tongatapu district 7. Recent polling reveals her as the frontrunner in her electorate.

With just several days before the election, Pohiva’s party looks set to form the next government. They could win all of Tongatapu’s ten seats, the two seats from Ha’apai, and also one each from ‘Eua and Niua. That makes up 14 seats, and that is a majority.

According to the unofficial polling, only the 3 seats from the northern islands of Vava’u are still very close to call. If these are won by the pro-democracy party, that would be a landslide overall, as Pohiva and his party would have won all the 17 seats for people’s representatives.

But there are some who seriously doubt this will happen. Despite Pohiva’s popularity, there are those who are opposed to his hardline democratic stance, as well as his insistence that corruption must be stamped out of government.

There are traditional leaders and prominent members of Tonga’s elite who fear that Pohiva’s reforms could bring too much change to Tonga, while those at the top stand to be the biggest losers.

But Pohiva’s message and movement appeal to the common people, especially to those who believe as he does, that good governance is the one hope that will lift Tonga in relation to economic and social development.

“Lack of natural resources is not an issue for Tonga; lack of good governance is,” claims Pohiva.

He pledges to be a ‘government of the people’ that will place good governance as the highest priority, along with transparency, accountability, and a firm stand against all forms of corruption.