It should be noted that the submission is the outcome of collective endeavour and that all the conclusions and recommendations may not be shared by all panel members

As you can see from the list at the end of this article, the panel was well placed to comment on a number of critical issues involved in Australian aid to Papua New Guinea.

Aid, and its impact on Papua New Guinea since independence, is a controversial issue occasioning much debate in PNG.

Educated Papua New Guineans are aware that aid is disbursed on the basis of the donor's national interests and, in Australia's case, that it is also now enmeshed within the fabric of Australian politics.

There is a strong perception that Australian aid is more complex than the offerings of a Good Samaritan. The notion of “boomerang aid” (that where much of the benefit of aid ‘boomerangs’ back to Australia) is well understood in PNG.

There also exists a view that, except in certain specific locations, Australian aid offers minimal tangible benefit to the majority of PNG's rural people, 80% of the population.

For various reasons aid is not seen to be capable of accelerating PNG’s economic development: the flow is largely governed by factors outside PNG’s control; it is volatile; it is often inadequate to the task; and it is frequently mismanaged in-country.

The question was raised of how Australia can ensure its aid money is spent correctly and that the benefit goes to the people in need rather than being siphoned off by corrupt officials.

The panel believes that aid is best delivered through government-to-government contracts with predetermined achievement targets and intermediate benchmarks that allow instalment payments and a goal that must be met to allow final payment.

There must be regular independent auditing of aid programs made against benchmarks. Audit reports need to be transparent and publicly available

The PNG government needs to demonstrate its commitment to improve its management of aid. Current efforts to promote performance-based allocation of aid should be continued and deepened.

It needs to play a larger role in the design, management, and evaluation of aid activities. If the PNG Government shows little ability to improve its performance, aid should be refocused on enabling the non-government sector to meet basic needs and human capital investment.

Many thanks to the panellists whose names are recorded here….

The PNG Attitude Panel

Phil Fitzpatrick (social mapper, author and former PNG kiap)

Trevor Freestone (former PNG primary school headmaster)

Christopher Taylor Hnanguie (program economist, Asian Development Bank)

Keith Jackson AM (publisher and editor PNG Attitude, ex PNG teacher and journalist)

Mathias Kin (science graduate and former PNG public servant)

Chips Mackellar (author and former PNG kiap)

Dr Clement Malau (former PNG Secretary for Health)

Vergil Narokobi (PNG doctoral student, Victoria University, New Zealand)

Paul Oates (sometime administrator of Cocos Island and former PNG kiap)

Chris Overland (managing director, Vespasian Consulting Services and former kiap)

Max Rai (head of trade division, PNG Department of Trade, Commerce and Industry)

Gabriel Ramoi (former PNG parliamentarian and Minister)

Doug Robbins (Australian business volunteer deployed to PNG five times)

Barbara Short (former PNG secondary school headmistress)

Download The delivery and effectiveness of Australian aid to Papua New Guinea