Instability in Melanesia linked to poor consultation

Transcript

Lack of consultation over changes to governance systems is being blamed for instability in Melanesia. 

The finding came from a conference which wrapped up on Tuesday in Fiji.

Organised by the UNDP and attended by around 100 participants from the region, the meeting aimed to analyse governance systems in the Pacific and improve the effectiveness and stability of parliaments and political systems.

The UNDP's Resident Representative for the Pacific says a common theme found across all countries in Melanesia was that people wanted to be included in the decision making process.

Osnat Lubrani spoke with Koroi Hawkins who began by asking her whether it would ever be possible achieve stability in Melanesia.

OSNAT LUBRANI: You are asking me is it possible, I think the first step to getting it right is to have that honest and frank debate. And in these countries over the past several years there is growing recognition, you know you need political stability not as an end in itself, but you need political stability in order to bring development to the countries and one of the sessions that we started the conference with was precisely on the link between political instability and economic development. And that is what the sustainable development agenda is all about, I mean it is a 15 year agenda and I believe that in 15 years you can do a great deal to bring greater stability to the Melanesian countries and I think there is a lot of consensus that it is very much needed.

KOROI HAWKINS: Yes and you have all spectrums across Melanesia you have from Fiji the coups, Solomon Islands motions of no confidence, in Vanuatu and in Papua New Guinea where there is actually quite a bit of stability although there has been big opposition to a government or government that have been in power for a long period. So finding a model that works would that be something for individual countries to sort of find in your view?

OL: Certainly what has been coming out is that there is no recipe. I think there is an exchange you can have an exchange of recipes but you know when we discussed today the issue of electoral systems and in choosing electoral systems. For example one of the speakers noted that it is not like baking a cake, you cannot have this amount of sugar and this amount of flour it has to be very linked to the local context. One thing that did really resonate throughout the discussions is that to the extent that systems do not work it is because there is no buy in there is not enough consultations, that the systems are not inclusive enough and then when there isn't that buy in people basically need they have priorities they want health they want education they need services. And if the system doesn't deliver their needs and there isn't that understanding or that real connection with citizens then that is a recipe for failure, for eventual failure in terms of bringing that stability that is needed where citizens know that the system delivers.

KH: This current conference is this a one-off is it the beginning of a dialogue over the next 15 years, what is to come off this?

OL: Well you know for UNDP we have been working in different areas in different strands of work on effective governance. So we do a lot of work on strengthening parliaments, we support strengthening of electoral systems. We support countries to undergo constitutional reforms. But we felt that with the launch of this, the SDG 16 it is a moment really to look at this package of support in a more integrated fashion. And we do have, certainly I think the follow up has to happen at the country level where, that the outcomes or some of the discussions that will happen and I would say not just in the formal sessions. But I think these kinds of meetings offer an opportunity to bring people together across political divides, across boundaries of countries to have these exchanges and based on that we will be looking to follow up country by country based on the ideas that come up.

KH: There are also I see part of the conference is looking at other governance systems from around the world what can we learn from other areas in the world?

OL: Well I think some of the issues that come up in other parts of the world are similar. But there were some interesting examples that were brought up from other small island developing states like for example Barbados and how political stability and ownership and buy in actually led to considerable economic growth. So there are those opportunities to share examples but as I mentioned it is a quite a complex topic. One of the issues that also was sort of tossed as an issue is that political stability doesn't mean, doesn't necessarily equate with parliamentary stability. You can have changes in parliament but still have that phase in the system that you can sort of continue on. There was this notion that with countries that have chosen to have a longer term vision that brings the country together there was the example of Kazakhstan that has put together a 30 year vision that is still implementing and monitoring today even though you know all of the changes happening over time. So different examples different models I think are always good to share.