national development council proposal
> background
NDC first existed as a government-created entity during the nineties. This was around the same time as introduction of new finance laws and what became known as “the transition” – mass layoffs from the public sector due to economic mismanagement and the subsequent cashflow crisis. Government invited societal stakeholders to near-quarterly and closed-door meetings. The council was initially a success as the first semi-formal and timely interface between public and private sectors on national development and other policy matters. It was the first time government went beyond one-off forums to seek private sector comment on state activities. However, after a few years, the council fell out of favour with government, accused of being captured by limited commercial interests, unrepresentative of the community as a whole. NDC was not a statutorily established body, or even a registered society, so no disbandment was necessary. Government simply stopped holding meetings. Members seemed to accept this withdrawal of official favour unquestioningly. No discussions ever emerged suggesting non-state interests assuming ownership of the council. During the 1999 election campaign, the then ruling Cook Islands Party proposed a highly sophisticated and multi-layered expansion of the NDC concept. No facilities for public dissemination or feedback to NDC discussions or even decisions were envisaged. Political instability following general elections apparently stopped implementation of the expansion.
> vision
NDC takes as its founding vision the only bi-partisan statement of national intent, the 1997 single sentence statement of National Vision, promising “sustainable” development. Towards this goal, the council will focus attention on good governance issues common to varying challenges and problems facing its membership. Instead of closed-door elitism, the new NDC will become the public testing ground for cutting edge concepts in transparency, accountability and contestable consultation.
> what the NDC will do
First and foremost, the NDC could concern itself with introduction of due process. For example, it will discuss ways to set down a process by which all laws must be introduced, consulted upon, meaningfully redrafted and how such redrafting can be made to accurately reflect public input. Secondly, the NDC could become a sounding board for government plans, a court of first-resort for perpetual public feedback to initiatives-of-the-day, including annual budgets. Thirdly, the NDC could act as a balance to the powers of central government by, for example, becoming part of the donor consultative process. Finally, but no less importantly, the NDC could become the focal point through which citizen or community initiated referenda and other activities are engaged.
> world precedence
World trends towards public-private partnerships have long been on the increase. More recent trends reflect growing equality status for non-state actors with national governments. This recognises that civil society may not be selected through universal suffrage, but that groups form, often temporarily, to address perceived issues of the day within communities e.g. the Unit Titles Bill petitioners. In other words, all sectors in society have a part to play in ensuring good governance, not just the people’s elected representatives. More specifically, online searches show multiple references to National Development Councils around the world, with some 39,000 pages showing up in Google. Similar pages dealing with National Development Commissions and National Development Coalitions, by contrast, number only in the dozens.
> domestic precedence
From a national sovereignty perspective, there may be a concern that a body like the NDC offers a mirror image of much criticised ‘political interference’ – a non-state version that, for want of a better term, might be termed ‘civil interference.’ There is however precedence for such interference. In the early nineties, the government of the Cook Islands appealed against the rights of the judiciary to rule against a decision of the parliamentary Privileges Committee. Government expressed concern judges were not respecting the paramountcy of parliament as democratically elected representatives of the land. And that the courts were not respecting the separation of powers between institutions, both concepts demanded by modern democracy, lest, perhaps, the Cook Islands ultimately become something akin to a police state run by fussy judges. This argument was given leave to be taken all the way to the Privy Council in London, where learned lords ruled in support of Parliament rightly being the paramount power in the land. However, the Privy Council also ruled that where Parliament stepped outside its own rules and the laws of the land, including the Constitution, other institutions like the courts were duty bound to bring Parliament back within those rules. In other words, there is a clear and present duty for all institutions to play their part in ensuring good governance – not just the government.
> public support: the strongest institute
In 1998, the Political Review Commission recorded strong support for the news media as an “effective control on the political process.” Of more than 300 voting-age people surveyed by commissioners – the largest such survey outside of elections – 56% expressed faith in the abilities of the news media. Other institutions, including voters themselves, attracted much less confidence; police, parliament, privileges committee, the courts, NGOs, traditional leaders all gained less than half that much. At that time, the news media consisted of a weekly newspaper now defunct, the existing daily newspaper, a talkback radio show, and television programmes like Te Rongo Veka and Karioi. All operated and supported commonly accepted journalistic standards, a situation no longer enjoyed today. There is strong evidence to argue the industry has weakened not because of any “media wars” but because of continued political interference in news media institutions, beginning with the privatisation of television in 1998. Lessons that can be gained from this experience as they relate to reintroduction of an NDC include the fact that people – taxpayers and voters – feel there is a place for strong commentary, open discussion, transparency and accountability in public and even private affairs of the nation. Political powers may again seek to sabotage any institution that threatens its monopoly on public influence. Future governments may find this task a little more difficult if an all-inclusive NDC partners with the media – and the people.
> the role of the media
News media are the single most important source of information for most people on a daily basis. Any resumption of the NDC could help secure its future by transacting most of its affairs in public. These two institutions could further cement support for each other by the NDC acting as a monitor for the media – there can be no better judge of community standards than the community itself. One of the issues that the NDC could look at in its objective to achieve sustainable development is a return to public broadcasting under a BBC-style charter set by NDC members. By supporting independent and publicly accountable news media as a development priority, NDC would help ensure impartial coverage of national issues, and greater public participation in national affairs.
> conclusion
Further discussion follows in question and answer format, including some big picture analysis about just what is at stake for our future. For now, concepts behind the reintroduction of a National Development Council have clear precedence locally and around the globe. There is equally clear evidence of a need for such a cross-cutting entity: a political system in seizure, constantly collapsing and reinventing itself around political opportunities of limited benefit to most of those outside parliament. Further evidence is witnessed commercially in an over-reliance on a secondary industry like tourism without enough checks and balance sufficient to offset emphasis on short-term gain at the cost of long-term pain. These are the symptoms. Lack of good governance – whether an environment service that does not prosecute environmental abuses, or a police force failing to properly act against corruption – is the cause. It is strongly suggested here that reintroduction of an interface between public and private sectors like the National Development Council is a leading contender as a potential remedy.
Questions and answers as follows:
Not another NGO !
Yes, another NGO, at least to start with.
What do you mean ?
National Development Councils are a commonly accepted feature of society around the world, reflected in a simple Google search showing about 39,000 web pages with this exact phrase. Many of those councils are statutorily recognised bodies, i.e. established in law.
Wasn’t the last NDC a failure ?
Depends on what is meant by failure. If failure is defined as a failure by government to absorb community input, then, yes, it was. However the NDC proved successful as a focal point for airing a wide range of community views on national development issues in a timely manner. Some may even feel that government rejection of the NDC is the best possible proof of its effectiveness in strongly advocating community views.
At the time, Government said the NDC was hi-jacked by business interests. What’s to stop the same thing happening again ?
It is correct that business leaders took the highest public profile in discussing decisions reached at council meetings. Much of this public discussion took place in the media, as opposed to village meetings, for example, perhaps leading to a perception among the public that business interests dominated the NDC. Traditional leaders and other NGOs who were also strongly represented at the NDC may not agree the council was captured by any one sector. However, accepting the criticism for the sake of argument, it would be a simple matter for secret voting procedures to be required at each meeting, with full disclosure of results, so that a true picture might be gained by all sectors of support for NDC recommendations.
But what makes this proposal for a new NDC any different from all the other NGOs? Aren’t they seeking good governance too ?
True. In doing so, many NGOs have to start from scratch, learning how to approach government, through what channels, in what form. At least one petition, for example, failed just because they did not know the ‘proper’ wording required by parliament. As another example, an environment NGO may have to learn the same processes as a health focused NGO, even if they are concerned with different issues. This is often termed ‘re-inventing the wheel’ – a waste of time, money and effort. There needs to be one national body concerned mainly with proper due process.
Good governance in other words ?
Exactly. Just as the Development Investment Board is a “one-stop” shop for foreign investors, so too could the NDC become a one-stop shop for individuals or groups seeking to engage government in issues of good governance.
But if government ignored the last NDC why should they take any notice of a new one ?
This question might be more appropriate if we still lived in colonial times and government was the main game in town. However, we have been self-governing for the last 40 years. Even politicians have called for an end to the “mummy government” era, and encouraged “private sector-led development.”
Put that simply.
People should no longer wait around for an official invitation to their own country.
Nice image. But isn’t the reality that government still protects its turf jealously? And how do we go about changing laws and other existing realities if government doesn’t want to ?
Indeed. Government itself has experienced problems adjusting from rhetoric to international realities that see a shifting of the power base from the public to private sectors, not least, civil society. Even aid donors who have spent the last decade or so encouraging such a shift themselves seek greater powers in their own countries. To change these realities, any attempt to re-introduce the NDC must assume authority in its own right, as an equal partner, not wait for government to bestow it. In assuming equal status, political reformers and good governance advocates may need to move their goal posts a bit.
What do you mean ?
For example, most political reform efforts have concentrated on costs of good governance. MPs pay. Perks. Allowances. Ministerial support. All these can be considered important. But nowhere near as important as much bigger issues, like sustainable development. Reformers and good governance advocates need to widen their perspective. Pay and perks related to Members of Parliament take up an amount equal to just 1% of GDP – but seem to take up 99% of the time in public debate. On this, it could be argued that people can have cheap governance, or they can have good governance, but they cannot have both. There may even be an argument for increasing pay and perks for MPs – but only if they agree to an increase in performance.
Taxpayers would never accept that ?
Again, good governance advocates need to widen their perspectives. It is not enough to react against misgovernment – community leaders need to advocate and promote measures that achieve good governance.
In other words?
Community leaders participating in the reintroduction of the NDC must provide leadership and offer new visionary futures for discussion by the country, not wait for government. Nor can we wait for overseas trends to wash up on our shores in another 20 or 50 years. Quite literally, most of our shores might be washed away by then with rising sea levels. We must boldly stake a claim to the future, and drag ourselves towards that future, just as our ancestors did many millennia ago.
Okay, food for thought, but let’s go back to basics: doesn’t CIANGO, the Cook Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations already act as a focal point for all NGOs?
Yes, CIANGO is already a valued and committed player in terms of capacity development and cooperation between NGOs and government. However, there are two reasons for establishing a new and separate body. One is that CIANGO remains ideally suited for providing a support and development role to NGOs, rather than raising and challenging issues facing the country. Secondly, it is hoped that government will “buy” into new visions for the NDC and, eventually, offer statutory recognition and support for this interface with the rest of society. If this happens, there will still be a need for CIANGO to act as the secretariat-style interface between donors, NGOS and government.
Enough nuts and bolts – can you give us the big picture, the context in which to fit the NDC?
A central element of sustainable development for any nation is having a nation in the first place.
To explain: in 100 years time, we, and our current leaders, will be long gone, our children will have assumed leadership and passed on, and our grandchildren will be ready – or not - to hand over to new leaders, three generations from now.
If climate change predictions are even half way correct, however, most of our islands may have already passed on into history. Atolls may become uninhabitable or even completely submerged. Low lying volcanic islands may not offer much more protection. Arguments still rage for and against global warming and whether or not there will be an associated sea level rise. However, in the arguments for and against it seems forgotten that, by the time we find out for sure, it may be way too late. Record severity in cyclone events in the Americas forecast the possibility that much bigger countries will suffer tremendously at the same time as small islands disappear.
As a small island state, the Cook Islands should be taking a much larger leadership role on potential impacts of climate change. Achieving credibility in international affairs, however, must also rely, at least in part, on authentic efforts to improve domestic realities.
Even if the Cook Islands improves it’s domestic performance, how on earth can a tiny dot in the ocean have any real impact on world affairs?
Again, we must look at old problems in new ways. Everyone has heard over and over again how small, weak and isolated island nations are. Our challenge is in recognising our biggest weaknesses could also be our strongest strengths.
In 2004, for example, the Pacific Islands AIDS Foundation proposed to international donors that they treat the island region as an opportunity for cheap advocacy – to prove that efforts to treat people with existing cases of hiv.aids and slow the spread of the virus can succeed better in small, isolated vulnerable populations, than big, well-connected seemingly strong communities.
This bold concept would put the Pacific Islands at the head of international efforts, rather than as a frequently overlooked part of Asia. After all, this doctrine suggests, if international efforts cannot succeed on the smallest scale, what real hope have they elsewhere?
Given similar boldness, there would be nothing to stop people in the Cook Islands drawing a line in the sand and similarly lobbying world support for strong environmental initiatives, as a first step towards achieving sustainable development nationally, and, if the approach proves a success, community-by-community, regionally and internationally.
Just as our closest trading partner, Aotearoa New Zealand, has proven itself as a testing ground for world beating technologies like EFTPOS, so too could Avaiki Cook Islands prove its worth in world leading social and economic change.
An example: our offshore finance industry has only just been removed from the so-called OECD blacklist. Suspicions about its activities remain. What if this industry was completely reinvented? What if our offshore finance laws offered a host nation for companies trying to do the right thing: protecting the environment, providing solid labour support, advancing social as well as economic values? All conducted in conditions of total transparency instead of total secrecy? What if a body like the NDC sought international assistance for transitioning offshore activities from their shady past to a bright future?
Naïve, perhaps.
However, green or environmental shares are the fastest growing sector of the global economy. This process will accelerate exponentially once the United States has exhausted itself protecting shrinking oil interests, and the new global superpower, China, begins suffocating in its own success, just as London did during the 19th century. Given this context, there appears no limit to the amount of profitability to be gained from attracting environmentally friendly investment.
At the same time, our own Ministry of Finance and Economic Management reports the offshore finance sector is suffering “stagnation.” It can be argued that the only naivety lies in blind faith in fast fading economic realities; in allowing ethically shallow interests to distort national development priorities without, eventually, paying the costs in our future sustainability.
Perhaps the best precedent for boldly reinventing our future is our own history.
Our ancestors took the very biggest picture – the stars of our universe – and used them to navigate themselves to bold new realities, exciting new futures. Continued success, even our very survival as a nation depends on nothing less.
> a final note
Some may have noticed use of the phrase “Avaiki Cook Islands.” This borrows from what became accepted practice in Aotearoa New Zealand to include the indigenous name in public self-reference, a concept now enshrined in many of that country’s laws. A similar process is encouraged here.
NDC first existed as a government-created entity during the nineties. This was around the same time as introduction of new finance laws and what became known as “the transition” – mass layoffs from the public sector due to economic mismanagement and the subsequent cashflow crisis. Government invited societal stakeholders to near-quarterly and closed-door meetings. The council was initially a success as the first semi-formal and timely interface between public and private sectors on national development and other policy matters. It was the first time government went beyond one-off forums to seek private sector comment on state activities. However, after a few years, the council fell out of favour with government, accused of being captured by limited commercial interests, unrepresentative of the community as a whole. NDC was not a statutorily established body, or even a registered society, so no disbandment was necessary. Government simply stopped holding meetings. Members seemed to accept this withdrawal of official favour unquestioningly. No discussions ever emerged suggesting non-state interests assuming ownership of the council. During the 1999 election campaign, the then ruling Cook Islands Party proposed a highly sophisticated and multi-layered expansion of the NDC concept. No facilities for public dissemination or feedback to NDC discussions or even decisions were envisaged. Political instability following general elections apparently stopped implementation of the expansion.
> vision
NDC takes as its founding vision the only bi-partisan statement of national intent, the 1997 single sentence statement of National Vision, promising “sustainable” development. Towards this goal, the council will focus attention on good governance issues common to varying challenges and problems facing its membership. Instead of closed-door elitism, the new NDC will become the public testing ground for cutting edge concepts in transparency, accountability and contestable consultation.
> what the NDC will do
First and foremost, the NDC could concern itself with introduction of due process. For example, it will discuss ways to set down a process by which all laws must be introduced, consulted upon, meaningfully redrafted and how such redrafting can be made to accurately reflect public input. Secondly, the NDC could become a sounding board for government plans, a court of first-resort for perpetual public feedback to initiatives-of-the-day, including annual budgets. Thirdly, the NDC could act as a balance to the powers of central government by, for example, becoming part of the donor consultative process. Finally, but no less importantly, the NDC could become the focal point through which citizen or community initiated referenda and other activities are engaged.
> world precedence
World trends towards public-private partnerships have long been on the increase. More recent trends reflect growing equality status for non-state actors with national governments. This recognises that civil society may not be selected through universal suffrage, but that groups form, often temporarily, to address perceived issues of the day within communities e.g. the Unit Titles Bill petitioners. In other words, all sectors in society have a part to play in ensuring good governance, not just the people’s elected representatives. More specifically, online searches show multiple references to National Development Councils around the world, with some 39,000 pages showing up in Google. Similar pages dealing with National Development Commissions and National Development Coalitions, by contrast, number only in the dozens.
> domestic precedence
From a national sovereignty perspective, there may be a concern that a body like the NDC offers a mirror image of much criticised ‘political interference’ – a non-state version that, for want of a better term, might be termed ‘civil interference.’ There is however precedence for such interference. In the early nineties, the government of the Cook Islands appealed against the rights of the judiciary to rule against a decision of the parliamentary Privileges Committee. Government expressed concern judges were not respecting the paramountcy of parliament as democratically elected representatives of the land. And that the courts were not respecting the separation of powers between institutions, both concepts demanded by modern democracy, lest, perhaps, the Cook Islands ultimately become something akin to a police state run by fussy judges. This argument was given leave to be taken all the way to the Privy Council in London, where learned lords ruled in support of Parliament rightly being the paramount power in the land. However, the Privy Council also ruled that where Parliament stepped outside its own rules and the laws of the land, including the Constitution, other institutions like the courts were duty bound to bring Parliament back within those rules. In other words, there is a clear and present duty for all institutions to play their part in ensuring good governance – not just the government.
> public support: the strongest institute
In 1998, the Political Review Commission recorded strong support for the news media as an “effective control on the political process.” Of more than 300 voting-age people surveyed by commissioners – the largest such survey outside of elections – 56% expressed faith in the abilities of the news media. Other institutions, including voters themselves, attracted much less confidence; police, parliament, privileges committee, the courts, NGOs, traditional leaders all gained less than half that much. At that time, the news media consisted of a weekly newspaper now defunct, the existing daily newspaper, a talkback radio show, and television programmes like Te Rongo Veka and Karioi. All operated and supported commonly accepted journalistic standards, a situation no longer enjoyed today. There is strong evidence to argue the industry has weakened not because of any “media wars” but because of continued political interference in news media institutions, beginning with the privatisation of television in 1998. Lessons that can be gained from this experience as they relate to reintroduction of an NDC include the fact that people – taxpayers and voters – feel there is a place for strong commentary, open discussion, transparency and accountability in public and even private affairs of the nation. Political powers may again seek to sabotage any institution that threatens its monopoly on public influence. Future governments may find this task a little more difficult if an all-inclusive NDC partners with the media – and the people.
> the role of the media
News media are the single most important source of information for most people on a daily basis. Any resumption of the NDC could help secure its future by transacting most of its affairs in public. These two institutions could further cement support for each other by the NDC acting as a monitor for the media – there can be no better judge of community standards than the community itself. One of the issues that the NDC could look at in its objective to achieve sustainable development is a return to public broadcasting under a BBC-style charter set by NDC members. By supporting independent and publicly accountable news media as a development priority, NDC would help ensure impartial coverage of national issues, and greater public participation in national affairs.
> conclusion
Further discussion follows in question and answer format, including some big picture analysis about just what is at stake for our future. For now, concepts behind the reintroduction of a National Development Council have clear precedence locally and around the globe. There is equally clear evidence of a need for such a cross-cutting entity: a political system in seizure, constantly collapsing and reinventing itself around political opportunities of limited benefit to most of those outside parliament. Further evidence is witnessed commercially in an over-reliance on a secondary industry like tourism without enough checks and balance sufficient to offset emphasis on short-term gain at the cost of long-term pain. These are the symptoms. Lack of good governance – whether an environment service that does not prosecute environmental abuses, or a police force failing to properly act against corruption – is the cause. It is strongly suggested here that reintroduction of an interface between public and private sectors like the National Development Council is a leading contender as a potential remedy.
Questions and answers as follows:
Not another NGO !
Yes, another NGO, at least to start with.
What do you mean ?
National Development Councils are a commonly accepted feature of society around the world, reflected in a simple Google search showing about 39,000 web pages with this exact phrase. Many of those councils are statutorily recognised bodies, i.e. established in law.
Wasn’t the last NDC a failure ?
Depends on what is meant by failure. If failure is defined as a failure by government to absorb community input, then, yes, it was. However the NDC proved successful as a focal point for airing a wide range of community views on national development issues in a timely manner. Some may even feel that government rejection of the NDC is the best possible proof of its effectiveness in strongly advocating community views.
At the time, Government said the NDC was hi-jacked by business interests. What’s to stop the same thing happening again ?
It is correct that business leaders took the highest public profile in discussing decisions reached at council meetings. Much of this public discussion took place in the media, as opposed to village meetings, for example, perhaps leading to a perception among the public that business interests dominated the NDC. Traditional leaders and other NGOs who were also strongly represented at the NDC may not agree the council was captured by any one sector. However, accepting the criticism for the sake of argument, it would be a simple matter for secret voting procedures to be required at each meeting, with full disclosure of results, so that a true picture might be gained by all sectors of support for NDC recommendations.
But what makes this proposal for a new NDC any different from all the other NGOs? Aren’t they seeking good governance too ?
True. In doing so, many NGOs have to start from scratch, learning how to approach government, through what channels, in what form. At least one petition, for example, failed just because they did not know the ‘proper’ wording required by parliament. As another example, an environment NGO may have to learn the same processes as a health focused NGO, even if they are concerned with different issues. This is often termed ‘re-inventing the wheel’ – a waste of time, money and effort. There needs to be one national body concerned mainly with proper due process.
Good governance in other words ?
Exactly. Just as the Development Investment Board is a “one-stop” shop for foreign investors, so too could the NDC become a one-stop shop for individuals or groups seeking to engage government in issues of good governance.
But if government ignored the last NDC why should they take any notice of a new one ?
This question might be more appropriate if we still lived in colonial times and government was the main game in town. However, we have been self-governing for the last 40 years. Even politicians have called for an end to the “mummy government” era, and encouraged “private sector-led development.”
Put that simply.
People should no longer wait around for an official invitation to their own country.
Nice image. But isn’t the reality that government still protects its turf jealously? And how do we go about changing laws and other existing realities if government doesn’t want to ?
Indeed. Government itself has experienced problems adjusting from rhetoric to international realities that see a shifting of the power base from the public to private sectors, not least, civil society. Even aid donors who have spent the last decade or so encouraging such a shift themselves seek greater powers in their own countries. To change these realities, any attempt to re-introduce the NDC must assume authority in its own right, as an equal partner, not wait for government to bestow it. In assuming equal status, political reformers and good governance advocates may need to move their goal posts a bit.
What do you mean ?
For example, most political reform efforts have concentrated on costs of good governance. MPs pay. Perks. Allowances. Ministerial support. All these can be considered important. But nowhere near as important as much bigger issues, like sustainable development. Reformers and good governance advocates need to widen their perspective. Pay and perks related to Members of Parliament take up an amount equal to just 1% of GDP – but seem to take up 99% of the time in public debate. On this, it could be argued that people can have cheap governance, or they can have good governance, but they cannot have both. There may even be an argument for increasing pay and perks for MPs – but only if they agree to an increase in performance.
Taxpayers would never accept that ?
Again, good governance advocates need to widen their perspectives. It is not enough to react against misgovernment – community leaders need to advocate and promote measures that achieve good governance.
In other words?
Community leaders participating in the reintroduction of the NDC must provide leadership and offer new visionary futures for discussion by the country, not wait for government. Nor can we wait for overseas trends to wash up on our shores in another 20 or 50 years. Quite literally, most of our shores might be washed away by then with rising sea levels. We must boldly stake a claim to the future, and drag ourselves towards that future, just as our ancestors did many millennia ago.
Okay, food for thought, but let’s go back to basics: doesn’t CIANGO, the Cook Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations already act as a focal point for all NGOs?
Yes, CIANGO is already a valued and committed player in terms of capacity development and cooperation between NGOs and government. However, there are two reasons for establishing a new and separate body. One is that CIANGO remains ideally suited for providing a support and development role to NGOs, rather than raising and challenging issues facing the country. Secondly, it is hoped that government will “buy” into new visions for the NDC and, eventually, offer statutory recognition and support for this interface with the rest of society. If this happens, there will still be a need for CIANGO to act as the secretariat-style interface between donors, NGOS and government.
Enough nuts and bolts – can you give us the big picture, the context in which to fit the NDC?
A central element of sustainable development for any nation is having a nation in the first place.
To explain: in 100 years time, we, and our current leaders, will be long gone, our children will have assumed leadership and passed on, and our grandchildren will be ready – or not - to hand over to new leaders, three generations from now.
If climate change predictions are even half way correct, however, most of our islands may have already passed on into history. Atolls may become uninhabitable or even completely submerged. Low lying volcanic islands may not offer much more protection. Arguments still rage for and against global warming and whether or not there will be an associated sea level rise. However, in the arguments for and against it seems forgotten that, by the time we find out for sure, it may be way too late. Record severity in cyclone events in the Americas forecast the possibility that much bigger countries will suffer tremendously at the same time as small islands disappear.
As a small island state, the Cook Islands should be taking a much larger leadership role on potential impacts of climate change. Achieving credibility in international affairs, however, must also rely, at least in part, on authentic efforts to improve domestic realities.
Even if the Cook Islands improves it’s domestic performance, how on earth can a tiny dot in the ocean have any real impact on world affairs?
Again, we must look at old problems in new ways. Everyone has heard over and over again how small, weak and isolated island nations are. Our challenge is in recognising our biggest weaknesses could also be our strongest strengths.
In 2004, for example, the Pacific Islands AIDS Foundation proposed to international donors that they treat the island region as an opportunity for cheap advocacy – to prove that efforts to treat people with existing cases of hiv.aids and slow the spread of the virus can succeed better in small, isolated vulnerable populations, than big, well-connected seemingly strong communities.
This bold concept would put the Pacific Islands at the head of international efforts, rather than as a frequently overlooked part of Asia. After all, this doctrine suggests, if international efforts cannot succeed on the smallest scale, what real hope have they elsewhere?
Given similar boldness, there would be nothing to stop people in the Cook Islands drawing a line in the sand and similarly lobbying world support for strong environmental initiatives, as a first step towards achieving sustainable development nationally, and, if the approach proves a success, community-by-community, regionally and internationally.
Just as our closest trading partner, Aotearoa New Zealand, has proven itself as a testing ground for world beating technologies like EFTPOS, so too could Avaiki Cook Islands prove its worth in world leading social and economic change.
An example: our offshore finance industry has only just been removed from the so-called OECD blacklist. Suspicions about its activities remain. What if this industry was completely reinvented? What if our offshore finance laws offered a host nation for companies trying to do the right thing: protecting the environment, providing solid labour support, advancing social as well as economic values? All conducted in conditions of total transparency instead of total secrecy? What if a body like the NDC sought international assistance for transitioning offshore activities from their shady past to a bright future?
Naïve, perhaps.
However, green or environmental shares are the fastest growing sector of the global economy. This process will accelerate exponentially once the United States has exhausted itself protecting shrinking oil interests, and the new global superpower, China, begins suffocating in its own success, just as London did during the 19th century. Given this context, there appears no limit to the amount of profitability to be gained from attracting environmentally friendly investment.
At the same time, our own Ministry of Finance and Economic Management reports the offshore finance sector is suffering “stagnation.” It can be argued that the only naivety lies in blind faith in fast fading economic realities; in allowing ethically shallow interests to distort national development priorities without, eventually, paying the costs in our future sustainability.
Perhaps the best precedent for boldly reinventing our future is our own history.
Our ancestors took the very biggest picture – the stars of our universe – and used them to navigate themselves to bold new realities, exciting new futures. Continued success, even our very survival as a nation depends on nothing less.
> a final note
Some may have noticed use of the phrase “Avaiki Cook Islands.” This borrows from what became accepted practice in Aotearoa New Zealand to include the indigenous name in public self-reference, a concept now enshrined in many of that country’s laws. A similar process is encouraged here.
posted by Avaiki Nius at 1:40 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home