WHERE HAVE WE GONE WRONG?

A reflection and analysis of underdevelopment in Aitape Lumi District

This article analyzes the progress of development in Aitape-Lumi District. The author seeks to analyze and bring to light the factors that greatly affects development.

*(Note: This is the author’s personal reflection and analysis of where we have gone wrong as a District)

Development and its meaning is interpreted in different ways. There are various definitions of development (refer to my previous articles regarding meanings and possible operating models). This article moreover analyses possible variables that greatly affects development.

There are several variables that directly impacts and affects development in any district. Those variables can be categorized into six (6) categories (this is my own perception of the categories). They are:

1.       1. Political Leadership

2.      2.  Administrative Arm (CEO & Team)

3.      3.  Public Service Machineries

4.    4 . Government Institutions (Directly attached with  National Government)

5.     5.  Partnering Organizations (in development)

6.    6.   Local Communities

POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

Political Leadership refers to all the Political Leaders within the District. Political Leaders at the ward level and at the District level. 

Political leadership at the ward and LLG level

Political Leaders at the village level are the ward councilors. At the LLG level we have the presidents. Altogether the presidents and the ward councilors form the leadership team at the LLG level.

With the operation and introduction of the DDA, the LLG leadership to some degree has become obsolete. Important decisions made at the LLG level lack tooth and nails to mitigate development issues at the LLG and ward level. Here is an example:

“when LLG ‘X’ convened an assembly meeting, they made a very important decision. Their decision was to build their LLG satellite station. After making the decision, they have to go through another process yet again at the district level which involves another decision making. This new decision making verifies and approves funding for the project based upon availability of their LLG funds or help elsewhere”.

The above example highlights the major setback to development at the LLG level. The major setback to the development agendas at the LLG level is created by centralization and micromanagement of LLG affairs by a third party which is the District Administration. This setback came about due to the introduction and implementation of the DDA model. Hence, ward councilors at this level find themselves ineffective. Thus they cannot deliver through the established process of wards and LLGs. Alas they now only function as relics of the glory days of change gone before.  

Henceforth permit me to introduce the underlying questions of this article:

 Can the LLG presidents and ward members be blamed for the underdevelopment experienced through our respective wards and LLGs? If the Presidents and ward members are devoid of development tools, how will they perform? Is the current operating model of DDA ‘development friendly’? Should we continue to crucify our LLG political leadership and blame them for incompetency? Is the ward councilors and presidents essential to development at the LLG and ward level? If yes, how can they effectively participate in development?

Political leadership at the district level

Political leadership at the District level incorporates the LLG Presidents and the constituency (electorate) elected representative. The elected representative commonly referred to as “member” together with the LLG presidents form the DDAC (District Development Authority Committee). The open member is the chairman of this special committee.

In the DDA meetings, the LLG presidents represents their LLGs (wards) in bringing and voicing their development agendas. Through this special committee meeting, decisions regarding development within the district are discussed and passed. In this context, the presidents and the elected member will technically be deemed as failed politicians when:

a.       i. Meetings are not conducted

b.    ii.  Specific job descriptions are not followed

c.      iii. The Organic Law on Provincial and Local Level Government is not followed

d.      iv. Fail to discuss and pass important decision on development within the district.

On the contrary, it is not their job to implement projects and decisions passed by the DDA meetings. Nonetheless, their wisdom and overseeing of development priorities should not be excused.

As it is, logical questions to be asked at this level are:

Were there any DDAC meetings conducted? Has the DDAC discussed and passed important development resolutions? If they have not done that, then they have failed. But if they have convened and passed important development resolutions, how is it that the effectiveness of those decisions cannot be tangibly measured and the effectiveness of their leadership is not felt? Has something gone wrong? Are they at fault or could there be other variables hindering the effectiveness of the decisions they make and other variables undermining the effectiveness of their political leadership?

                     DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE ARM (CEO & Team)

The District Administrative Arm is the most important team. The team is made up of the District Administrator who also acts as the CEO. The Administrator with the support of the deputy leads the district public machinery. The Administrator is supported by the District Finance Manager (DFM) and the district finance team. Altogether, they play the most important role of executing, monitoring and controlling all the district’s operations. They are the chief executing officers of development agendas and decisions initiated, passed and directed by the political leaders.

To put this particular point into perspective, here is an example. Let’s suppose that “Aitape Lumi” District in its DDAC meeting discussed and approved funding for the road maintenance from Poltulul to Yalinge River. After the meeting was held, it is chiefly the DA’s responsibility to ensure that this maintenance is carried out forthwith.

Now, in the context of the explanations and examples, who is at fault? Let’s suppose that the DDAC meetings were conducted as planned and development decisions passed by the politicians were passed and the money is readily available but road maintenance was not carried out. In this scenario who is directly at fault? Is it the Politician (politicians) or the Administrator and his or her team?

Who out of this typical scenario will be the one heavily criticized, is it the Politician? Or is it the Administrator (administration). Who is the person or personals mostly at fault in this context?

PUBLIC SERVICE MACHINERIES

For the purpose of this article, I directly attach this term “public service machinery” collectively to the ‘district program managers’ of each sectors. The program managers, subordinates and others of similar standing fill in this space. This special group is attached with districts although it plays a very important role of carrying-out national government’s directives.

The “public service machinery” by nature is the vital cog in development. It acts as a vital cog in connecting the national government, province and the district abstract development concepts with concrete development.

Here is an example. The role of the District Education Manager (DEM) is to oversee district education agendas. In this sense, planning, organizing and executing educational agendas within the district is chiefly the Education Manager’s responsibility. The DEM and subordinates are accountable officers directly responsible for educational matters.

In the light of the above explanation, when the District lapses and falls behind in educational aspects, who is to be chiefly blamed? Should we blame the Political Leader, the District Administrator or the Education Personals? Who is the Chief accountable officer? Do we have to change our political leader, change our DA or sack the Educational Personals out of incompetency?

Has the District experienced the effectiveness of those sectors? Has the district experienced the effectiveness of the leadership of those sectorial heads? Have they failed us as a District?

Should we still blame the Political leader out of the incompetency of the public service machineries?

The leader is armless and toothless without the public service machinery.

Let us take time to analyze and reflect on each sector’s (e.g. Commerce, Health, DAL, Fisheries) within the District and their effectiveness in delivering our development agendas. 

               GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS (Directly attached with National Government)

“Government Institutions” in this article refers to institutions attached with the national government. In this article, these institutions often times may appear to be working independently from the District Administration’s influence. Only on certain occasions and collaborations can one see the district’s administration’s influence upon such institutions.  Examples of such would be the ‘police’. 

These important development vehicles play a vital role in the process of change within the district. Although they are within the district, they have a very active connection with their chain of command, job descriptions and duties with the national hierarchy. 

These government institutions (as specifically described in the context of this article) plays a very vital part in the district’s development pursuit. They carry out their specifically assigned duties specified by the national government directives and the respective government. In this exercise, they are not only keeping up with the national directives but become active players in development. 

To encapsulate the forgoing points, here is an example. Let’s suppose that our district police (*I have been using police here since I have already use the department as an example) is trying to achieve and meet the vision for the police ministry and Police Commissioner. The vision is to make every town in the country safe. In this light, by trying to meet the direction and demand from the top brass, our police personals in their act of duty are making our town environment conducive for foreign investment and participation in development. 

Coming back to the purpose and direction of this article, has the “government institutions” helped us as a district in achieving our development goals and pursuit? Have they escaped scrutiny because the district to some extent cannot effectively have a say in employment, appointment and other related matters? Have we blamed the wrong officers out of the incompetency of the government institutions’ officers?

I have been in the district for five months now after a long spell away and have noticed quite an interesting trend. Let me propose a case here (I will use the police department as an example). Let’s suppose that I went to the Aitape Police Station one day and lay a formal complaint. 

(*please note that this is just an example and this case is not true. If it is true to you or anyone’s experience that you know of, it may be a coincidence and I’m sorry for the inconvenience caused. My point here is, I’m trying to do an analysis here in trying to figure out where we have gone wrong in all our development fronts)

Here is my complaint: 

“Hello officer, I’m from Ningian Village in West Aitape LLG. I was travelling to town early this morning. On my way, there was a road block at Siaute village. The drunkards who illegally block the road swore at me and my travelling companions. Then they started throwing stones at us. During that confrontation, I received stabbing on my right hand and had my left eye-brow badly injured and broken. After the confrontation, we drove all the way to Raihu hospital. There I was stitched and patched. That is why I’ve come all the way here to lodge my complaint. Officer, could you please assist in identifying and capturing the culprits? What is the next course of action now?” 

Let’s suppose that this is the Officer’s response:

     “I’m very sorry to hear your plea. We are living in a very dangerous society. At the moment we cannot assist you. We could not look into this case either. We are having a hard time. To make the matter worse, we are down on logistics and manpower. We do not have the resource to effectively curb crime in our district. I’m sorry. I would love to assist you and bring the perpetrators to justice but I could not. The system is not working.” 

Now, after digesting the example given, lets’ do an analysis of our police department’s arsenal and logistics. Here is an assumed stock-take:

No#	Item	Quantity	Condition/Comments
1	Vehicle	3	In operating condition
2	Men power	15	5 Officers & 10 deputies (auxiliary)
3	Gun/ammunition	6/500 bullets	In fair condition/ 20 boxes of ammunition left

From this short assumed stock take, is the police department sufficiently equipped to deal with such case presented? How effective can they deal with five cases of similar nature within two weeks? Assuming that they can, how can they effectively perform their duties? How can they effectively manage their scarce resources with the ever increasing crime rate? 

Having shed some light on the government institutions through the police example, how does other similar departments fare in this similar situation? Have they demonstrated excellence in the face of challenges? Have they effectively manage their scarce resources to fulfill our district’s development pursuits? Were the accountable officers complacent in their jobs? Were patriotism and zeal demonstrated? Have they failed their part in the development pursuit?

Has the district failed in terms of support? Or the responsible officers did not seek help? Should we blame the District Administration, the accountable officers for incompetency or the political leader leaders for the lack of oversight?

Should we require and demand excellence from our officers from the government institutions such as we demand from our political leaders? Is there a difference? Who is at fault?

Take some to reflect on this sector’s participation in our district’s development drive.

 PARTNERING ORGANIZATIONS (IN DEVELOPMENT)

Development Partners are an essential link in development. Often times, they fill in the development void left vacant by the government. Within Aitape Lumi District, we have a good number of development partners. 

Development partners within the district comes in the form of Church-run institutions, private business operating public services and such. The partnering organizations in development play major development roles in the health sector, the education sector, transportation and others. One of the typical and clear example of partnering organizations in development operating in Aitape- Lumi is the Church. 

The Church, as a private organization has contributed immensely to the development of Aitape Lumi as a district. One of the most iconic important development ever contributed towards the District and the people is the Roman Catholic Church establishment and operating of Raihu District Hospital. The hospital for so long has contributed immensely to the health and wellbeing of the people of Aitape Lumi. 

Let us look at Raihu District Hospital as a typical example of private development partners. Raihu District Hospital for some time now has been serving the people of Aitape Lumi in health-development matters. The coverage of its services also reaches as far as out-backs of Nuku, remote parts of Lumi bordering Vanimo Green district and others beyond and elsewhere. 

Let us then take a look objectively at the hospital and the challenges it goes through as an example of partners in development. The Hospital’s general outlook of infrastructure is slowly deteriorating. The outpatient building needs a proper upkeep such as painting and refurnishing. From anecdotal evidences, the hospital is and have always been having insufficient operational funds. Constant electricity supply needed by hospital of such standard is also poor. The hospital is having difficulty in maintaining or purchasing new generators to keep constant electrical supply. Medical store is always low on important medical supplies.

Having given the objective outlook of the hospital from anecdotal evidences, there are obvious constrains experienced by the hospital. The hospital obviously needs support from the main development stakeholder which is the government. On the other hand, proper and professional acquitting is needed from the government of the hospital and other development partners.

The most important element that development partners should know and use to their advantage is “knowing one’s development partners or stakeholders”. Running private businesses or services such as the hospital in support of the Government’s development agenda is tiresome. The trick however is to know the major stakeholders. The hospital management ought to know their partners in health services. An example of a partner in health services is “World Vision”. World Vision runs health programs and supports health related activities.

Looking back and reflecting on the district’s general performance in development is not a promising experience. We have a gigantic task to do in terms of development. On the same note, we as a district owe all the partnering organizations in development great gratitude. They have struggled immensely to get the district this far. For that, the district will always be forever grateful.

To round-off this section’s reflection here are some questions for reflection:

1.      How can we show our gratitude to private development stakeholders within the district?

2.      In what ways has the district failed in the support of partnering organizations in development?

3.      In what ways can the district support the partnering organizations’ in our development pursuit?

4.      Has the partnering organizations faithful in acquitting to the District and the Government the support rendered? Is there a loophole in the partnership somewhere?

5.      Have the partnering organizations’ managers and administrators effectively lead and use all the available knowledge and tools to better their development output?

6.      Can the partnering organizations in development do better in what they are doing? 

7.      Do the partnering organizations need strategic thinkers and administrators? 

8.      In what ways can the general public support the partnering organizations in the effort to help maintain our development status in specific areas?

9.      Have our leaders consider the supporting organizations in our development plans?

The pursuit of Development is everyone’s business. Let us all appreciate and support and contribute in whatever way we can for the betterment of Aitape-Lumi District in development.

LOCAL COMMUNITIES

“Local communities” is a very important stakeholder in the district’s development pursuits. Often times, local communities are commonly deemed merely as recipients of development output. The Politicians, District Administration, Public Service Machinery and National Institutions sweat tirelessly to deliver development goals whose benevolence the local communities greedily receives. 

“Local Communities” as chief recipients of development goodwill are also so immersed and inundated with this concept of ‘development recipients’. In our immersion with this concept as recipients, we failed to realize and understand our other roles in development. As a result of this misconception, we became chief negative criticizers and naggers of the poor politicians, administration, public service machinery, national institutions and development partners. In this whirlpool of negative criticizing, the poor politician is the one who receives the most and cruel blows. 

Alas, it is sad to see that we criticize without even contributing to this development pursuit. We nag and brag and disrupt development channels and process without effectively playing our part. We are supposed to play a supportive role in the district’s development drive. By looking after our development centers. By working closely with our development partners. By collaborating well with the district team and the national institutions operating within our communities. Yet we rob, we steal, we burn and we beat-up the poor development machineries. We stick our fingers out at them while we ourselves rot in the degradation of our own insolence. 

Local communities have failed to provide a development-friendly environment. We have failed to support the district’s development drive. We ourselves have become stumbling block to development. 

As members of the local communities, let us reflect on where we have failed.

Perhaps these questions can aid us in our reflection:

Have we provided a development-friendly environment? Have we effectively played a good support role as chief recipients of the development outputs? Have we as local communities played our part in development? Before criticizing our Politicians, have we played our part at an individual level or at our local community level in development? Should we now stop our babblings and nagging and start playing our part personally in developing our communities in our district? In what ways can we assist in development?

CONCLUSION

Aitape-Lumi district is a developing district, yet the district is underdeveloped. The problem of underdevelopment is real. In comparison with other leading districts in the country, we are not faringwell. Though a proper research has to be conducted to vet this assumption, anecdotal evidences are clear. It is crystal clear that our development machine is not properly synchronized.

Our development machine needs to be properly tanned. Patriotism and zeal may be the missing fuel needed to fuel the different variables of the district development vehicle. If the politicians were to play their part in passing and planning the much needed development activities, we need the district administration team to equally play their part in the implementation. The public service machinery such as the district program managers and their cohorts needs to perform well. Incompetent officers should be shacked and replaced based upon merit and performance. 

The government institutions such as the police needs good governance and administration. Effective administration can only enable the departments to use their scarce resources effectively. In this country of scarce logistics and resources, good governance and administration is essential. The developing partners’ partnership should not be undervalued by the local government. Accountability and proper acquitting is need by the local government of the development partners.

The local communities equally has to play their part in support. For so long we have become back benchers and criticizers of the development vehicle. Instead of nagging and criticizing, we should contribute at an individual level and at the community level to the development agenda. An example of such would be to help build primary school classrooms in our community schools. Help assist police to curb crime in our local communities. Provide development friendly environment and so forth.

I hope this article clarifies some misconceptions typically held by general public. Misconceptions such as Political leader is solely responsible for development. “Memba tasol bosim divelopmen”, “mipla mas senisim memba bikos distrik bagarap”, “ol sevis ino ron gut so mipla mas rausim memba”. This article I hope enables us to see that there are other variables also at play. Such as, the non-performance of the district administration can frustrate development. Likewise, the incompetency of the district program managers and subordinates can frustrate specific development areas. Further, incompetency and mal-administration in the national government institutions such as police, schools, works and can hinder specific areas of development. Also that local communities must stop the blame game and take up development arms in our personal pursuit and support for development. 

In addition, while it is true that the oversight of the Political leader should not be excused in development. It is also true that the Political leader should not be totally blamed for underdevelopment. Administration team and the public service machinery, other development partners and us as local communities are largely equally at fault as well. It is about time, we put on a different lens when we look at the development issues within our district. 

To end this piece, it is clear that we all have failed the district. We have failed the district as leaders. We have failed as public servants and development partners. And above all, we have failed as individuals and members of Aitape-Lumi Community.

So when will we experience change? Shall we do up a plan? Should we have to elect a new MP? Or should we have to start new by sacking all our public machinery personals out of incompetency? Whatever it is, our personal perception, interest and ego that may frame our understanding of the reality. The truth that stands out is to start today. The future starts with us all. The future is now!

Reference

*Pictures are collected from the web (google) and TCA website

*Photos- curtesy of Hendrick Yomun