Country Constituents Assembly Meeting Minutes
Participants
Jill Bosro HELP
Resources
Simon Rollinson VDT
Margaret Sete NVS
Naomi Yupae Family
Voice
Miranda Ortiz Cooperant
Rep
Steve McDowell CUSO PNG
Gabrielle
Appleford CUSO
PNG
Peter Hoffman Observer
(CIDA Viet Nam)
Jennette Observer
(Divine Word University)
Steve welcomed
everyone to the meeting. Participants
then introduced themselves, and provided a brief summary of their organisation
and the work of the cooperant or intern in their organisation.
Gabrielle then
went through the agenda and asked if there were any additions or changes to the
agenda; none were made. An informal
approach to the meeting was agreed upon.
Gabrielle then briefly reviewed last year’s meeting minutes. Highlights included:
§ CUSO accountability: strategic plan &
PM&E (Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation) systems
§ Institutional memory: CUSO as a learning
organisation
§ Focus on community
(through—primarily---partnership with NGOs)
§ Emphasis on custom and tradition: key to
NGO work in PNG
She mentioned
that there would be an opportunity to discuss CUSO PNG’s experiences to date
with PM&E system later in the meeting.
Minutes were accepted for the 1999 Meeting with no changes.
Steve and
Gabrielle then stuck up CUSO PNG overhead which stated “CUSO PNG: to support
organisations working with communities and/or the promotion of gender
responsiveness”. CUSO’s thematic
areas were acknowledged but not highlighted here as they had been in the 1999
meeting. For Peter’s clarification
however, it was explained that partners were selected based upon their work
falling under these thematic areas.
“Placements” were
then divided under communities and gender responsiveness. Partners were asked to refer to the
Placement Buddy (attachment).
Placements were briefly reviewed.
Gabrielle highlighted that many organisations were responding to both
gender and community but their main focus had been selected for this discussion.
Comments: It
would be good to have a list of past placements for institutional memory—this
would go along way in explaining “who” (or what) CUSO is about.
Then an overhead
depicting cooperant clusters and regional focus was put up which showed a focus
on the main island of PNG in Morobe, Eastern Highlands, Madang, East Sepik and
NCD. Gabrielle explained the objective
of this focus as: consolidation of the CUSO PNG programme (can’t know
everything everywhere), more cost-effective, and an improved sense of security
and support for cooperants. Gabrielle
stated that this focus would not disallow for placements in other provinces in
the future but for the present CUSO PNG would like to focus and consolidate
their work.
“Dialogue and
research” (D & R) overheads were then stuck up under the beneficiary focus
of community and gender responsiveness.
Partners were asked to refer to the list of activities under these areas
(attachment). Steve mentioned that
dialogue and research (or investigation) were meant to formalise work that had
always gone into “partnerships” in the past.
He also highlighted that this also indicated that partnership was more
than just the volunteer placement.
Naomi and Margaret thought that this emphasised real partnership in that
the CUSO relationship could continue after the volunteer.
The list of
current dialogue and research activities were then reviewed (attachment). Simon asked if this list indicated that CUSO
was becoming an NGO. There was debate
on the difference between an “NGO” and a “VSA”. Gabrielle thought that CUSO could be classified as a Canadian NGO
as CUSO engages in work beyond volunteer placements both in Canada and in its
overseas offices; she gave an example of the work that the Canadian region
does.
Margaret: VSAs as
“professionals” who are not interested in the context of their work—or if it is
even relevant. She stated that NVS
feels comfortable working with CUSO, VSA (New Zealand) and Swiss Interteam. Margaret thought that CUSO was strong at
relationships.
Naomi: thought
that CUSO was presented as a VSA as this or the volunteers were the “tangibles”
of CUSO’s work. The list of sub-activities were important for institutional
memory and that dialogue with CBOs was sometimes all that was needed (“man
maus”). Also that specific areas like
computer training were good entry for establishing groundwork with new or young
organisations.
Peter: thought
that connection between placements and D & R can show that work is part of
a project or programme which in turn could be related to CUSO’s themes. He suggested adding to the “Placement Buddy”
CUSO’s objective or theme (ie: good governance with TI).
Naomi: PNG
“context” is the community. If someone comes
and sells an “issue” this is only a “slice” of the community (these comments
made in regards to CUSO themes).
Gabrielle then
asked participants to refer to handouts on Alt Econ and TK/IPR (traditional
knowledge and intellectual property rights) as these came under D & R
activities. Partners had had an
opportunity to read these the night before and most had done so. She said that
she wanted an assessment of accuracy and relevance so that CUSO PNG would have
something to report back to PAC (where these areas had been highlighted the
previous year).
1.
Do
you agree with the analysis provided on “alternative economics” in the context
of PNG?
All agreed. There is a need to be innovative and to
understand how the international market operates.
2.
Do
you think that if services improved to rural areas, people would be satisfied
with their “alternative economy” or lifestyle?
Margaret: Difficult to
access due to rapid changes. A taste
for new things is here to stay. This
should not replace but be complementary.
Country in a “confused state” due to neglect of rural areas,
urbanization, increase in rascalism (indicating a sense of “desperateness”).
Peter: alternative systems in a sense are the timber and mining in PNG. Very little connection between these
large-scale activities and subsistence lifestyle. Naomi: women hard-working but
individually-based as community-based not working. Simon: alternative can also be a matter of scale.
3.
Do
you think that “alternative economics” is promoted in PNG? If yes, then, by whom: the state? NGOs?
The education system? If no,
then should alternative economics be promoted?
Not promoted but should be.
Jill: Some of
these issues were discussed at a recent food security conference. People were interested in answers to
questions but why are people still suffering from malnutrition? Are these things only to be talked about or
are they things, which require action?
4.
Do
you think that NGOs working on business development in areas such as eco-tourism,
eco-enterprises and small income-generation schemes follow the “western” model
of business or do they follow something “alternative” such that it embraces or
complements traditional systems?
Simon: VDT’s eco-enterprises promoting cash income as
this is seen as a priority of communities.
How this is done depends upon the community.
5.
Do you think that more education about world trading systems and
globalisation is needed for people to understand how this affects their
lives? Yes.
6.
Is your
organisation doing work in this area?
If, yes, please explain.
None of the partners were working in this area. Simon mentioned that Pacific Heritage
Foundation (where he used to work) had rejected IPR as inappropriate.
7.
Do you see
this as an area that requires NGO support?
More popular awareness?
Partners thought that this area required more
awareness. The National Health Plan now includes traditional medicine, which
should be promoted. Traditional medicinal
practices were stopped because new names for illnesses were introduced so
people did not know that it was the same old illness they had always
treated.
Naomi has been trying to find out more on traditional
knowledge of gender relations. Men are
hiding behind mask of tradition. For
example, previously women were not targets in tribal fighting—now they
are.
Simon mentioned that there are “informal” IPR systems
where customs are not divulged to outsiders.
However, other customs or groups are more open and thus vulnerable to
manipulation by outsiders. Some thought
that this would depend on how much traditional knowledge is incorporated into
lifestyle and livelihoods. All of this
has been affected by colonisation: mixed messages on what is good or bad
vis-a-vis culture and tradition; now in a “confused period”. For example, there has been a loss of
respect for the elderly and traditional value systems. Modernisation is seen as being against
tradition and not with tradition.
Traditional knowledge will also become more eroded with the increase in
mixed marriages.
There are gaps in education now with a lost
generation who are unskilled for survival back in the village. Some districts
have “typical” houses where traditional skills are taught to children. NVS has incorporated traditional examples
into Community Development trainings.
Gabrielle thanked
everyone for their insights and comments on alternative economics and
TK/IPR. She said that these would be
incorporated into the papers to be presented at PAC and circulated to partners.
Participants were
brought back to the overheads where an additional item, “outcomes” was then
stuck up as an offshoot to “D & R”.
This was used to indicate that sometimes there are direct outcomes of D
& R, such as the development of a volunteer placement. The Eastern Highlands Department of
Education example was given. However,
it was emphasised that this was not the main or only objective of “D & R”
activities.
Partners were
asked to refer to the security handout (attachment). This had excerpts from the cooperant conference and included
minimum-security requirements for all placements with additional items for Port
Moresby placements. This was reviewed
in order to emphasise the need for collaboration on cooperant and intern
security.
The
capacity-building handout was then reviewed, in particular the cooperant
outreach and training opportunities through such schemes as CDS (Community
Development Scheme) and GDS (German Development Service). Issues raised:
Margaret: partner
can’t be left in the dark about what the cooperant’s doing. Important the “chain of command” in which
these external requests go through and that the main objectives of the
placement are met. Others thought that
bearing this in mind, that using cooperants in this manner was a good
idea. One person suggested that CUSO
should stand behind the notion of “sustainable development” through effective
means of capacity building.
The CUSO budget
situation (budget cuts and PNG placements deferred) was then reviewed. CUSO’s main funding sources were outlined
including CIDA, Industry Canada & revenue generation. The possibility of rethinking funding and
looking at opportunities and initiatives such as placements developed within
projects or funding proposals was presented.
Partners were supportive of this.
Simon asked what the minimum contribution from partners was considered as
he was not clear. Gabrielle explained
that either contributing to housing or the living allowance was requested of
partners but that the mix of partner support was flexible.
“Outcome” on
the white board was shifted from R & D (research and dialogue) to placement
to begin discussion on impact. Steve
asked everyone to refer to the handouts which included CUSO PNG’s PM & E
system experiences to date and emphasis on Results-Based Management. Discussion based upon this presentation
included:
Peter: RBM given what CUSO is attempting (add up
individual contributions and measure impact) is very difficult to do in the
short run. There has to be a shared
agreement with partner (collaboration).
“Readings” of impact often can only be anecdotal. Programmatically, case studies can be used
to show achievements.
Margaret: NVS used their last staff retreat to do an
evaluation of the programme—this was extremely useful.
Peter: measure outputs (ie: “impact”) but also
measure the process. At the
volunteer-partner level more about relationships. For example: how well liked is the person? Measure how good people are feeling about
the process. Personality ultimately
will decide whether capacity-building, CUSO’s “impact”, is happening. Need technical side plus social, “process”
side to create an “enabling environment”.
Naomi: in the Melanesian way, the skills of an
educated individual belong to the community.
This supports idea of sharing cooperant skills with wider community.
CUSO PNG’s PM & E system comments:
Qualitative, personal aspects need to be captured in
the monitoring
Workplans and indicators: may diminish people taking
risks—things that aren’t planned and things that were but were not done need to
be captured.
Miranda: The importance of personal traits and
aspects of individuals sought for positions need to be conveyed to recruiting
office, not just technical skills sought.
Naomi had agreed
to chair this session. She started by
conveying her experiences at the AGM and TPM in June in Vancouver. She thanked Stephen and Gabrielle for the
opportunity and the work undertaken to get her there. She also stated that through Stephen’s Douglas’ introduction of
meeting and workshop techniques, she had been well inducted as the TPM used
many of the same approaches. Naomi said
that she
was quite touched, that CUSO takes partnership quite seriously, that there were
people from all over the world attending representing all stakeholders in
CUSO. Naomi stated that her confidence
had been boosted by the fact that CUSO had this much faith in her as she felt
that she had a say and was able to express her views at the top levels of
CUSO. People had a lot of time for her
and she was able to visit other organisations dealing with similar issues as
Family Voice. Out of this some good
partnerships have been developed and she is “dialoguing” (to borrow our term)
with these organisations.
The following
questions were then put up on the board.
What became apparent very quickly was that a lot of these questions had
been answered in previous discussions.
§
What does
CUSO (or any other international organisation) mean when they call you a
“partner”?
§
Has the
role of volunteers changed within organisations?
§
Are there
different kinds of volunteerism? What
kind is CUSO? What kind should CUSO be striving to be?
§
What is
the impact of volunteer work in your organisation? What is the impact of your work?
§
How can
CUSO PNG get the most impact? Within
current budget constraints, are there other ways to be more effective?
§
Discuss
the importance of building in linkages and analysis to placements
Discussion based
around these questions included:
Margaret: CUSO needs
to be responsive to partner needs; should reconsider S-N and SS placements.
Naomi: pleased
that partnership doesn’t begin and end with the volunteer. Naomi raised the issue of placement
accountability. Gabrielle responded by
stating that the cooperant is accountable to the partner, in some instances
they are directly accountable to the Board.
Margaret:
suggested putting into the orientation where the volunteer fits between CUSO
and the partner. NVS uses a “triangle”
(NOTE: This was trailed after the meeting with the new intakes; a copy of this
has been attached.) Cooperants need to
be able to “hear” when someone is telling you that something is not right
(Melanesian ways of dealing with things).
Problems should be dealt with immediately. Suggested that a volunteer panel could be used in country for
orientations (or that other VSA volunteers could be used due to geographic
disbursement).
Gabrielle started
by stating that Joe Silipin had been the partner rep for two years now and had
represented PNG well at PAC, but under PAC by-laws it was time to nominate a
new partner rep. She also stated that
Naomi had agreed to put her name forward for partner rep. All present unanimously supported Naomi in
this role.
Gabrielle also
mentioned other preparation that was underway for PAC: country statement (that
cooperants are preparing), alternative economics paper and traditional
knowledge/IPR paper to incorporate comments and be presented at PAC. Partners
did not suggest any additional prep for PAC.
Miranda briefly
introduced her debt kit to partners.
She also explained that she is currently working on adapting this to PNG
with students from the “reclaiming our history” course at Divine Word
University.
Miranda had
agreed to facilitate this session and partners were kind enough to provide
feedback on the outlined questions for Diane Goodwillie. Feedback on the four questions done in a
group format are attached to the meeting minutes.
There was no
further business; meeting was adjourned.
Attachments