<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hey big spender: PNG&#8217;s 2009 budget</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2008/12/04/hey-big-spender-pngs-2009-budget/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2008/12/04/hey-big-spender-pngs-2009-budget/</link>
	<description>Economics, Politics and Public Policy in East Asia and the Pacific</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:19:36 +1100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Aaron Batten</title>
		<link>http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2008/12/04/hey-big-spender-pngs-2009-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1007</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Batten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eastasiaforum.net/?p=379#comment-1007</guid>
		<description>Thanks Satish. The education statistics are taken directly from the Budget (chpt 7) and yes they are hard to believe. I imagine there is quite an interesting story to be told there. In all likelihood there would be significant measurement error.

Funding wise, total recurrent funding for educational services is actually expected to be below past levels, with K273 million appropriated for 2009, compared to K357 million in 2007. Further, despite the massive increase in the development budget, total development expenditure for basic education has remained unchanged at K175 million, albeit reflecting a shift to domestic financing of approximately K20 million.

Your right, health continues to be a concern, especially when there has been plenty of funds found for special interest projects like national stadiums and NRL team scoping studies.

Nevertheless, few of these issues have been raised in the domestic media as all eyes in Moresby continue to be fixated on the finalization of the Gas Project.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Satish. The education statistics are taken directly from the Budget (chpt 7) and yes they are hard to believe. I imagine there is quite an interesting story to be told there. In all likelihood there would be significant measurement error.</p>
<p>Funding wise, total recurrent funding for educational services is actually expected to be below past levels, with K273 million appropriated for 2009, compared to K357 million in 2007. Further, despite the massive increase in the development budget, total development expenditure for basic education has remained unchanged at K175 million, albeit reflecting a shift to domestic financing of approximately K20 million.</p>
<p>Your right, health continues to be a concern, especially when there has been plenty of funds found for special interest projects like national stadiums and NRL team scoping studies.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, few of these issues have been raised in the domestic media as all eyes in Moresby continue to be fixated on the finalization of the Gas Project.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Satish Chand</title>
		<link>http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2008/12/04/hey-big-spender-pngs-2009-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1006</link>
		<dc:creator>Satish Chand</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:03:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eastasiaforum.net/?p=379#comment-1006</guid>
		<description>Another good piece Aaron! Two significant worries of mine: (i) the jump in gross enrolments is hard to believe; and, (ii) the fall in recurrent outlays into health is even harder to rationalize. The jump in gross enrolment rate from 61 percent in 2005 to 80 percent by 2007, if indeed true, is a great achievement. Resources to education did not jump all that much in this period. Much of the change, therefore, would have to come from increased productivity within the education sector. Is there hard evidence to suggest this to be the case? The decline in recurrent outlays on health is worrying. The PNG Government may have left it to donors to attend to the growing HIV-challenge, which says much about (the lack of) local ownership of this initiative, but the same cannot be claimed about the other health concerns. Maternal mortality (often at childbirth) and infant mortality remain disturbingly high. Malaria and TB continue to create havoc. The medicine cabinets in many aid posts remain empty. Yet recurrent outlays to the sector are being cut!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another good piece Aaron! Two significant worries of mine: (i) the jump in gross enrolments is hard to believe; and, (ii) the fall in recurrent outlays into health is even harder to rationalize. The jump in gross enrolment rate from 61 percent in 2005 to 80 percent by 2007, if indeed true, is a great achievement. Resources to education did not jump all that much in this period. Much of the change, therefore, would have to come from increased productivity within the education sector. Is there hard evidence to suggest this to be the case? The decline in recurrent outlays on health is worrying. The PNG Government may have left it to donors to attend to the growing HIV-challenge, which says much about (the lack of) local ownership of this initiative, but the same cannot be claimed about the other health concerns. Maternal mortality (often at childbirth) and infant mortality remain disturbingly high. Malaria and TB continue to create havoc. The medicine cabinets in many aid posts remain empty. Yet recurrent outlays to the sector are being cut!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
