I am prompted to share my personal perception on development after reading Samson Viulu's most recent post on this e-column.
Mr Viulu made some bizarre claims as far I am concern. His claims are not only bizarre but contradictory to a certain degree. It is claimed that small projects like poultry, piggery, canteen, fuel depot are unsustainable and are a waste of money and effort. Mr Viulu obviously disqualifies ( based on his reasoning) the rest of the people who have truly made a living for themselves from such small projects. Failure with some of these projects does not mean that it is a wrong form of development and must be disregarded. These are essential basic developments devised to meet primary needs of people. They may not be 100% productive but of course they are important and deserves attention to see that they work effectively to benefit people. To by pass basic needs of people to focus on more advanced forms of needs is illogical and simply unnatural to do.
I share the same aspiration with Mr Viulu though that development must take us somewhere. The form of development that Mr Viulu aspires to see is ideal and can be pursued. However, it is misleading to say that it is the "positive" form of development in comparison to the small project type of developments.
Mr Viulu's invitation to "talk about positive development that can be sustained in the long run" and his assertion that "we dont need aid donors money" is contradictory. SI on its own is incapable of footing large infrastructure development both now and in the distant future. It depend on aid money for small projects, certainly it will need aid money for more advanced development to be sustained in the long run. Free Fee education is the pride of the government but who is footing the bill? Not the government. Development cetainly must come. Its when we want it, how we want it and what we want from it that must be considered with diligence. These will draw the line between success and failure.
30 years had passed us by and the nation is still on its posterior;no marked progress. We must accept to grow within our means which makes copycat development style futile for our progress. SI must choose its form of development that is suitable to meet the need of the people where it matters most. Development must not choose SI.
Development must not choose SI, SI must choose development
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this letter are those of Kristina Fidali-Hickie and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Solomon Times Online.
What do you think? Any Comments?
Comment here or write your own Letter to the Editor.
Disclaimer: Solomon Times Online may edit or delete your comment and cannot guarantee that all submissions will be published or remain online. The comments expressed on these page are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Solomon Times Online.