logo
Lowy report finds Pacific nations 'grappling with a tidal wave of debt repayments' to China

Lowy report finds Pacific nations 'grappling with a tidal wave of debt repayments' to China

RNZ News5 days ago

By foreign affairs reporter
Stephen Dziedzic
, ABC
China has lent money to Vanuatu financing new roads for its outer islands.
Photo:
Facebook / China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation
In short:
What's next?
New research shows that China has emerged as the world's largest creditor for developing nations, which are due to pay back at least $54 billion to Beijing this year.
Australian foreign policy think tank the Lowy Institute has crunched data from the World Bank and found some of the world's poorest countries are now
facing "record high debt payments" to China
.
China rapidly boosted investments in infrastructure last decade, funding railways, ports and roads across the developing world under its sprawling Belt and Road Initiative - projects which have often been welcomed by governments across Latin America, Africa, Central Asia and South-East Asia.
But the lending has also placed pressure on government balance sheets around the world.
Beijing has sharply pulled back lending in the last five to 10 years, but the Lowy Institute's Riley Duke said bills from earlier loans were now starting to land.
"China's earlier lending boom, combined with the structure of its loans, made a surge in debt servicing costs inevitable," Duke said.
"Because China's Belt and Road lending spree peaked in the mid-2010s, those grace periods began expiring in the early 2020s."
"It was always likely to be a crunch period for developing country repayments to China."
The problem has been exacerbated by China's move to defer debt repayments during the Covid-19 pandemic, a move which was "helpful at the time" but is now "heightening…the current repayment spike".
The picture painted by the report is incomplete, because China typically does not provide data for its loans, and information isn't available for many developed nations.
But Duke said it was obvious that developing countries - including in the Pacific - were now "grappling with a tidal wave of debt repayments and interest costs".
"Now, and for the rest of this decade, China will be more debt collector than banker to the developing world," he said.
"The high debt burden facing developing countries will hamper poverty reduction and slow development progress while stoking economic and political instability risks."
Six people were killed and much of the central business district of Tonga's capital Nukuʻalofa was destroyed in the 2006 riots.
Photo:
ABC / Supplied
Pacific nations like Tonga, Samoa and Vanuatu are already grappling with high levels of Chinese debt, and have been
pushing Beijing for extensions on their loans
.
For example,
Tonga borrowed heavily from China to rebuild in the wake of the devastating 2006 riots in Nuku'alofa
. It has now started gradually repaying loans worth around $190 million - a sum which Lowy says is roughly equivalent to a quarter of its GDP.
But those repayments - along with recent natural disasters - have placed significant strain on Tonga's budget, as well as stoking political controversy in the Pacific Island nation.
Australia has stepped in with significant financial support to help Tonga balance its books,
including an $85m budget support package unveiled earlier this year
.
The report says that while Chinese institutions are at times willing to push back repayment demands
, they've typically been unwilling to forgive debts - which means Beijing often faces a difficult diplomatic balancing act.
"Beijing faces a dilemma: pushing too hard for repayment could damage bilateral ties and undermine its diplomatic goals," Duke said.
"At the same time, China's lending arms, particularly its quasi-commercial institutions, face mounting pressure to recover outstanding debts."
The report said Beijing's preference to kick the can down the road could create new financial dynamics in a host of developing countries.
"As a result, China's approach to debt distress increasingly echoes the 'extend and pretend' practices of Western lenders during the 1980s Lost Decade - a period that left many low-income countries deeply indebted and ultimately required sweeping restructurings and write-downs in the 1990s."
China's foreign ministry denied Beijing was responsible for developing debt.
"China's cooperation on investment and financing with developing countries follows international practice, market principles, and the principle of debt sustainability," spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters on Tuesday, local time.
"A handful of countries are spreading the narrative that China is responsible for these countries' debt.
"However, they ignore the fact that multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors from developed countries are the main creditors of developing countries, and the primary source of debt repayment pressure. Lies cannot cover truth and people can tell right from wrong."
-
ABC

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Babies for sale: New Zealanders commissioning illegal surrogacy in Thailand
Babies for sale: New Zealanders commissioning illegal surrogacy in Thailand

RNZ News

time16 hours ago

  • RNZ News

Babies for sale: New Zealanders commissioning illegal surrogacy in Thailand

By Jeremy Wilkinson, Open Justice multimedia journalist of Oranga Tamariki has identified a trend where Kiwis are travelling to Thailand to commission illegal surrogacy arrangements. Photo: NZME / Paul Slater New Zealanders are travelling overseas to illegally commission surrogate babies from Thai women, and bringing them back home to adopt them despite opposition from Oranga Tamariki. It's a practice the agency has labelled a "concerning trend" and it said there had been five cases where surrogate parents have flouted international law to have children in recent years. In one of those cases a gay man paid a Thai fertility clinic worker to subvert the country's strict surrogacy laws, which prohibits foreigners from commissioning children from surrogate mothers. The man paid a "significant" sum of money, according to a Family Court ruling, to find a surrogate and then his sperm was used to fertilise a donor's egg. Once back in New Zealand, the man applied to the Family Court to adopt his son so he could be legally recognised as his father. Under the current legislation, which was written in 1955, every parent of a child born by surrogacy, whether the practice is illegal in the country of birth or not, must effectively adopt their own child even if they have a genetic link to them. This is because when the law was written more than 70 years ago lawmakers didn't foresee the advances in fertility medicine such as in vitro fertilisation. That legislation is currently before a select committee after the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill was first tabled before Parliament in 2022. The proposed law would effectively create a mechanism that accounts for these changes in science, technology and culture and mean that parents, lawyers and judges won't need to rely on a piece of legislation that was never intended to account for surrogacy. However, it's unlikely to change things for people who commission surrogacy arrangements in countries where it's illegal. They will still come under scrutiny from the courts when they attempt to bring their children back into New Zealand. It's a practice that Oranga Tamariki says is occurring more frequently, at least in Thailand, and there's a possibility New Zealanders desperate to have children will look further abroad to other countries as well. In the case of the gay man who paid a Thai surrogate, which made its way through the Family Court last year, Judge Belinda Pidwell noted that the law around surrogacy was complex and there was no statute in New Zealand to provide clarity. "A number of illegal steps or breaches of laws occurred in the creation of [the child]. However, he has now been born, and as a result, has the right to grow and thrive, to have a nationality, and the right to know and be cared for by his parent," her ruling reads. "The irregularities in his creation, or the sins of his father, should not be visited upon him." However, Oranga Tamariki objected to the adoption being granted by the courts, despite finding that the father was the only real parental option for the child and that, barring the illegal way in which the baby was created, he was an otherwise suitable parent. Lawyers for the agency tabled a report from a senior adviser in its Intercountry Adoption Team, which identified a "concerning trend where New Zealanders have engaged in surrogacy around involving Thai surrogates, despite the illegality". "The concern is if children born of illegal surrogacy arrangements are allowed entry into New Zealand, and their parentage is then endorsed by an adoption order, that could be seen as an endorsement of unlawful actions," the report read. Oranga Tamariki says the release of its report could cause diplomacy issues, but didn't give the courts any evidence about why. Photo: NZME / Supplied Oranga Tamariki refused to release the full report to NZME under the Official Information Act, and then opposed its release through the Family Court claiming that it could impact New Zealand's diplomatic relations with other countries. However, it didn't provide any evidence about that specific impact. Judge Pidwell recently released the full report to NZME, which outlines how there has been an increased demand for women to become surrogates, and this demand has caused an increase in the number of women being trafficked from countries where the practice has been banned. The report found that between 2015 and 2020 the agency wasn't aware of any evidence New Zealanders had been involved in these situations, but from 2020 it had encountered five cases where a commercial surrogacy arrangement had been commissioned by Kiwis involving Thai surrogates. Three of these cases have involved the transfer of the surrogate across international borders for the purpose of an embryo transfer. In the other two cases, the mothers were transferred to another country to give birth. "Not only do these emerging trends demonstrate New Zealanders are breaching and demonstrating disregard to Thailand's domestic laws, but there are also significant concerns about the risks these practices pose for the safety and wellbeing of surrogates and the children born via the arrangements," the report reads. "Whilst we have noticed these examples of illegal practices have occurred in Thailand, we are mindful to the possibility of surrogacies being commissioned in other countries where it is illegal and would place similar scrutiny on New Zealanders engaging in illegal surrogacy arrangements in any jurisdiction." In New Zealand there is currently no legal pathway for a surrogate child to obtain residency except via an exemption from the ministers of immigration or internal affairs, or through the antiquated Adoption Act. Oranga Tamariki receives referrals from commissioning parents, private lawyers or requests from the Family Court to complete reports under the Adoption Act, which assesses their suitability to adopt. Since international surrogacy was outlawed in Thailand in 2015, Oranga Tamariki as well as the Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Immigration New Zealand and the Department of Internal Affairs have all published advice for New Zealanders about the law change. Those agencies held a meeting in January 2024 to discuss the trend where New Zealand was flouting these rules. Then in May, Oranga Tamariki effected a policy to refuse to provide pre-court adoptive applicant assessments for people who commission surrogacy in a country where it is illegal. NZME asked Oranga Tamariki questions about whether it had liaised with the Thai Government about its concerns, about other countries where New Zealanders were commissioning illegal surrogacy and about its submissions to the new bill. New Zealand First MP and Children's Minister Karen Chhour says she hasn't received advice from Oranga Tamariki about the report. Photo: NZME / Mark Mitchell In an emailed statement the agency did not respond to those questions, instead noting that following an inter-agency meeting in 2024 Oranga Tamariki put in a formal policy to not support an immigration exemption for anyone commissioning an illegal surrogacy. "As outlined, we do not undertake any pre-court assessments of adoptive applicants who commission an international surrogacy in a country where it is illegal but will undertake such an assessment if we are required to do so by the court once an adoption application is received," the spokesperson said. "Oranga Tamariki has contributed along with other agencies to the review of surrogacy that has been led by the Ministry of Justice. "Through the course of that work, discussions were held about the issue of illegal surrogacy actions." A spokesperson for the Minister for Children, Karen Chhour, confirmed her office had not received any reports or advice from Oranga Tamariki about the illegal surrogacy its staff had identified. The Thai Embassy in Wellington did not respond to questions about whether it had seen the report, and was concerned by it. Domestic surrogacy, where someone volunteers to carry a baby for someone else, is legal in New Zealand, as long as no money changes hands. However, there's also no legal pathway to enforce this arrangement meaning that if the birth mother wants to keep the child, she can. If in vitro fertilisation needs to be done to get a surrogate pregnant then it has to be approved by the Ethics on Human Assisted Reproductive Technology committee (ECART). Oranga Tamariki will also assess the intended parents for their suitability. According to official information released by Oranga Tamariki there were 89 domestic surrogacy adoptions in New Zealand between 2020 and 2024, and over the same period there were 69 from international surrogacy arrangements. Barrister Margaret Casey, KC, says not much will change under proposed new legislation when it comes to illegal surrogacy. Photo: NZME / Supplied Margaret Casey, KC, is one of three legal experts who assist with surrogacy arrangements in New Zealand and told NZME under the new proposed surrogacy law, people would no longer have to adopt their own genetic children, rather it would become a parenting order. "The courts will still be juggling the same kinds of issues, it will just be through a different lens," she said. "Illegal surrogacies will still come before the court, and the court will still look at the background and make a decision about whether or not when you balance it all out it can make a parentage order." In terms of illegal surrogacy, Casey said not much would change under the new legislation, and there were already checks and balances in place that served to disincentivise people deliberately pursuing illegal arrangements. "You may not get to live where you want or with your child for a long time, you may have to give detailed evidence at a court hearing, be subject of further reports from Oranga Tamariki ... you will live in this state of uncertainty and probably panic for a long period of time," she said. In all five cases in recent years where New Zealanders have commissioned babies in Thailand, the New Zealanders who had paid a surrogate claimed that they didn't know it was illegal, despite clear advice from agencies in New Zealand to the contrary. Casey said this was likely born from optimism, rather than wilful blindness. "People are paying too much attention to the process of creating the baby and not concentrating on whether they can bring the child home and how long it will take, and is there anything I'm doing that will be a problem," she said. "Do your research and ask questions. If you don't do that and rely on an agency whose business is reproductive optimism, then you might not look as deeply as you should." Associate Minister for Justice Nicole McKee said the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill won't prevent people from seeking illegal surrogacies abroad. "It will expressly enable the Family Court to scrutinise these arrangements. The court will be able to consider whether it is in the surrogate-born child's best interests for the intended parents to become the child's legal parents," she said in a statement. Another expert in New Zealand surrogacy law is Jennifer Wademan, who agreed that in her experience there's nothing Machiavellian in parents seeking out illegal surrogacy. "I've never come across a case where someone has had the knowledge that it is illegal and still gone ahead. We simply point them in a direction where people can do it legally," she said. Wademan said she primarily gets two kinds of clients; those who work with her from the start, and those who only come to her once they realise their baby's foreign birth certificate won't get them through the border in New Zealand. "By the time these families are turning to international surrogacies they've been through hell and back and their desire to have a child is so great, it's optimism rather than deliberate avoidance of research," Wademan said. "I think for many it's putting the blinkers on. As human beings we can all understand that." As for Oranga Tamariki identifying cases of this happening, Wademan said that while the numbers might appear small, a spike of five is quite significant in the world of international surrogacy. "It's enough for me to go, hmm, I don't like that," she said. In terms of the proposed law change, Wademan doesn't see it changing much in the way of illegal surrogacy, but for domestic parents she predicts it will change the landscape altogether for an area of law that is particularly ad hoc. "Every day we get a new challenge," she said, "We're having to be innovative about legislative process about science and culture because our legislation doesn't provide for it. "The international landscape will always be more complex because we're dealing with another country's laws that we have no control over. "At the end of the day, these are overwhelmingly New Zealanders who just want to be parents so badly." -This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .

Covid-19: New wave could be coming after 11-month reprieve
Covid-19: New wave could be coming after 11-month reprieve

RNZ News

time2 days ago

  • RNZ News

Covid-19: New wave could be coming after 11-month reprieve

Professor Michael Baker says the new NB.1.8.1 is becoming dominant in a number of countries and would "almost certainly" do the same in New Zealand. Photo: Supplied to RNZ A sudden surge in Covid-19 detections - along with the emergence of a new, and what's thought to be more infectious, subvariant - should be a warning to take action, an epidemiologist says. NB.1.8.1 is now the dominant strain in China and Hong Kong. ABC News reports it is also driving up infections in Australia. Here, the latest available ESR wastewater testing to 11 May shows the sub-variant making up 21.6 percent of readings. Epidemiologist Michael Baker said it comes as overall Covid-19 detections surge . "We've had a long period when Covid levels have been relatively low in New Zealand. It's about 11 months since our last big wave, the sixth wave, in June last year." Baker said there were numerous surveillance systems giving an idea of how the virus was spreading, and most were not showing changes. However that was not the case for wastewater testing. "There's quite a striking spike in the wastewater samples and the positivity detected there. And numbers are really shooting up across the country, so for the first time in around 11 months we're seeing what looks like the beginning of a wave." Wastewater testing reveals a spike in Covid-19 cases nationally. Photo: Supplied / ESR Baker cautioned it was too early to see a clear picture and further results over the next week or two would help. "But I think it is a strong warning that we should be taking more action around Covid-19 in various ways." Baker said NB.1.8.1 was becoming dominant in a number of countries and it would "almost certainly" do the same in New Zealand. "We see many new subvariants and most of the time they're not translating at the moment into a rise in cases. "But that's why this one is different - we are seeing that early increase, but we're not seeing it in all the surveillance systems yet, so we just need to keep watching. "I think the message is very clear that we're moving into winter, we have got this rise in cases - and if anyone has been putting off getting their Covid-19 booster, now would be a good time to get it." Baker said health authorities should also be taking additional precautions in hospitals, residential care facilities in particular. He said the existing vaccine gave added protection against the new subvariant, which descended from a variant the vaccine is based on. "I think it's all adding up to a picture of the need to take precautions against this infection." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

Couple owes $20,000 Working for Families debt 'through no fault of our own'
Couple owes $20,000 Working for Families debt 'through no fault of our own'

RNZ News

time3 days ago

  • RNZ News

Couple owes $20,000 Working for Families debt 'through no fault of our own'

Just a quarter of 'squared up' Working for Families recipients are getting the right amount. Photo: RNZ Phoenix Ruka says he and his wife owe about $18,000 to $20,000 in Working for Families debt, despite always doing their best to ensure that they supplied the correct details about their income and circumstances. "We've always stayed up-to-date with my salary and what we received from them and updated my salary every time it went up and down," Ruka said. "What were receiving was what they assured us we were entitled to. But then we got a massive bill saying they had overpaid us." He said his wife had been "relentless" in trying to work out what had happened. It was discovered that a couple of years they had been underpaid, by many thousands of dollars, which they were reimbursed, but one year they were paid too much, which left them with the debt. "I think the really frustrating part is that it's through no fault of our own. We owe a substantial amount of money. Now they're taking $350 a fortnight out of our bank account," Ruka said. "We've gone back and forth and shown them our expenses, that we actually can't afford the amount they're taking. We've shown them our bills, our mortgage - they told us that they can't keep taking money if we can't afford it but we can't." He said there had been multiple times where the money that was being taken to repay the debt was all that was left in their bank account. It's an issue the government is attempting to tackle with proposed changes to the way that income is assessed for Working for Families. As part of the Budget, it was announced that the threshold at which entitlements start to abate was to be increased slightly, and the government would look at options to help avoid the issue of Working for Families debt. Inland Revenue's discussion document said 85 percent of Working for Families households received their payments weekly or fortnightly during the 2022 tax year, based on an income estimate. Only 15 percent were receiving their credits annual based on the family's actual income once income tax had been assessed. Those who were being paid weekly or fortnightly were subject to an end of year "square up" process by Inland Revenue, the document noted, although they were expected to update IRD with any relevant changes during the year. In the 2022 year, only 24 percent of households receiving weekly or fortnightly payments and squared up by IRD had received the right amount of Working for Families credits. Those who were overpaid are left with a debt to repay. The document said debt was a particular problem for low- and middle-income families because it reduced their ability to meet their day to day costs in the future. "Debt undermines the intent of the Working for Families scheme to support low to middle income families to meet basic needs and incentivise work." The amount owed by Working for Families recipients has been steadily increasing over the years. The document noted that in June 2024, 56,800 accounted for $273.5 million of Working for Families debt. There were 21,418 instalment arrangements in place to clear $50 million of debt. "Having to estimate annual income in advance is the most common reason why families do not receive the right amount during the year," the document said. "For many families, estimating yearly income is difficult to do with any accuracy. Under the current income estimation model, families can still be overpaid when their income increases unexpectedly. For example, something as simple as a promotion or starting a new job towards the end of the year could cancel out their Working for Families entitlement and leave them in debt." But the document said assessing people's income very regularly could mean a lot of changes in what people received. If someone was paid fortnightly, some months could have two paydays and some three. Someone who was paid every four weeks would occasionally be paid twice in one month. "Families would need to check in more often to report or confirm their income so that Inland Revenue can recalculate their payments. This would mean an increase in time spent interacting with Inland Revenue and its systems. This could also mean payments would vary every week or month, making it harder for families to budget and plan." The discussion document said the government's current thinking was that a quarterly assessment could strike the right balance between responsiveness, certainty and recipient effort. It was seeking feedback on the idea. The government also suggests a shift from calculating a recipient's Working for Families on the recipient's estimate of future income over the coming year to basing the calculation on past income they actually received. This would help to prevent people going into debt. It is also proposing to simplify the residence criteria for Working for Families and require both caregivers and children to be physically present in New Zealand to qualify. Susan St John, associate professor at the University of Auckland and Child Poverty Action Group spokesperson, said she thought the review was limited. "There are huge difficulties for self-employed in more regular assessment. For income that is not earned regularly it can cause volatility and add to the admin or compliance load. There are other ways - in Australia they hold a portion back until the end of the year." She said the review did not address the problems of Working for Families in a meaningful way. "They arise because the threshold is way too low and the rates of clawback way too high." She said the scheme was confusing with the different types of credits available, and the poorest 200,000 were excluded from the full package, missing out on about $5000 a year. Revenue Minister Simon Watts said the government knew that it could be distressing to have debt to Inland Revenue. "We are interested in what people think of the proposals." Another woman, Amy says she's still paying off the $12,000 in Working for Families debt she was landed with three years ago, amid a messy divorce. She and her husband were shareholders in a business and, she says, he incorrectly reported some of the business profit as income in her name. That prompted the government to think she had been overpaid credit and she was landed with a bill. She now can only receive $172 a week in Working for Families credits for her three children because she is paying back the debt. She is a single parent also paying a mortgage. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store