News and Comments Tuesday 5 February 2013

WHAT IS TRUE? "Okay, I ask you if any of this is true. How can you know? I haven't given you enough information even to ask better, more sensible, more meaningful questions. The better question is, 'Having heard what I told you ... is it likely to be true?' Let me suggest these categories: true, untrue, likely to be true, unlikely to be true, and, there isn't enough known to answer likely or unlikely." --Elliot Perlman, The Street Sweeper.

NO SURPRISES ON MILITARY.  PM Bainimarama has  reconfirmed that the RFMF will be represented in the Constituent Assembly  and hinted that the military's submission, ignored by the Constitution Commission, has been considered in the new draft constitution. This should  not, however, be taken to mean that the military has political aspirations.  Land Force Commander Colonel Mosese Tikoitoga  says the military as an institution will not support any political party "even if  Prime Minister and Army Commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama decides to form a party."  But soldiers can "vote for any parties they would want to vote for ...and if military people want to contest elections they will do so like any other political party."

"THE MEDDLESOME PRIEST."  NZ Truth editor Cameron "Whaleoil" Slater got a number of things wrong in the recent Fiji Sun article on Michael Field and Fr Barr. I agree totally with his criticism of journalist Michael Field's selective biases, the uncritical "baton-passing" of Field's writings on Fiji by other overseas journalists, and the role of the blog Coup4.5 in disseminating biased and incorrect information about Fiji.    I'd also go along with his reliance on Graham Davis as a reasoned commentator on Fiji but I'd also say that Graham is unashamedly pro-Bainimarama and, like Slater himself, politically right wing which could have influenced their judgement on the left-leaning Fr Barr.

But I  cannot agree with their argument that Fr Barr's work permit was  revoked because of his repeated breaches of his work permit. Slater writes: "Father Barr is an Australian in Fiji on a religious permit which allows him to work for the church and in certain other activities. It does not, however, allow him to engage in politics, something he appears to have forgotten recently with political statements concerning the minimum wage and certain decrees such as the Essential Industries Decree."

It all depends on what you mean by politics, of course, but where has Cameron been for the past 32 years while Fr Barr was writing and working on political issues such  as social justice, fair wages, affordable housing, and empowerment of the poor?  Not to mention his participation in and support for the People's Charter and as the government-appointed chairperson of the Wages Council? Were these not political?  If Fr Barr  has been troublesome and meddlesome, as Cameron  says. then it must have escaped the attention of successive governments for the past 32 years.  Until now. 

Cameron also seems to suggest Fr Barr has no right to speak because he has not taken up Fiji citizenship, but he failed to note that until recently dual citizenship was not possible.  (By the same logic, Fiji-born Cameron, now a NZ citizen, has surely disqualified himself from speaking on Fiji.)

As for his assertion that non-citizens, and especially churchmen, would not be allowed to take part in politics in New Zealand, this is nonsense. My Mother voted in every election for over fifty years and never took up citizenship or applied for permanent residence. And NZ church leaders have been constantly engaged in the very same social issues that have been deemed political in Fr Barr's case. Think Rev Charles Waldegrave QSO, or Archbishop Sir Paul Reeves. 

The whole affair should be put behind us. I am disappointed the Fiji Sun published the article. It only added to the misinformation.  Fr Barr has apologized and the PM seems to have accepted the apology.  We should move on.

CHRISTIAN STATE: NOT AGAIN. On Sunday the new president of the Methodist Church, Rev. Tuikilaila Waqairatu, delivered a sermon  reiterating his support for Fiji to become a Christian state. The call comes as a surprise given that only a week earlier the church said it sought to improve relations with government and government's "non-negotiable" position  that Fiji will be a secular state will be no special preference for any religion.  Equally  surprising is that he chose to deliver the sermon, not to iTaukei whose tradition calls for the unity of vanua. lotu and matanitu (hence the many submissions to the Constitution Commission by villagers calling for a Christian state) but to the Indian Methodist Circuit at the Dudley Church in Toorak.  Unsurprisingly, some church members raised concerns on how Rev Waqairatu had used the pulpit to push through his political views on a Christian State. Early on Monday Rev Waqairatu told Fiji Village he would be making a public statement to explain his position but by the afternoon he had changed his mind and refused to comment.   

SPEIGHT COUP PLOTTER FEARS FOR HIS LIFE. Maciu Navakasuasua, who was involved in the planning and execution of the the 2000 Speight Coup, and who subsequently imprisoned  for three years. has been told he cannot live in Australia and has to return home. The Australian government has denied an application for a protection visa for the whistleblower. Navakasuasua, who works in a mining company as an explosive expert under the name Maciu Naqari, said he feared for his life if he returned home. Navakasuasua expressed disappointment over the decision, saying he was a genuine applicant whose life had been threatened by the 2000 coup supporters in Fiji."The whole of Fiji knows I was involved in the May 19, 2000, coup, and that I was incarcerated on Nukulau for my involvement. Unlike those who are coming to Australia from Fiji and applying for protection, they don't have a life-threatening situation back home compared to what I've gone through and experienced," he said."Failed politicians and businessmen have a gang ready to slit my throat if I ever return home. I can't go home for my life is in danger and my safety is not guaranteed."

Minister for Immigration Joketani Cokanasiga said: "If he is genuine, the government will see how he can be protected."

MASI MOTIFS. A petition is circulating to prevent Air Pacific trademarking/copyrighting 15 traditional masi (tapa) designs. The Fiji Women's Rights Movement is one of the organizations opposed to the Air Pacific action.

EMMANUEL METHODISTS.  A small "branch" of the Methodist Church wants the Bainimarama Government to continue in power after the 2014 election.

REPUTABLE AND DISREPUTABLE JOURNALISM.  Anyone with any knowledge of journalism education in the Pacific knows Prof David Robie's impeccable reputation earned over  many years in PNG, New Caledonia and Fjii. Anyone with any knowledge of the the recent dismissal of Canadian Dr Marc Edge from the USP journalism programme and his hasty departure from Fiji will know something of the chaos he created in his short tenure.  He is still at it, promoting himself on his personal blog and on the anti-government blogs.  Almost all his writings start and finish with "I" with something about democracy sandwiched in between.  I've blocked his personal and vindictive comments on this blog and have otherwise have tried to stay out of the picture.

But I think this article by David Robie  on vendetta journalism and Marc Edge's reply worth publishing, despite Edge's obvious errors of fact. Further exchanges may be found on these links: Edge  
and for Robie Cafe Pacific  and Cafe Pacific.

Robie is also  the author of the bookMekim Nius: South Pacific media, politics and education (USP Book Centre, 2004) which gives a history of journalism education in the Pacific, especially Fiji, and the impact of politics and political intrigue.    He was the head of journalism at the University of Papua New Guinea and the the University of the South Pacific (Fiji) for a decade.

This item is for your information only and does not invite further comment.

Read More

News and Comments Monday 4 February 2013

"A rose by any other name..."?

THE "NEW" SDL, RO TEIMUMU  AND MICK BEDDOES.  The acronym stays the same but the old SDL is now the Social Democratic Liberal Party and its patron is still Ro Teimumu Kepa whose Constitution Commission submission wanted the 1997 Constitution, Senate and the Great Council of Chiefs reinstated,  Fiji to reaffirm itself as Christian, no immunity for Bainimarama, and further protection for the "indigenous way of life."  Mick Beddoes, having dissolved the UPP, is now applying for membership. He thinks his experience in politics will help the SDL should they choose him as a candidate in the 2014 election.

CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY.  With Government's release of its changes to the Ghai draft constitution already  late, people are asking whether invitations  to participate in the Assembly will also be late, and, more importantly, whether the deadline for the acceptance of the constitution will provide sufficient time for full and proper discussion.

The draft is reported to be in its final stages and is expected to be presented the Constituent Assembly when it meets.  The PM told the Fiji Sun, “The Constituent Assembly is to have its first sitting in February 2013. We expect, as announced last year, that a new Constitution should be in place by March of this year.”  But when in February, the 14th as earlier stated, and when in March? And who will be invited to be members of the Assembly?

WORLD INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN 2014 ELECTIONS. Government has invited the global community to participate in preparations for the 2014 general election.  A letter has been sent to the heads of all diplomatic missions in Fiji by the Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, laying out a timetable for election preparations and inviting them to take part. The letter has also been sent to a range of multilateral agencies such as the United Nations Development Program, the Asian Development Bank, the International Labour Organisation and the Pacific Forum.

Government has allocated $11.4 million dollars in the 2013 Budget for election preparations, including voter registration within Fiji and abroad, the recruitment of key personnel and the purchase of election materials such as ballot boxes.

Areas in which the global community can immediately participate include:  planning the administration and logistics for the election, assessing the technical requirements of holding the poll and funding such things as the printing of ballot papers and voter lists.  In the second quarter (April-June)  Fiji invites participation to draft the rules and regulations for the election and also begin a programme of civil education and awareness to educate Fijians on the new electoral system. In the third quarter (July-September) the supply of election materials will commence. Expressions of Interest have been advertised for qualified companies to supply a range of items and advertisements are also being commissioned by Fiji’s diplomatic missions abroad.

Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said, "These preparations are for the first parliamentary elections ever conducted on the basis of one person, one vote, one value. We have a lot of ground to cover and we need the best possible preparations now to ensure a transparent process and state of preparedness. We need proper systems to guard against fraud and protect the integrity of the new parliament.”

EU WEIGHING OPTIONS. While France has supported Fiji's dialogue process, a Cook Island opposition MP says sanctions should be increased, and Charge d'affaires for the EU delegation in the Pacific, Johnny Engell-Hansen, has told Radio Australia the EU is weighing its options regarding financial support to Fiji for election-related purposes.

"I'm not sure that I'd say we've lost faith, but we are a little bit confused by what's actually going on right now," he said. "We see various developments and we hear various statements, and what we would really like to be reassured of is that the process is on track, and that there is an irreversible process that will lead to those free and fair elections by 2014."

Fr BARR: THE PM RECONSIDERS. "Following representations made to me, I have reviewed and reversed the decision made by the Minister of Immigration to cancel the work permit for Kevin Barr. Father Barr is free to remain in the country until his work permit has expired which at that time will still be subject to assessment for renewal following the necessary protocols." -- JV Bainimarama, Prime Minister.

MICHAEL FIELD GETS IT WRONG AGAIN.  Does he do this on purpose or is he just a sloppy journalist? He reported that Fr Barr sought refuge in the Australian High Commission and, that when he rung him, Fr Barr said he could not talk just now, inferring some sort of duress.

Fr Barr, however, has informed me that  he had merely gone to the HighCom to inform them about what was happening,  and he "could not talk" just then because he had just got home and Field had caught him unprepared.

HUMAN TRAFFICKERS JAILED.  High Court judge Justice Paul Madigan. sentenced four foreigners to between five and ten years imprisonment for human trafficking. The four facilitated the travel of three Thai women into Fiji in early September last year on the pretext that they were to work as masseurs but after arrival they were forced into prostitution.

Justice Madigan said: “If a robust prison sentence is needed in order to send a clear warning message to would be offenders then so be it.” He said invading an overseas country with drugs and criminal activity was a breach of international protocol and relationships.

Meanwhile, the Director of Public Prosecutions Christopher Pryde said that the sentence given sent a strong message to would-be offenders.“This is Fiji’s second successful prosecution of a human trafficking ring since the Fijian Government brought in the Crimes Decree in 2009 which created specific offences of human trafficking,” he said. “The sentence handed down today sends a very strong message to people who would engage in this type of offending.”

ALLEN LOCKINGTON WRITES. Latin and French were two languages taught in schools back in the old days. I don’t know how it benefited those who studied it, but just imagine if Hindi and the iTaukei languages had been taught back then. I’m pretty sure we would have benefited so much culturally and we would have better understanding of each others ways of life.

Read More

CCF Wants Budget Transparency

Media Release, Citizens’ Constitutional Forum Limited, 1st February 2013

Open Budget Survey a Wakeup Call for Government 

The CCF maintains its call for government to practice Transparency and Accountability on the back of a poor 2012 Open Budget Survey rating released yesterday.

Authorities on Good Governance ESCAP define Transparency as decisions taken and their enforcement being done in a manner that follows rules and regulations. It also means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions. This definition includes openness of the decision-making and enforcement processes as well as access to and distribution of information.

The Citizens’ Constitutional Forum reiterates its calls on the Bainimarama government to initiate urgent steps to make public the Auditor General’s reports and reports from the Public Accounts Committee available to the people of Fiji.

The recently released assessment by the Independent Open Budget Survey 2012 (OBS) shows that Fiji scored 6 out of 100. Our index rating, lower even than China’s 11, defines Fiji as providing “scant or no information” to the public in the budget documents.

CCF CEO Rev. Akuila Yabaki says taxpayers remain in the dark on how their money has been spent by the Bainimarama government since 2006. This in itself goes against Pillars 3, 4 and 5 of the Peoples Charter which demands greater transparency and accountability from the government in dealing with public funds.

CCF urges the Bainimarama government to take on board the findings and recommendations of the OBS and allow public access to its financial documents and audits which are currently only for internal use within government bodies.

In the absence of Parliament there’s even greater onus on the part of Government to make this information available as it is a fundamental principle of Good Governance.

For further information, please contact the communications team at CCF on communications@ccf.org.fj

Read More

Lockington's Everyday Fiji ... Life Goes On

                                 Slipping Away

 There was so much hype with this being the best 7s team and that they were well prepared. Just after all the praise and the reality that Gordon Tietjens and the Australians bought their teams to learn from us.

Anyway, what could have gone wrong with the boys, are they not listening to the coach? We see that they don’t seem to have a game plan and played individually. They didn’t seem to gel as a good team should. Where did all the goodness that was evident in the Uprising Sevens go? We have been falling lower and lower in performance on the international scene, now we will play the bowl for the first time ever, somewhere we should never be seen. I’m glad that there is nothing like the wooden spoon to contest, because we could even fall that way, because its not impossible.

But the boys have done what they possibly could do and like Africa we are slipping away. But I congratulate the other teams that have grown from strength to strength and now sit where we once sat.

And to all the coaches and team management, please don’t shoot your mouths off before we play and make no predictions because times have changed and rugby is now played scientifically and not with just brawn.

Oh how I long for the days when the Nabua team made up the bulk of the Fiji team, they played with class and flair and were a joy to watch.

Allen Lockington is a self-employed customs agent and business consultant who has regular articles published in Fiji. I thank Allen for permission to reprint some of them in this political blog. They remind us that life goes on, whatever the political situation. And it's good to know that.

Read More

Politics, the Reforms and the Economy

Pacific Scoop: Analysis – By Professor Biman Prasad in Suva

Fiji government budgets since 1987 have been prepared in the shadows of political instability and suspicion, coups, and uncertainty of the future. Even General Elections held under the 1997 Constitution, which was based on power-sharing, failed to fully allay the concerns. The People’s Coalition’s 2000 budget was implemented against the backdrop of rumours about another coup and continued protests by the ethno-nationalists.

There is no doubt that the last seven budgets since 2006, including the revised 2007 budget, have been prepared against an environment of dominated by fear, mistrust and uncertainty of the future.
In delivering the 2008 budget, the then Interim Finance Minister, Mahendra Pal Chaudhry, blamed the SDL government of mismanaging the economy and claimed that the country was on the verge of bankruptcy.

This may have been an exaggeration, even though the situation wasn’t rosy. Since the 2000 coup political instability continued to be an issue.N Even after the 2001 General Election, investment levels did not increase.

Economic growth
Between 2006 and 2010 the Fiji economy grew by a mere 0.1 percent. In 2011, the growth rate improved to 1.9 percent. The projection for 2012 has already been revised two times: first, it was revised upward to 2.7% and then revised downward to 2.5 percent.

The initial forecast to 2.7 percent was misplaced as it was done soon after the devastating floods in the early part of 2012. The forecasts for 2013 and 2014 make sense but the big unknown is how the political climate will change in 2013 and 2014.

The current constitutional consultations and the preparation of the new Constitution, if followed through, would be positive, especially if plans for 2014 elections are fully transparent and on-track.
This will boost confidence and we may be able to achieve growth rates of more than 2 percent in 2013 and 2014. What is clear from GDP figures in the last 6 years is that almost all productive sector contributions to GDP have declined.

The 2012 budget has had some radical measures and this involved reductions in corporate tax and income tax. In many ways it was a bold budget.

It tried to radically change the fiscal policy environment by providing incentives for consumers to spend more and investors to invest more. In my previous comments on the 2012 budget I had stated that while it is a bold budget, its effectiveness will depend on the level of confidence that will be generated in the economy through steps taken towards democratic elections.

The formation of the Constitutional Commission did help but the skirmishes with the commission and the government because of decrees restricting transparency of the work of the commission may have discredited the process somewhat.

The uncertainty in 2012 as a result of the differing views of the commission and the government may have dampened the spirit of consumers and investors.

It is therefore not surprising that growth rate for 2012 has been revised downwards to 2.5 percent; however, given the poor performance of the productive sectors such as agriculture, sugar and forestry we could end up with a growth rate for 2012 at less than 2 percent.

Key focus
One of the key thrusts of the 2013 budget is the continuation of incentives for investment. However, it must be noted that despite the significant incentives, the overall level of investment remains below 20 percent of GDP. More disconcerting is the persistent low levels of private sector investment.

From as high as 14 percent of GDP in the early 1980s, it has now declined to only 4 percent. The media hype about investment approvals and to some extent selected government propaganda about investment does not reveal the true state of investment levels in Fiji.

The registration and approval of investment proposals does not necessarily imply its implementation. Figures show that over the past few years registered investments have not translated into actual investments.

The reason for poor private sector investment remains mired into poor institutional process. Too much control and inconsistency of policies and incentives have created uncertainty.

While the work of the Commerce Commission is important for addressing prices issues for the vulnerable and poor, it is not necessarily the best way to deal with the impact on poor.

The lack of transparency and the unpredictability of the price control system have created more uncertainty and confusion and have probably increased the cost of doing business in Fiji.
In fact, in 2011, the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Survey shows that Fiji’s ranking has gone down and is lower than Samoa and Tonga. Government needs to further concentrate on improving the business environment by applying rules and policies in a transparent and predictable manner.
The 2013 budget is again bold and has built on the direction set by the 2012 budget. I am particularly encouraged by the emphasis of the budget on capital expenditure and a focus on roads.

The deterioration in the infrastructure in the last 25 years has been phenomenal and it has become one of the binding constraints for investment in Fiji apart from the sustained political uncertainty. The infrastructure deficit has to be addressed and the increase in the deficit to 2.8 percent in the  2013 budget to address infrastructure bottlenecks is not necessarily worrisome immediately.

If the spending on roads and other infrastructure is managed well and improved in the next two years, then we would be setting up a very good foundation for growth beyond 2014, especially if promised elections are held.

However, the total debt level has to be scrutinised carefully so that it does not become unsustainable. The present debt level will have to be gradually brought down in the next few years so that there is enough fiscal space to counter any global risks emanating from the global economic slowdown.

There are other positive aspects of the budget where expenditure on health, education, social welfare, pension for those over 70 years is going to have a positive impact on improving the quality of life of people.

The health sector particularly needs urgent attention and we hope that the increase in the budget is used to improve the conditions of the hospitals around Fiji and the services it provides. The condition at the CWM Hospital for example is depressing. It has filthy toilets and dirty floors, and services at the hospitals are getting worse by the day.

A 70-year-old woman who suffered a stroke was left in the corridors of the CWM hospital in Suva without any care for almost a day. Expenditure allocation therefore alone does not mean that services to the poor are going to improve.

It depends on how the respective ministers, their permanent secretaries and senior civil servants are able to implement and spend funds wisely to improve the services.

In my view the biggest hurdle for the government to achieve better delivery of public services is hampered by ineffective ministers and senior civil servants.

Addressing unemployment and poverty
 The biggest cause for concern is the low level of employment generation in Fiji over the last several years. Close to 40 percent of those employed are in the informal sector, where wages are very low.

While the 2013 budget has increased the tax threshold, it is not going to address the concerns of those employed in the informal sector and in some of the lower paid private sectors. The failure of the wages council to address the appropriate wage rise for those workers in those sectors will continue to keep many families in the poverty trap.

The immediate prospect for employment looks bleak. The National Employment Centre (NEC) data shows that since 2010 a total number of 25,801 unemployed persons have registered but only a small number of close to 1,400 have been able to secure full time employment.

One area where government has concentrated recently is to ensure that our unemployed and especially those with skills would be able to find employment in other countries and this is commendable. The recent Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) agreement on labour mobility relating to skilled workers may provide some cushion.

Remittances contribute close to about F$300 million to the Fijian economy and this is only second to tourism. Fiji has lost out on seasonal workers scheme in New Zealand as a result of the 2006 coup. One hopes that after the General Election, Fijian unskilled workers would be able to get employment in New Zealand.

To make matters worse for these unemployed and low income categories of families, inflation has been hitting them hard. Between 2006 and 2010 the average inflation rate has been around 5 percent.
In 2008, 2009 and 2010, mainly due to high fuel and food prices and devaluation of the Fiji dollar in 2009, inflation rate was close to 8 percent.

In 2010 and 2011, the inflation rate remained high while it is predicted to be lower in 2012. Government may not be able to keep inflation down through price control as the causes of inflation are either imported or driven by domestic supply and demand conditions and import duties.

For example, the increase in duties on milk products appears to be inconsistent with the overall thrust of the government export-oriented strategy for growth. The high import duty imposed on imports could lead to significant costs to consumers of milk products as more than 80 percent of milk products are imported.

While, it is laudable that government is supporting dairy development in Fiji, it should not do so through high import duties. This is only going to help increase private profits at the expense of the consumers.
The tax free incentive for dairy investment and direct support to farmers should be the approach adopted to develop the industry instead of high import duties on milk products.

It is worrisome that imported milk products for infants will become very expansive and unaffordable to the poor families. Government should re-look at the high import duties on milk products.

Support to productive sectors
The support to the rural agricultural sector makes sense as poverty levels are now higher in the rural areas. The allocations for export promotion in the agriculture sector, new crop extension programme, livestock extension programme, allocations for research programme and drainage programme are welcomed and should be increased in future budgets.

The allocation to the sugar of $13 million is welcome but it is not clear how much of that will go directly to the farmers apart from the $0.5 million for cane replanting programme. The sugar industry will need additional injection and direct support to farmers to bring back the confidence in the industry and keep productive and experienced farmers on the land.

Future prospects
As indicated earlier, the economic growth rates have been less than 1 percent in the last five years. While the projections for 2012-2014 show a growth rate of more than 2 percent, they would not be achieved if the enabling environment for investment through building political certainty and credibility are not improved.

We know that despite the significant financial incentives, private sector investment has remained very poor.  This has resulted in high levels of unemployment in the economy. The 2013 budget has some very positive elements like the focus on improving physical infrastructure and supporting productive sectors to improve production and exports.

However, there remain several challenges like reducing the cost of doing business in Fiji through institutional transparency, accountability and good governance.

The government should seriously consider removing some of the decrees and limiting the development of new decrees as these do not promote confidence in the economy. Government should continue with other important structural reforms.

These reforms should continue to ensure that the civil service is productive and effective, introduce further competition in the telecommunications sector and continue to reform the sugar industry.
Confidence in the country will continue to grow if the constitutional process is seen to its logical conclusion through an inclusive and transparent process. This will improve the prospects for further private sector investment and the 2013 budget will lay the foundation for better growth in 2013 and beyond.

Dr Biman Prasad is Professor of Economics at the University of the South Pacific and the views expressed here are not those of his employer.

Read More

Australia and Fiji by Richard Herr

Why Carr needs the velvet glove more than the iron fist

31 Jan 2013

By Richard Herr

On my flight home from Fiji recently, I was struck by the continuing negativism of the arguments regarding Australian relations with Fiji. Rowan Callick’s commentary in the Weekend Australian is another example of a tough line on Fiji without any positive proposals. The one element of novelty in Callick’s piece, however, is the suggestion that Carr’s ‘soft’ approach toward the Government of Commodore Voreqe (‘Frank’) Bainimarama is the reason why Fiji has slipped the leash and gone feral recently. But this belies the evidence of the past six years. When has the Bainimarama Government ever been on an Australian leash or even responded positively to pressure from Canberra?

Having viewed the changing events in Fiji fairly closely in a variety of roles over the past six years, I find it difficult to see how the tactics that have failed to have any influence on the course of Fiji’s return to democracy since the December 2006 military coup will work in the 18 months before Fiji is due to go to elections. And this view has been bolstered by a week in Suva talking with a range of people that included participants in the constitutional process, current and former members of Government and academics. More of the same intransigence simply will not to produce a different outcome.

The Bainimarama Government has neither deviated from the roadmap’s timing for the return to democracy that it announced in July 2009 and nor has it altered this timetable since Bob Carr became Foreign Minister. Still, it’s a welcome development that Carr apparently has accepted this—albeit at a fairly low level—but it’s far too late to have the sort of influence that was on offer at the beginning of 2008.


The deepening frustration with Canberra since July 2009 comes from seeing Australian Governments refusing to set incremental steps for returning to a balanced relationship; of being obdurate even to the point of reneging on an agreement. Fiji’s lifting of censorship rules, withdrawal of the public emergency regulations, registering of voters and starting of the constitutional process have all been greeted with ‘not enough’ from Canberra.

The Bainimarama Government nevertheless expected some improvement in relations after the July 2012 tripartite agreement between Australia, Fiji and New Zealand to restore High Commissioners and relax some visa sanctions. However, to its genuine disappointment, many in Government in Suva saw little real change. They smile wryly at Australian critics who interpreted Carr’s expression of understanding over some of the complexities of the drafting of a new constitution as example of unwarranted appeasement.
Understanding scarcely constitutes undeserved compassion in a sanctions regime against Fiji which includes elements that, arguably, would be illegal if applied domestically—such as those against family members of targeted officials. Indeed, within the Fiji Government, the travel sanctions against it are claimed to be more extensive than even those against Mugabe at his worst. Yet, for all their severity, the critics can’t point to a single positive instance where these sanctions have hastened the return to democracy in Fiji by so much as a day.

Seen from the Suva perspective, there hasn’t been a skerrick of public encouragement to mark the passing of the roadmap’s milestones to elections. The most recent disappointment was the denial of a visa to Aisake Taito, the chief executive of the Fiji National Provident Fund (a Government enterprise) and Bainimarama’s brother-in-law, who was to make a business trip to Australia at the end of December. Suva saw this as a clear breach of the July 2012 tripartite agreement. According to one commentator, it’s now highly likely that the Government’s response will be to refuse Margaret Twomey a chance to present her credentials as the first Australian High Commissioner to Fiji since James Batley was expelled in November 2009.

Whether anyone one in Canberra wants to admit it, Australia has suffered a retreat from influence within our region and its institutions; a decline of support from our neighbours in the United Nations; and diminished respect from key allies in the South Pacific on regional affairs. These foreign policy consequences for the contretemps between Australia and Fiji shouldn’t be used to excuse the weaknesses in the political processes of Fiji today but the critics, especially those so vocal in the Australian media, should be consistent in their expectations.

Even supporters of the Bainimarama Government have been disappointed that it hasn’t taken every opportunity to demonstrate the bona fides of its professed reformist goals. This includes, most recently, aspects of the constitutional process and the edict regulating political parties as well as a renewed activism by the Republic of Fiji Military Forces. Nevertheless, the present Government is the only game in town at least until 2014. Canberra needs to recognise this even as its South Pacific allies have already done. Moreover, Canberra needs to recognise and address the fact that Fiji has its own complaints against Australia.

It’s impossible to prove that a gentler, more engaged approach to the Bainimarama Government would have accelerated the return to democracy or made the path to democracy smoother. What’s undeniable is that the hard line approach advocated by critics over the years hasn’t prevented any of the adverse consequences of the toxic political relationship between the two countries. Indeed, it has contributed demonstrably to these outcomes. Failing to reset policy settings with regard to Fiji until ‘after free and fair elections in 2014’ merely demonstrates this ineffectiveness. Worse, where does Canberra go when elections are held under a constitution it regards as flawed by a process it deems biased? Does Australia rail against the result as not ‘free and fair’ and so maintain the sanctions that have had no effect?
It’s far too late to expect any great Australian influence on Suva’s charted course to the 2014 elections. But there’s much to be done to assist technically with the preparations for them, if Bainimarama will accept help now. If not, it’s still essential to prepare the ground for more effective relations after the elections. Hectoring from the bunkers is not only a demonstration of impotence; it is also preparing a grave for future relations.

Richard Herr is honorary director of the Centre for International and Regional Affairs, University of Fiji. Some of these themes will be explored more fully with regards to the broader implications for Australia’s security interests in Melanesia at RUSI’s forthcoming 2^nd International Defence and Security Dialogue. Image courtesy of Flickr user Asia Society.

Read More

A Clarification and Further Apology from Fr Barr

Dear Croz,

Greetings from Fiji!

Sorry I have not been in touch recently but I have been busy and did not have access to my internet.  Our system has had some problems.

You are obviously aware of the events of the past few days and the misunderstandings and misinterpretations that seem to have arisen. You might like to publish this statement on your blogsite.

My comment on the flag was not intended to be disrespectful to Fiji, government or the PM.  As reported, the rumour intended to be a humourous dig at the growing Chinese influence in Fiji about which I had previously expressed some concern to the PM. Some, including the PM, seem to have taken the letter as an insult and I again apologise if they have seen it as such.  It was not my intention.

Also, unfortunately, my confidential letter to the Archbishop and a few close friends got into the hands of some anti-government bloggers who publicised it widely and made me appear to be anti-government.

Again some misrepresented my talk on Social Justice at the recent FTUC Conference as being involvement in the founding of a new political party. While I do support worker's unions, I had nothing to do with the founding of a new party.  My views on the Church and politics can be found in my various articles - most recently in my recent booklet on "Social Justice in the Judeo-Christian Tradition" chapter 6.

Also I did not "seek asylum" at the Australian High Commission (as some have stated).  I simply went and informed the High Commission of my situation and the misunderstandings which seem to have arisen.

As you know, for the last few years I have supported many of the good things government has been doing.  However I have also offered my criticisms directly to the PM and I trust these have been helpful and positive.

I am grateful that the decision for me to leave Fiji has been revoked by the PM. I see Fiji as my home and I am committed to all the people I love and serve here.  I continue to hope that a positive way forward for Fiji will be found and the vision originally proposed by the PM will become a reality.

You are welcome to publish the above as a clarification to the misinterpretations which seem to have emerged.

Keep well and every blessing.

Kevin Barr.

Read More

The Impact of Government Policies on Vanua Levu

The impact of Govt policies in regional Vanua Levu

December 4, 2012 | Filed under: Opinion | Posted by: newsroom

By Mahsood Shah 

Fiji-born Mahsood Shah is a principal adviser-Academic Strategy, Planning and Quality at RMIT Uni versity, Melbourne, Australia. The views in this article are his own views and not the views of the University. Email: shah_mahsood@hotmail.com

In recent years the current government of Fiji has introduced policies in many areas of priority. Such policies have been introduced either to ensure economic sustainability of the country or to fulfil social responsibilities to the general public. The uncertainty in the global economy and the lack of financial support by neighbouring countries means that the government has to find ways to survive with budgetary constraints and limited resources.

At the same time, government is pressured to assure the general public, including the international community, that the new policies are going to have a positive impact on all stakeholders including industries and businesses, civil servants, non-governmental organisations, and the general public.
More importantly, the government has to assure the general public that its policies and initiatives are fair and that it will be beneficial to the diverse groups of people.
Innovation and developments in any government or institution are based on the financial health or sustainability and leadership which provide strategic change as needed. At times, leadership also requires one to make tough decisions in the best interests of various stakeholders. In the last 25 years, many of us have witnessed political upheavals in Fiji which, in turn, has had a huge impact on the country in terms of social and economic developments.
In many ways, such actions tend to punish the innocent people in our society while the government is shifting its priorities with limited funding in areas of national need.
Govt policies impact in Bua
The progress made by the current government is enormous in many areas. In fact, the government, in its limited time span, has made significant reforms which the previous democratically elected governments were unable to deliver – notwithstanding that the progress made by the current government is without opposition, freedom to critique policies and critical debate on key strategic policies and reforms in the parliament.
The inability of previous governments to deliver key promises raises important questions on whether people of Fiji are well served by the military government or by a democratically elected government, which has attempted to introduce controversial policies to suit certain groups of people.

The actions of the previous governments (although democratically elected) with the introduction of controversial policies and increased corruption at almost all levels also raises questions around ethics, moral values and accountability of senior and academically educated leaders in public service.
While government policies and actions may not have pleased some in the society, it has made significant impact in remote communities.

I am a strong believer that government or institutional policies and reforms are only value-added if they have positive impact on people of all walks of life irrespective of whether such policies and reforms are implemented by a military or democratically elected government.

What has changed in Bua
In this article, I will briefly outline the impact of government policies in regional Vanua Levu, particularly in an area called Bua. This area is well-known for its rice farming and commercial fishing and it is fair to say that this region has been ignored by many governments in the past in terms of key services such as education, employment, health, transportation, investments, infrastructure (including technology) and road upgrades.

In 2011, Prime Minister Bainimarama visited various settlements within this region including two small settlements, Vuniuto and Naruwai. Both settlements have made enormous progress where iTaukei and Indo-Fijian farmers have worked together in rice farming.


The poor assured
Historically, in both of these settlements, Indo-Fijian farmers have been dominant in rice farming, however, in the last few years more progress has been made by iTaukei farmers.
There is a widely accepted view in these two very poor settlements that the first ever visit by any prime minister in these settlements assures farmers that their voices will be heard and their issues and concerns will be addressed.

The remoteness and poor backgrounds of families in this settlement is such that only a handful of youths have been able to successfully complete secondary education with high academic outcomes.  The access to and success of tertiary education in these settlements is a dream which may only come true if government provides scholarships to potential high-performing students from such backgrounds. Some of the high impact areas where the current government is fully credited include the following -

School education: the current student bus fare voucher system has provided financial relief to many parents. Some students in these settlements used to walk barefoot for almost 10 kilometres each day to access primary education. Their active participation and engagement in the class and the consequences on the academic outcome is affected by long distances of walk along gravelled roads. Many schoolchildren in these settlements h ave dropped out after primary education because of the poor financial status of the parents.
Agriculture: significant assistance is now provided by the government to those farmers with proven success in various farming areas such as rice, livestock farming, pineapples and other projects.
Financial assistance is provided for machinery and relevant farming equipment and the role of the agricultural officers in these regions are also strengthened to help and support farmers.
Investment: the current investment in mining by the foreign company in Nawailevu, in Bua and the current bio-fuel project are some of the recent examples of how investments are boosting the region with the hope of job creation and other economic benefits.
The renewal of the Wairiki pine project could witness further development in the region. Some other areas yet to be explored by the government in this region includes

• the logging of one of the largest mahogany projects in Fiji, renewal of pine plantations to replace what has already been exported,
• possible renewal of the cocoa project in Namuavoivoi which could see one of the first production and possible manufacturing of home-made chocolate pin Fiji;
• possible investment of large scale poultry farm;
• potential to renew the plantation of sandalwood which benefited the region in the 1980s;
• investment in coconut and copra production;
• significant potential for one of the largest citrus projects based on the success of the Batiri citrus in the past;
• funding of large scale livestock farming; and
• many other agricultural projects which the region is capable of sustaining.

The region could also attract prospective research students around the world to undertake research in agriculture and marine science.

Government’s plus points
The government’s social welfare payment in remote regions is also commended by many in such remote regions and there is a strong view that policies are fair and equitable irrespective of the ethnic background of people. Discussions in these communities suggest that the corrupted practices in the past are now eliminated with the fear of the community and stakeholders complaints that are made directly to the Prime Minister’s office.

The momentum that has already been gained in these regional communities, in terms of developments, can be described as ‘destiny not to miss’, with more benefits yet to be seen if the government contests and succeeds in the 2014 election. The downfall, post 2014, if the current government does not contest and succeed, could see a reversal of projects and investments in regional communities and how such communities could contribute to the economic development of the country.

While the government has made significant progress in remote regions  -

• more work is needed to improve the access and success of youths from these communities in tertiary education;
• more investments to boost regional developments and employment;
• improvement in health services;
• upgrading of the highway from Nabouwalu to Dreketi; and
• the improvement in law and order in such communities.

Read More

Personalities and "Progress"

By Crosbie Walsh

I feel as if I'm on two treadmills trying to catch up with and publish comments on the daily news while at the same time trying to put recent and unfolding happenings into some sort of perspective. What some call "the big picture."  If only I could do a Coup4.5 and change editors when I get tired, or farm out editorship like "Peter Firkin" in Fiji Today. You can always trace these changes when they  occur by subtle changes in policy and their tolerance of contrary comments. Peter, come back. Fiji Today is fast losing its reputation as a reasonable anti-Bainimarama blog.

The elements or major constructs in the bigger picture are government, its various opponents, and more distantly, foreign governments, agencies and advocates  most of whom are tied into one or another of the local opponents. Some NGOs and trade unions are cases in point.

The issue at the centre of the current big picture stems from the conflicting disappointments with the Ghai draft constitution and, inevitably, with the subsequent passing of the Political Parties Decree.

The Ghai Draft and the Political Parties Decree
To some, some features of the Political Parties Decree are draconian. It imposes difficult or impossible requirements on existing political parties (but not, significantly, on any new parties that may emerge later).  First, there is the requirement of 5000 members and $5005 dollars, recruited in the numbers stated from each of the country's four administrative districts. This will be no problem at all for the SDL party and not much harder for the FLP, but smaller parties will have problems.  Secondly, is the requirement that the party must apply for registration within 28 days. And finally, the requirement that no "public officer" may join a political party or stand in the election without first resigning from his or her public office.  I have expressed the view that I see no problem with civil servants being limited in this way but there  should be no restrictions on trade unionists and others who in most democracies may wear two hats: one as a unionist, the other as a party member.  Graham Davis suggests a way out for the old parties: fold up and re-register under a different name later along with the new parties. But this may be no solution if Government is seeking to exclude the old politician and its more voracious critics, which I believe is its  primary purpose.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Political Parties Decree is intended to thwart the formation of the announced Workers Party, undermine the trade union movement, and the Fiji  Labour Party.  There is, after all, no employers' party on the horizon, the SDL is not threatened, and there is no requirement that chiefs cannot  join a political party, yet they should also be considered  public officers in this new, extended meaning of the term.

People not Organizations Targeted
But this judgement requires qualification.  I don't think it is the Workers' Party, the trade unions movement or FLP per se that are being targeted,  although the Bainimarama government is far more right wing than left.  Rather it is the people who lead them that Government seeks  to marginalise. From what has been said many times, I can't see Government making any accommodation with the likes of Felix Anthony, Daniel Urai, Attar Singh and Mahendra Chaudhry.

Fiji is a small society and an important consequence of "smallness" is that personal relationships are that much more important in the political arena than in bigger societies.  What may have started as differences in opinion or policy so often end up as a conflict of personalities.

Bainimarama sees these trade unionists  and Chaudhry as putting their self-interests ahead of the nation, and their efforts to win support from the international trade union movement as acts of betrayal tantamount to  treason. Government claims unionists were responsible for pushing Air Pacific close to the edge of bankruptcy. I think this unlikely but it matters not whether these claims are fair and accurate. It is what they believe.

Opposition as bad or worse
The opposition argument is similarly founded. It is not willing —or even able— to look at any of the government's measures that many would say were long overdue or  much needed or commendable.

All it can see are two men, Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, whom they loath. Hence, the venom, accusations and vitriolic personal attacks in the anti-blogs and in a more guarded fashion in the mainstream Fiji and overseas media.  This, I think, is one important reason why Government passed the Public Emergency Regulations and the Media Decree. It could not trust the opposition to do anything other than criticise negatively.

For those who may say:  Of course. It is the job of an opposition to criticize, one must consider its extent and purpose.  Government has been submitted to a barrage of criticism on every conceivable issue: mining in Bua  and Namosi, Chinese investment, its loans (that will "cripple our grandchildren"),  the sugar industry, its handling of the the two floods in 2012, the FNPF, the proposed casino, the PM and A-G's salaries, e-voter registration, and unfounded accusations against the judiciary. Even the
frequent visits of the PM and ministers to remote rural areas (rarely if even visited by previous politicians),  and its free or subsidised bus fares for school children and the elderly are labelled vote buying.

The list is endless and the purpose obvious. These are not the criticisms of a reasonable opposition hoping to influence Government policy. They do not propose informed alternatives. Their aim is to distract, delay and cause doubt. Their only purpose is to undermine government and hope that in the "fallout" that follows they will somehow be able to return to the good old days.

Both the FLP and Fiji Trade Union Congress submissions to the Constitution Commission wanted all the things Government did not want.  They did not want a new constitution. They wanted to retain the 1997 Constitution with only minor modifications, Senate and the Great Council of Chiefs. Both wanted Government out of all arrangements leading into the 2014 elections. Both opposed the granting of amnesty. And both expressed reservations about the Constituent Assembly.

Looked at in this way they did not want any dialogue on a new constitution until much later when, having gleaned some knowledge of the Ghai Commission's recommendations, they were suddenly transformed into its keenest advocates.

Opposition don't want process to succeed
Personalities are also a major reason why the old political parties were wary of the constitution dialogue process. They do not trust Bainimarama or Khaiyum. They did not want the process to succeed because they knew that ultimately amnesty would have to be granted; Bainimarama and Khaiyum would still be around, and they would also have to agree to compromises that could undermine their future prospects in parliament.

Similarly, this is why Government tried to stop the draft decree being made made public until it could be discussed in the Assembly under normal rules of debate.  The opposition's past record led Government to believe they would inflame the situation, stir up strong feelings on particular issues and  create altogether the wrong atmosphere prior to the first meeting to the Constituent Assembly.

Events lend some credence to this suspicion.  With the easing of media restrictions we might have expected somewhat more tolerant or balanced public statements by those opposed to Government but this was not to be. The criticisms, personal accusations and unrealistic demands have not  abated.

The "personal factor" can, of course, be overstated.  There are differences in philosophy and policy, and Government and the old political parties definitely have different visions for Fiji,  but even these are often used by both Government and its opponents to attack each other on a personal basis.

Sometimes one wonders whether Fiji's motto should be Argumentum ad Hominem and not Rerevaka na Kalou ka Doka na Tui  Fear God and honour the Queen. Something else that may need changing?

Antipathy not new
This antipathy is not new. It preceded the 2006 coup.  It could be seen in the personal attacks on Mahendra Chaudhry in 1999; in the refusal by Qarase to include Chaudhry in his Cabinet in 2001 even though this was required by law; in Chaudhry's refusal to form a parliamentary opposition and the subsequent farce of a one-man party, Beddoes, as leader of the opposition.. It is seen also in the peripatetic behaviour of Tupeni Baba who parted from Chaudhry to form the New Labour Party and who has now moved into the SDL, abandoning his former pleas for multiculturalism. And in Chaudhry's departure as Bainimarama's Minister of Finance in 2007.

More recently, it is seen in the refusal of the "opposition" to participate in the People's Charter; their refusal to even consider the Roadmap; their initial refusal to participate in the constitution dialogue process and ongoing demands for a return to the 1997 Constitution and that Bainimarama immediately step down.

Imagine what a heyday they would have had had the draft constitution been released for public scrutiny. Think what they have done with the leaked version.  There is no spirit of reconciliation or accommodation here.

Opposition don't really want the Constituent Assembly
Think what the political parties have said about the Constituent Assembly.  They refuse to accept a chairperson nominated by Government and have prevaricated about participation. This can only be aimed at undermining the credibility of the Assembly's decisions. They don't really want the Constituent Assembly.  They want the Ghai Commission recommendations on the transfer of power.  Which may seem reasonable except that the recommendations virtually excluded the de facto Government, and
obviously would be unacceptable to them.

Only if different people (on both sides) were involved, would there have been an outside chance the transition recommendations would have been accepted.

Opposition let lose in a china shop
Let us assume the political parties change their mind on participation in the Assembly as they did with the Constitution Commission. What sort of discussion may we anticipate within the Assembly as it attempts to achieve consensus or workable compromises that would result in acceptance of the draft constitution?

Government will obviously refuse to hand over to an interim Cabinet and it will not agree to the National People's Assembly overseeing Parliament. How will the political opposition react to this? What will the fiery, wily Chaudhry do when he cannot win the Assembly over?  I think he will choose his moment to walk out —or be sent out by the Chairperson for disorderly behaviour— and have yet another opportunity to discredit the Assembly which is, let's face it,  the only process that will return Fiji to parliamentary rule.  And how many of the old politicians will follow the Chaudhry example?

Did Government anticipate the Opposition actions?
My guess is that it is with this sort of drama in mind that Government decided to amend the draft before it got to the Assembly, and to hobble the old political parties before they could generate any traction.

The reaction of Government to the formation of a "united front" of the old political parties and some trade unions  last week lends weight to the contention that  it sees its old antagonists personalising issues and engaging in petty politics. Note in particular item 5 in the official media release below (my underlining).

Government does not wish to engage with these people.  It holds them responsible for the state of politics prior to 2006 and their opposition to what it has been endeavouring to do for the past six years.  And to this extent the central issue is  not about  democracy  but about some of the people who have claimed the word.

Neither, of course, does the opposition wish to engage with Government.  They hold it, but particularly the "illiterate  dictator" Bainimarama and the "self-serving" heinous Muslim Sayed-Khaiyum,  responsible for the curtailment of civil liberties, their loss of power and the loss of freedom that they equate with a loss of democracy. There seems no way these two groups will agree.

And yet, there is perhaps still one small possibility of reconciliation. A traditional apology (matanigasau) by Bainimarama to the President for the arguably less creditable feature of his administration, followed or preceded by public apologies and matanigasau by his main opponents.  But can you see this happening?

MEDIA RELEASE : RESPONSE TO UNITED FRONT FOR A DEMOCRATIC FIJI

1.     The issues raised by the so-called United Front for a Democratic Fiji ("UFDF") have already been answered by Government.
2.     The latest release by this so-called UFDF goes precisely against the address by His Excellency the President, that is to disengage from petty politics and to focus on contributing positively in the formulation and adoption of a new Constitution for the betterment of all Fijians.
3.     In terms of Government transparency and accountability, these questions have already been addressed and as stated, further laws are also being developed to ensure even greater standards of accountability and transparency for all. Amongst these laws include the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Decree 2013 ("Decree"). Suffice to say, previous governments which have consisted of or were supported by the members of the so-called UFDF, have failed to do so.
4.     In their rush to personalise matters and engage in petty politics, the release by the so-called UFDF contains a number of factual inaccuracies and anomalies - one of which is that the salaries of all cabinet ministers are in fact paid and processed by the Ministry of Finance and not by any private entity.
5.     The Bainimarama Government does not and will not engage in political bickering, which of course these political parties are used to and which have they have been practising for years. The Bainimarama Government is focussed on development and introducing systems, processes and laws that will ensure transparency, accountability, prosperity for all Fijians and true democracy. Accordingly, Government will no longer respond to this already discredited UFDF.
6.     The release by UFDF also demonstrates how they relish and thrive in such political bickering without having a principled approach. It is quite apparent that in their desperation to not comply with the Decree, they are now clutching at straws.

Read More

The Rise and Fall of Political Parties

By Mahsood Shah 

Fijian-born Mahsood Shah, originally from Bua, is Principal Adviser Academic Strategy, Planning and Quality at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. Shah is also an adjunct with the Faculty of Education at the University of Canberra, Australia. The views in this article are his own and not the views of the University. Email: shah_mahsood@hotmail.com

The year 2014 will determine the future of Fiji’s political landscape.
It will be a critical year in the history of Fiji with future developments yet to be seen.
The current government although unelected has made significant progress with limited financial aid from neighbouring countries.

The policies introduced by the current government have had a big impact on people of all socio-economic classes.

The impact ranges from education, social welfare, tourism, investments, infrastructure development, agriculture, and new diplomatic relations. Government policies have also been felt by many because of a lack of democracy and freedom, the rise in the cost of grocery with inflation rate at 5.5 per cent in 2010 compared to 3.7 per cent in 2009, the increased divide between the rich and the poor, and limited innovative developments in key areas of public service such as health.

The Government has most recently outlined the rules of engagement surrounding the formation of political parties.

It is clear that some dominant parties who have traditionally represented the voice of many poor and middle class people may demise.

The demise is because of a number of factors including leadership of the party and the trust from the general public.

The 2014 election will witness the emergence of few new political parties whose members were part of the dominant party; however individual differences and self-interest has resulted in members forming or joining new parties.

While politicians move around and form or join a new party, it is clear that the product is the same with a different sales pitch.

None of the existing or new parties have outlined their key policies which may attract voters.
This is because of the fact that the current government has not encouraged political campaigns leading towards the 2014 election.

At the same time, many, including the young generation aged between 15-39 who represent almost 50 per cent of the population, are not interested in politics. However they are interested to find out if policies and principles of the party address issues facing our country including:

• Gender equality;
• Increased use of drugs and alcohol in our society and its implications;
• Creation of jobs and employee mobility;
• The role of trade unions to fight employee rights;
• Agricultural developments in remote regions and outer islands;
• Access to national broadband and other technological developments;
• Modernising public health and other essential services such as transport;
• Access to education and scholarship in a wide range of disciplinary areas;
• Renewal of our relationship within the Asia Pacific region, and
• Issues around climate change and environmental sustainability.

Another important area none of the political parties have focused on in the past is research on contemporary issues facing Pacific Island countries to position Fiji as a leader within the Pacific in research and innovation in tourism, agriculture, mineral resources, marine science, public health, and climate change.

The current and new political parties will be dominant with former members of Parliament who had the opportunity in the past to influence national policies. However, history suggests that most have focussed on self-interest rather than the needs of the broader society.

The focus of politicians has shifted from patriotism to egotism.
As the people of Fiji wait for policy announcement and membership composition of the parties it would be interesting to see if new or existing parties provide opportunities for underrepresented groups such as women and young people to participate in politics.
The 2014 election is very important for the young generation who represent almost 50 per cent of the population and their choice of the party is critical on issues that matters to the young generation.

Maybe it is time for the old horses to rest and give opportunities for interested young people to enter into politics.

Shortlink: 

Search Classified

---

Read More

Solomons Reaffirms Support for Constitution Reforms

Solomon Islands PM

The Government of the Solomon Islands has reaffirmed its position on supporting electoral reforms implemented by the Fijian Government.

At a recent meeting between Fiji’s foreign minister Ratu Inoke Kubuabola and the Honorable Prime Minister of the Solomon Islands Hon. Gordon Darcy Lilo, both parties discussed Fiji’s progress towards achieving electoral reforms.

Minister Kubuabola visited the Solomon Islands and paid a courtesy call to Prime Minister Lilo and updated on a number of issues. At the same time, the Minister was able to convey Fiji’s recognition of the enduring support of the Government of the Solomon Islands towards Fiji’s Roadmap to Parliamentary Democracy and our appreciation for Solomon Islands vigorous support towards Fiji.

In doing so, Minister Kubuabola also provided an outline of the recent developments on Fiji’s new Constitution, confirming that following the successful completion of national consultations, a Draft Constitution has been tabled to His Excellency the President of Fiji. Minister Kubuabola specified that whilst the merits of such a Draft Constitution are being acknowledged, there were certain critical elements that required further discourse and analysis, such as the size of Parliament relative to the size of Fiji’s population, and the notion of a largely unelected national people's assembly comprised principally of non government organisations sitting alongside the elected Parliament. These are the possible amendments that the Constituent Assembly would be considering, to the Draft Constitution, as opposed to what activists are deliberately interpreting to be “A New Draft Constitution”. Minister Kubuabola assured PM Lilo that the New Constitution would be ready by March this year.

The Hon Prime Minister Lilo thanked Minister Kubuabola for these clarifications on recent political developments in Fiji, commending the manner in which Fiji has meanwhile conducted herself on the international front. He conveyed his confidence that Fiji would be meticulously monitoring the undertakings of the Constituent Assembly over the next month to ensure that the crux of the New Constitution shall enshrine issues that are fundamental to Democracy, and reiterated his support and the support of the Government of the Solomon Islands for Fiji’s efforts towards Parliamentary Elections in 2014.

The Hon Prime Minister Lilo also expressed his appreciation to the Hon Prime Minister of Fiji, Voreqe Bainimarama, for his exemplary leadership and his congratulations for Fiji’s recent assumption of the Chairmanship of the Group of 77 + China in 2013.

Minister Kubuabola took the opportunity to also discuss with the Hon Prime Minister Lilo the Fiji Volunteer Scheme, recognising that the Solomon Islands was amongst the first Pacific Islands to have signed the Development Cooperation MOU with Fiji in 2010.  The Hon PM Lilo thanked the Government of Fiji for this Scheme, accepting the proposal by Minister Kubuabola for the surplus Solomon Islands graduate doctors from Cuba being considered for deployment to Fiji under the Scheme.

Read More

Graham Davis on Political Parties and the Political Parties Decree

# VALENTINE’S DAY MASSACRE: WHAT NEXT?
http://www.grubsheet.com.au/?p=3828&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=st-valentines-day-massacre-what-next

Posted: 18 Jan 2013 12:33 AM PST

Blood on the carpet (Photo:imdb.com)

On February 14^th 1929, the notorious American gangster, Al Capone, sent four of his henchmen into a Chicago garage with guns blazing. Seven members of an opposing gang were murdered in what became known as the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. That same day in Fiji 84 years later – which is normally dedicated to a celebration of romance – may also spell the demise of a string of local political leaders. Because as things stand, they won’t just be tormented by the usual pressure to buy flowers or cards for their spouses or partners. February 14^th is the deadline for them to meet undoubtedly the strictest condition the Bainimarama Government has set for parties wanting to contest the 2014 election.

By the end of Valentine’s Day, the sixteen existing political parties in Fiji have to come up with five thousand registered members, plus their five party executives, and the princely sum of $5005 – a dollar for each person – or they’ll be struck off the current party register. Even if they can raise the numbers, there’s an extra hurdle in the requirement for their party membership to be spread across the nation – 2000 in the Central Division, 1750 in the Western Division, 1,000 in the Northern Division and 250 members from the Eastern Division. The parties have a 28 day deadline to achieve all of this starting Friday. The clock is ticking away. And as the enormity of the challenge dawns on them, their leaders are aghast and screaming “stitch-up” in the local and overseas media.

Yes it’s tough. As the critics have it, unreasonably so. Yet amidst all the gnashing of teeth, one important consideration has been ignored; that there is nothing to stop the leaders of these parties from winding up their existing structures on Valentine’s Day and starting all over again. They can simply allow themselves to be deregistered and regroup down the track without having to be bound by the 28-day rule.

Why would they be remotely interested in doing this? Because all of these parties are personality based. They revolve around a brace of national figures who are well known – some might say too well known – and whose faces are arguably far more important than their organisations. In any event, those party organisations are in a state of flux after six years of being excluded from the process and in some cases, are in crisis. So why not start again with a clean slate? Why be bound by the 28-day rule? Why not let the deadline pass, dissolve, regroup and then rebuild either singly or in coalition with others? Form new parties and meet the required membership rules in a much more leisurely and considered fashion. As they wage war on the Political Parties Decree, it’s worth examining the challenges each of the existing organisations now face.

SDL: Soqosoqo Dua Vata Ni Lewenivanua: The SDL is gutted by the provisions of this decree. For a start, its name has been declared illegal because every party henceforth must have an English language appellation. Under normal circumstances, the SDL might have had a real chance of getting the 5000 members required to register by February 14th because of all the existing parties, it alone arguably has a truly national geographical spread. Yet it faces several added burdens. The SDL founder and leader, deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase, is serving a year-long jail term for corruption. So he’s automatically excluded from standing next year by the Decree’s provision banning anyone convicted in the past five years of an offence carrying a jail sentence of six months or more.
The SDL now claims to be a multiracial party but as its name suggests, it is almost exclusively i’Taukei. In its current form, can it meet the test of being non discriminatory and respond to the needs of all Fijians, as the law now requires? Probably not – at least in the public mind – given the discriminatory policies it pursued in government that contributed directly to Voreqe Bainimarama removing it in 2006. Now that we know that Laisenia Qarase is barred by law from making a comeback, who could lead the SDL into the election, or at least the party that is now required by law to be re-named and represent the interests of all Fijians?

Two names seem to be at the fore at the present time -Ratu Jone Kubuabola – the brother of the Foreign Minister – and Dr Tupeni Baba, the academic and former Labour Party politician who’s astonished the country with his political transformation over the years. Dr Baba was a member of the Bavadra Government that was removed by Sitiveni Rabuka in the coup of 1987. Back then – with his Labour colleagues – he was committed to a multiracial agenda for Fiji. But after falling out with Dr Bavadra’s ultimate successor, Mahendra Chaudhry, Baba did a complete about face. He’s embraced the nationalist cause and – to the dismay of many former colleagues and supporters – now sits at the apex of indigenous politics. The less charitable view is that Baba is an opportunist who turned to the SDL after Chaudhry froze him out. The more charitable view is that Chaudhry’s unlovely personality and uncompromising control of Labour drove Baba into the arms of the nationalists in the SDL.

The problem for the SDL is that Baba is hardly charismatic and those around him are virtual unknowns. Yet at the apex of the party as its patron is someone who is both charismatic and at the apex of the vanua – the Roko Tui Dreketi , Ro Teimumu Kepa. Ro Teimumu is head of the Burebasaga confederacy – one of the three main indigenous groupings – and was a minister in Laisenia Qarase’s cabinet. So she is high born, well connected and politically experienced. At the present time, she is arguably the most potent opposition in the vanua to the Bainimarama Government. At the head of a reborn, renamed, ostensibly multiracial party, she could be a formidable force if she can overcome her less attractive political attributes. She horrified many Fijians last year with her warning of “racial calamity” if the chiefs were ignored. And she has been strongly identified with the nationalist cause- which will deter many non-indigenous people from supporting her – as well as the unsuccessful campaign to declare Fiji a Christian state. But someone definitely to watch.

The Fiji Labour Party: Of all the existing opposition parties, Labour is most identified with one person, the wily Mahendra Chaudhry, who was Fiji’s first Indo-Fijian prime minister until he was removed in the George Speight coup of 2000. As Labour’s General Secretary, Chaudhry rules the party with an iron fist and broaches no dissent. The style is old-fashioned socialism, authoritarian and unyielding, and there are a string of political figures who’ve exited Labour for daring to question Chaudhry’s authority. They include not only the aforementioned Dr Baba  but also traditional Labour figures of the stature of Krishna Datt and most bitter of all, the recent falling out between Chaudhry and Felix Anthony, the head of the Fiji Trades Union Congress (FTUC).

Both men now loathe each other and trade insults at every turn, Anthony accusing his former close associate of being a dictator and Chaudhry accusing the feisty union leader of being a traitor to the workers’ cause. Chaudhry’s abrasive son, Rajendra, has fought some of this battle by proxy, amusing television viewer last year with his description of Felix Anthony as a “Chihuahua” and a “howling banshee”. Yet the underlying problem of this momentous falling out is that the labour movement – not to mention the entire left faction in Fijian politics – has suffered a momentous and highly damaging split. Anthony and his union colleagues at the FTUC have broken away to form what they’ve dubbed the Worker’s Party. But where do ordinary workers now go to safeguard their interests, faced with this slanging match between once close allies?  What happened to the old song “Solidarity for Ever”? The classic political maximum is that disunity is death. So the longer this schism on the left continues the less likely these titans are to get anywhere in 2014, irrespective of the hurdles they now face.

For Chaudhry – with his main powerbase among sugar cane growers in the west – the Political Parties Decree is a disaster. Not only does he have to gain substantial members all over the country in the next 28 days but his opponents are convinced that he will also have great difficulty meeting certain other provisions of the decree. The most glaring of these is the requirement that any political officer bearer or candidate must make a declaration of all income and assets – both in Fiji and abroad – on behalf of themselves, their spouses and their children.

Chaudhry has already been exposed for having large sums in personal bank accounts in Australia that allegedly came from Indian donors for the Labour cause. He’s currently facing charges in the courts of violating Fijian currency laws. Will he really be keen to declare his assets in Australia plus the land holdings he is said to have acquired in India through his family connections there? If funding for Labour has come from India or any other foreign source, that will also have to be declared and the arrangement halted. Because another provision of the decree is that no party funding can come from foreign governments or NGOs. And the limit that any individual can donate – foreign or Fijian – is pegged at $10,000.

Felix Anthony is also in a bind. His new Worker’s Party was launched in a blaze of publicity in Nadi last weekend, where he appeared on stage with Sharan Burrows, the former Australian union supremo who’s now strutting the global union stage. Was the global brotherhood planning to support Fiji’s Worker’s Party financially? Because it clearly won’t be doing so now.

Before the Decree was unveiled, Felix Anthony clearly saw himself as standing in 2014 as an MP. But the Decree stipulates that no elected or appointed official of a trade union can be a party member and hold office. Felix Anthony screamed loudly about this but then announced that while the Worker’s Party would press on, he would not be standing for parliament. He’s evidently far too financially comfortable where he is to resign as FTUC leader and risk standing for parliament next year and losing. Yet if Labour and the Worker’s Party are to have any viable future at all, the split between them has to be mended. They too should consider dissolving altogether and regrouping rather than pursuing a vendetta against each other based on personal animosity. Because leaving aside the decree, the way they are going they are toast.

The National Federation Party (NFP):  This once great party – of the likes of A.D Patel and S.M Koya – is a pathetic shadow of its former self. What on earth is the point of its existence? It was once the principal opposition party in Fiji, the Indo-Fijian counterweight to the “Fijians” and “others” in Ratu Mara’s successive governments. Yet what is its raison d’etre now?  Pramod Rae is fighting a losing battle against total irrelevance. The great quest of the old NFP was one, man, one vote. Yet now that it’s finally got it -thanks to Voreqe Bainimarama – Pramod Rae thunders on. He too has no hope of meeting the stipulation of being a national party representing the whole country. It’s high time for the NFP to dissolve and its existing members to seek political solace elsewhere. Times have changed but the NFP hasn’t.

The United People’s Party: Mick Beddoes seems a lovely bloke and given the pasting Grubsheet has given him, we were impressed when he warmly shook our hand when we recently ran into each other. Yet his mouth is infinitely bigger than his electoral base and he needs to realise it and give up. The UPP is Mick, a small rump of old “general voters” and people who also think Mick is a lovely bloke. Given that he has no hope of meeting the provisions of the Political Parties Decree, he should forge new alliances if he has any thought of staying in politics, which he must do otherwise he would shut up.

The “Perfectly Frank Party” aka the Great Unknown: And so to arguably the biggest unknown of all, just what will happen if Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama does what many expect him to do and morph into a civilian politician. Will he or won’t he?  The whole nation is asking the question and we haven’t got a formal answer yet. But whatever the Government’s opponents say about the Political Parties Decree, they can’t say it is selective and doesn’t apply to everyone. Apart, of course. from the obvious fact that if Voreqe Bainimarama forms a political party and stands, he’s obviously not bound by the 28 day limit to register. That’s because he’s yet to declare his hand and says he won’t do so until after the new constitution is finalised. On every other provision of the Decree, the Prime Minister would have to live by the same rules as everyone else.

As the Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, made clear this week, any member of the RFMF who wants to stand as a candidate next year will have to resign their commission. This means that if Bainimarama runs, it will be as a civilian. He will leave the military and contest the election with a list of candidates who are all civilians and have to live or die politically at the hands of the Fijian people under the same rules as everyone else. None of them can hold any public office, they must declare all their assets and those of their families, take no money from companies, take no more than $10-thousand from any individual, no money from foreign governments or NGOs, no “freebies” or kickbacks, their personal finances laid bare. Yes, all those alleged millions in Chinese bank accounts included.

No-one can accuse the Prime Minister or his Attorney-General  - the architect of this decree – of double standards. What’s good for the geese in the old parties is also good for the ducks who’ve worked hard over the past six years to produce the Bainimarama Revolution – to smash the racial paradigm of the past and introduce the first genuine parliamentary democracy in Fiji of one person, one vote, one value. The old parties can’t see it yet and neither can their overly excitable fans in Fiji and abroad. But come the election next year, every candidate – including Voreqe Bainimarama if he so chooses – will be presenting themselves for the nation to make its decision on the same footing – transparently, fairly and with precisely the same opportunity to win. Now that we have a level playing field at last, Fijian voters may not know precisely right now who is going to make up the competing teams. But get set for one hell of a game.

Read More