Conquering Hero or Con Man or both? You decide..
http://davidpflieger.wordpress.com/

One thing for certain Dave does not believe in the old adage “Self Praise is No Recommendation”  

The very fact that the bridge was even considered is mind boggling,  when a fraction of the cost of the bridge could have built a network of essential roads throughout the country.

This is totally indicative of how inane an administration can become.

PLANS for the construction of a bridge to connect Vanua Levu to Viti Levu have been cancelled.

Divisional planning officer north Alipate Bolalevu confirmed the plans had been dropped after considering a number of factors surrounding the project.

The initial plan was to build a bridge from Viti Levu to Vanua Levu from the end of Bua to one part of Ra.

“A few things that made the project unsuccessful was the depth of the sea along the proposed stretch for the construction — which is very deep indeed,” Mr Bolalevu said.

“On the other hand we also considered the vast effect that the construction of such a bridge would have on the maritime islands and the shipping businesses taking into mind the small businesses that survive on transportation by sea.

“The proposed 60-kilometre bridge was also seen to be a very expensive project.”

Mr Bolalevu said a team from China which was in Vanua Levu to look into the proposed project and its location had returned to their country.

“They were supposed to return this year but so far we have not heard anything from them,” he said.

FIJI TIMES

The following letter was released to the public via Coup 4.5 web site. The question is, could it be true.

The good Colonel concerned reports directly to the Attorney General who is the Minister responsible for anti corruption efforts in Fiji. Why has the AG not made a statement, or taken any action ?, could it be that corruption is acceptable at certain levels of the administration, that is FICAC and above, or is it something much more sinister ??

Dear C4.5

The observance of the recent International Anti-Corruption by the Fiji Independent Commission against Corruption is something to be proud of and appreciated especially when its head, the demure Deputy Commissioner Colonel George Langman is the one leading the way in highlighting, investigating and actively pursuing those alleged to have committed corrupt practices within the civil service.

Now what about the $25,000.00 taken by Deputy Commissioner Colonel George Langman from the FICAC kit for his personal use when he travelled to Hong Kong in the not-too-distant past for a Conference organized by FICAC’s counterpart? Did he not use the $25,000.00 for personal expenses incurred before, during and after attending the Hong Kong 7’s tournament? And did he not hide the use of State monies thereafter so much so that not a whiff of this misdemeanor has ever gone out of the FICAC offices? And did not the Honorable Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama know about this misuse of public funds and yet kept the facts all under wraps?

The brave young lad who raised the issue with Deputy Commissioner Colonel George Langman of the blatant misuse of State funds was sacked on the spot but he was not to be out-done and reported the matter personally to the Honorable Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama who, in trying to protect his appointee at the FICAC, instead transferred the brave young whistle blower to the Ministry of Information where he now works quietly with the secret of what happened in FICAC firmly tucked away and forgotten.

Perhaps beginning in Jerusalem is relevant after all.

A concerned citizen.

 

YASH GHAI RESPONDS TO A REGIME THAT IS CONTROLLED BY ITS ATTORNEY GENERAL

This short note is in response to allegations by senior members of the Fiji Government and the RFMF that the Constitution Commission violated the law when it ordered the printing of 600 copies of the Draft Constitution.

The process for the making of the constitution was negotiated largely between the Attorney-General, Mr. Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and me. I insisted on a legal framework for the process, so the Commission would have a clear guidance on its responsibilities and the protection of its independence, and the public would have an understanding of the process and their participation in it (contrary to the view of the AG that there should be no law on the process).

Originally there was to be one Decree covering the whole process, the first draft of which I wrote. The AG divided the draft into two Decrees, one covering the Commission and the other the Constituent Assembly. I insisted that the Decree on the Commission should be as I had drafted it (with the exception of the provision on immunity of those involved in previous coups, excluding the 2000 one). But significant changes were made as regards the Constituent Assembly which I was opposed to (which were set out in a joint statement by the Commissioners when the Decree was published).

It was agreed throughout that the process would be highly participatory (the PM has said that every Fijian must have a voice) and that the Commission would be completely independent. Both Decrees guarantee that the process would be “inclusive, participatory and transparent”. The process was defined to include public consultation on the draft constitution by the Commission, and the submission of public views to the President for transmission to the Constituent Assembly.  The Commission was to ensure that all the people were able to participate in the process, and to show “manifest respect for people’s participation” and of their rights. The Commission had to inform the people the progress of the process so that they understand the issues under discussion. The participation of people was also reiterated in an important objective of the process: “true and sustained democracy”.

The Commission also had to publish an Explanatory Report summarising as concisely as possible and in a way that the people understood the recommendations embodied in the draft constitution and the reasons for those recommendations.

It was within this framework that the Commission decided on its engagement with the people including publishing the draft constitution and consulting the people. However on 31 October when the Commission had already made some decisions on the draft constitutions and were planning public consultations, that a Decree was published without any consultation with or advance notice to the Commission that there would be no public consultation. 

There was no mention whatsoever that the Commission could not publish the Draft Constitution and the Explanatory Report to the public. Indeed even after the October Decree, both the original Decree retained statements about the consultation and the duty of the Constituent Assembly to take public views into consideration (for example sec. 8 (1) (c) of the Decree mentions the function of the Assembly to “debate the Draft Constitution, Explanatory Report and the view of the people expressed on the Draft Constitution”).

It is not unusual for important reports to be presented to the Head of the State. This in no way precludes distribution of the report to the public.

If the overall objective of the process: participation of the people and the responsiveness of the Commission and the Assembly to their views, is to be respected, it is imperative that the Draft Constitution and the Explanatory Report should be available to the public immediately after they have been presented to His Excellency the President. It is on this assumption that we ordered the printing of a sizeable number of copies and were about to publish other material to assist the public when the Commission was told that it was not to publish any material relating to the Draft Constitution.

The position of the Attorney General is extraordinary, and hard to understand. The Decrees make clear that the Draft Constitution that the Assembly has to consider is that produced by the Commission—none other.

It therefore makes no sense to say that that Draft cannot be released to the public.  In none of the nearly 20 constitution making process in which I have been involved, or others that I have studied, has the commission been told not to publish the draft constitution. What happens to the Government’s objective of a “true and sustainable democracy” if the people are not allowed to read and discuss the Draft Constitution?

The Assembly has been given a maximum of 9 weeks to consider the Draft and adopt the constitution. Inevitably a week or more will be taken up to swear in and induct the members, adopt the rules of procedure, assemble a secretariat.

The documents that the Assembly members have to read, understand and debate are long and complex. When are they going to have the time to explain the documents to the people and seek their views?

Under what moral authority has the Government changed the process more than half through the period given to it? The Commission and even more the people have the right to expect that the rules and procedure governing the process as set out at its start will be respected and observed. It is on this basis that they engaged in the process.The change of rules has also seriously interfered with the independence of the Commission.

The dissemination of its work is surely a matter for the Commission, especially given the emphasis on the participation of the people. And is the printing of a decree any different from the phone call from the PM or the AG to the Commission to desist from their legitimate activities? Would the latter not be a clear instance of the violation of the independence of the Commission?

The illegal ban on the publication of the Draft Constitution and the Explanatory Report has led to circulation of legal texts purportedly as the Commission’s documents. This has resulted in considerable misunderstandings and confusion. The authentic, and the only valid, documents are those that I presented to the President on 21 December 2012. I have therefore decided on my own responsibility to release copies of the authentic documents to the public.

The Draft Constitution Ghai says he presented to Nailatikau by Courtesy of Coup 4.5

KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS A GOVERNMENT THAT HAS CONDEMNED AND BOYCOTTED FIJI

(1)  Admission that political advisers to the government have botched decisions resulting in a cost something in the order of $20 billion.

(2)  Boat refugees that have chosen to skip Nauru and go home again given $3000 each by the government as “compensation”.

(3)  The pursuit of a temporary seat for Oz on the UN Security Council has, to date, cost a reported $40 million.

(4)  1000 new cotton/rice farms have been permitted to open in the Eastern States during the last 12 months.

(5)  A revenue shortfall tipped this year of $25 billion whilst the country’s borrowings exceeds $240 billion and continues to rise.

(6)  Gillard announces a $6.5 billion School Education Funding plan but is unable to say how it will be funded

(7)  Dental care plan for children announced by Plibersek at a cost of $2 billion but she can’t say how it will be funded either.

(8)  The price of “spin doctors” presently employed by the Federal Labor Government now costing $150 million a year

(9)   Each public service employee was given a bonus of $1000 to “head off industrial unrest” at a total cost of $33 million.

(10)   $320 million was promised by Gillard at the Pacific Forum Conference to help increase the number of female politicians in the Pacific.

(11)  The Treasurer suggested planning to further tax the nation’s $1.4 trillion superannuation funds in an attempt to balance his 2013 budget.

(12)   Australian Funding for Indonesia – 2012/13 – $578.4 million.

(13) National Broadband Network way behind schedule and blown out by another $1 billion –  total cost of the project – $43 billion  Expert opinion is that this cable system will be outdated long before it is finished being replaced by wireless broadband.

(14)  Failed Pink Batts Insulation Scheme – Cost $3.45 billion plus $424 million extra to repair the mess left by Minister Garret’s inefficiency.

(15)  An audit has revealed that the $540 million government scheme to boost literacy and numeracy in schools has totally failed.

(16)  An enquiry has revealed that the $16.2 billion “Building the Education Revolution”(BER) programme (administered personally by Gillard)  has totally failed. A number of schools destined for closure & demolition in the near future had new buildings erected during the scheme.

(17)  A headline from Adelaide ’s “The Advertiser” in 2009  … “OUR FUTURE MARKED BY RISING RIVERS OF RED INK”

(18)   The cost of recording the first round of Carbon Tax commercials was $350,000 followed by $340,000 for the second round. That’s $690,000 before buying any airtime.  Estimates also heard that the Government is planning another round of advertising to sell the Carbon Tax Labor promised not to introduce. And in anticipation of that, the creative advertising agency involved has had its contract increased by 50% to $3 million.

(19)  A planned National Disability Insurance Scheme … $10 billion – promised but unfunded.

(20)  Planned Child Care Subsidies …. $1.4 billion – promised but unfunded.

(21) The Immigration Department revealed that about $2 million has been spent flying 260 asylum seekers from Christmas Island to Nauru – averaging more than $7,600 per asylum seeker

(22) Nineteen lawyers worked on the Government’s defence of the Slipper/Ashby case at a cost of $780,000 to date.

(23) A portrait of Peter Slipper in his “Speaker’s Robes” destined to hang in the halls of Parliament has been commissioned at a cost of $30,000.

(24) Bureaucratic Excesses: The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry spent $21,000 on a single dinner. The Department of Industry spent $75,000 on just five coffee machines.

(25) Fair Work Australia has so far spent more than $1.8 million on external legal and accounting advice for its investigation into the rorting of Health Services Union funds.

(26)   $79,700 was spent building three fake kitchens for the Government’s Carbon Tax advertising campaigns.  Using real kitchens would have cost $5,000 a day.

(27) More than 10,000 asylum seekers arrived by boat so far this year – five times as many as Wayne Swan estimated when framing his Budget. The budget estimate of $1.1 billion was based on an average of 450 arrivals per month but actual arrivals are running at 5 times more on an average of 2,400 per month.

(28) While departmental officials refused to be drawn on the cost of the Budget blow-out we do know that in 2011/12 every boat that arrived cost taxpayers $12.8 million, or more than $172,700 for every person on board.

(29)  The present Social Security and Welfare Budget for 12 months is, in round figures, $131 Billion.  Assuming that there are 3 million Australians eligible for this that equates to $43,885 per person per annum.  The current age pension is $15,132 per person per annum so the question remains – where does the other $28,753 go?  Surely not administration?

Meanwhile Gillard has vehemently stated her opposition to pension increases for non-Labor voting pensioners. (”Sieg Heil Comrade mate?”)

(30) Gillard announced a white paper – “The Asian Century” – where Asian languages will be taught in all Australian schools for us to “better communicate with our Asian neighbours”.   The cost will be $6 billion which is, again, unfunded whilst an implementation strategy has yet to be formed. Fact: As there are many Asian languages and dialects most Asian business transactions are presently conducted in English.

(31)   Gillard announces her “Plan to Save the Murray”.  Quote: “We can deliver the extra water by investing $1.8 billion in infrastructure, water efficiency and fixing constraints like raising low bridges so more water can flow.”Unquote.

Raising bridges so more water can flow ????  Surely, bridges, no matter how high or low, do not normally restrict water flow?)

(32) Water Fact 1:  Gillard has “found” 450 billion litres of water at a cost of $1.8 billion to “Save the Murray”.

Water Fact 2: Cubby Station is licensed to take 460 megalitres a year from the river.  460 megalitres = 460 billion litres so, by closing Cubby Station the problem is solved & $1.8 billion is saved.  Where do we send our account?

(33)  Further Fabulous Failures:

(a) Grocery Watch

(b) Fuel Watch.

(c) $1 billion Cash for Clunkers failure.

(d) 450 GP Super Clinics promised …. Only 3 delivered.

(e) $2.1 billion promise of a “Laptop for every child”.

(f) $275 million “Green Loans” debacle.

(g) $534 million Solar Panel Rebate suddenly withdrawn.

(h) Promise to build 222 Child Care centres – abandoned.

(34)  $38.5 million spent for a pro-mining tax advertising campaign.

(35)  The gross Australian Federal Debt as at August 31^st 2012 was A$244,325,881,000.  ($244.3 billion) and continues to grow at $100 million a day.(That’s two hundred & forty four billion, three hundred & twenty five million, eight hundred & eighty one thousand dollars!)

(36)   A random quote from “The Punch”.    Headline quote: “Gillard & Swan are Failures, Not Leaders.” Quote from the text:  “Mr.Swan has undermined Australia’s international standings and jeopardised our economy.  He should have been sent to the back bench, not made Treasurer & Deputy Prime Minister.”  unquote.

(37)  And we won’t even mention the 3 or 4 year “protection” given to Craig Thomson by Gillard …..Thomson being the Health Services Union man who, by his statement, “had his credit card stolen” by “someone unknown” to “pay for prostitutes” and then “put back in his wallet again”  …… several times in fact!!

 

The outgoing chair of the Constitution Commission, Yash Ghai, has told Radio Australia Fiji police illegally confiscated printed copies of the draft constitution, and set some of them on fire. 

Ghai says all 600 copies of the draft document were seized from the printer three days before Xmas, on Saturday the 22nd.

He also told Pacific Beat he was abused by the police officer in charge of the operation when he tried to tell them their actions were illegal. 

Predictably the regime has not responded to the allegations. 

Ghai told presenter Bruce Hill he was called when police arrived at the printers to confiscate the copies of the proposed new constitution. 

GHAI: Well I decided that I would go to the printers and talk to the police and tell them that the copies of the draft constitution belonged to the commission and we had ordered the printing, we had done the report, therefore they should desist from confiscating those copies. 

HILL: What was the response of the police when you went down there and remonstrated with them about this?

GHAI: Well there were 12 policemen there who had been sent to collect the boxes, and they didn’t really know how to respond to me. And I said the police had always to act according to the law and the documents belonged to us. But they were a bit embarrassed and they didn’t know what to say. Then after a while they rang someone and they told me that the officer in charge of the particular operation was going to come and explain to me the reasons. Well it took about half an hour, a bit more, before that officer came, and he seemed very angry with me and was quite rude to me. But I explained to him the background of the printing of the documents. He used language I can’t repeat on the phone … and sort of brushed me aside and ordered the staff to, or the police to upload the boxes in the truck they had brought for this purpose. 

HILL: Presumably the police don’t make this decision by themselves. Did the officer in charge tell you had ordered this?

GHAI: No, he said he had his orders. I told him that I’d be trying to call the Commissioner of Police as soon as I heard that the police were at the printers, but I could not reach him. I wrote a letter when he I couldn’t reach him setting out the circumstances of the printing and saying that he should instruct his police not to confiscate them. And I showed him that letter and said if he were to take the copies, I would be grateful if he could sign that letter so that … but he took it knowing that I thought it was illegal. 

HILL: So was this in any sense legal? Was there a warrant to take these? Was this simply as you say a confiscation of what was officially the Constitution Commission’s property?

GHAI: No there were no instructions, no written instructions. In the beginning he just said this printing is illegal, and I said under what law? He said under the decree, he meant the decree which governs the process. And I said no, on the contrary, we are completely independent and we decide how we distribute our documents. Then I said he contradicted me, abused me, then I said are you a lawyer? He said no. I said well I am, and I’ve been working under the decree. And then it seemed that it was a bit pointless, so then I stopped trying to persuade him.

HILL: Now I understand that there was another incident just on the tail end of this in which some shredded copies of the final document the printers had used for proofing, were actually piled in front of you, soaked in kerosene and set on fire?

GHAI: Yes exactly and I was saying why are you setting it on fire? You have shredded it, nobody can put it together or you can just take it with you and you can cut up a bit further, but they insisted on, they brought a tin of kerosene and spread all the papers, brought some stick with a flame at the end and started the burning of it, and every few minutes or seconds they would come and put another dose of kerosene, so the flames would rise up again until everything was reduced to ashes.

HILL: As you were watching this draft constitution that you’ve been working on for months, what was going through your mind?

GHAI: Well I was of course extremely upset and I thought that this was some sort of symbolic act on the part of whoever gave the orders to tell me that this is how we will treat your work. And I felt extremely sorry, not for myself, but for the people of Fiji, if this was indeed an order from the government then it shows such contempt for our work, and in turn contempt for the people who had come out in their thousands and thousands to give us their views, participate in the process. And I felt really not just a betrayal, I just felt will Fiji ever have a democratic constitution.

HILL: Given that this has happened, what do you feel now about the government’s publicly stated commitment to return Fiji to democracy in a fair and transparent process?

GHAI: Well I hope that the government will ensure that the Constituent Assembly that it proposes to establish will really be representative of the people.

HILL: Given however that they quite literally made the constitution go up in flames in front of you, can you really have confidence that this government will actually do that?

GHAI: Well I have to say this is very discouraging.

HILL: Do we know where the actual physical printed copies of the draft constitution were actually taken away to by the police?

GHAI: Well they didn’t tell me. I heard some people say it will go to the Attorney General’s office, some saying it’ll go to the police station. And I had wanted to know because I had this letter they had signed saying they were taking it, but they won’t tell me where it was to be taken.

HILL: Given that this whole process is not your process, you were the chair of the commission, but it’s very much everyone’s process, a lot of people and groups in Fiji took part in this. What message do you think the people of Fiji should take from what’s happened?

GHAI: Well I don’t know, I think they should continue to take part in the remaining stages of the process, which is the next one is convening of the Constituent Assembly. The government has said those who wish to be on the assembly should express their interest through a letter to the PM’s office. And I believe that people should participate in the process despite their scepticism.

HILL: Well given what you’ve just said they would have a right to be sceptical wouldn’t they?

GHAI: Well they indeed have a right to be, but I think institutions like this one has to do one’s best to participate. I think people should participate even though they have reservations about the process.

HILL: You’ve done this sort of thing all around the world, you’ve been involved in similar activities in Kenya, in Cambodia, you’ve guest lectured in Sweden and America and all over the world. Have you ever faced a situation like this where something this bad has happened and you’ve been personally abused by a police officer?

GHAI: No not really. I’ve had hard times in many places, but not quite to this extent, and I have never been in a process where there has been such an attempt to hide the recommendations of a body which was setup by this very government, which was encouraged to have a completely participatory process, which was assured they’ll be completely independent. And if this is the draft to be discussed by the Constituent Assembly, I would have thought that in keeping with good process people should have had a chance to read and discuss this, which indeed was what we had agreed, and that was what was in the decree which started the process.

HILL: Is there anything that we haven’t touched on in this interview that you’d like to mention about what’s happened and what it means for Fiji?

GHAI: Fiji cannot go on like this. Fiji has to return to some normality, but above all it has to make decisions about the future, about working and living together, creating national unity around certain common values, which are sketched out in great detail in the draft constitution, and which we believe is what people wanted. This is what we gathered from our discussions with them. I’d very much like to be able to encourage all the sides to work together. This is not a question of party politics, this is a question of the national interests and a constitution has to be a consensus document, otherwise it fails to perform its essential function of a kind of social contract. I have done the best I could, I’m an outsider, I was privileged to be asked to chair it. I was able to look at all points of view with some objectivity, and to suggest a compromise, not even a compromise really because I think it’s in the interests of all the groups that institutions, procedures, values we have recommended should become the foundation of Fiji.

Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama (Call me Frank), did all the right things.

As cyclone Evan warnings came in, he made a personal appeal to every citizen of Fiji to heed the warnings and be responsible in their actions.

After the cyclone had torn through Fiji, he donned his $600 army boots plus a red cap and went out to see and assess the degree of damage for himself, and in keeping with his normal style did it the hard way by covering a great deal of the area on foot, meeting poor people who had lost everything. In addition he authorised the immediate use of the RFMF and prisoners to participate in the clean up of debris. These actions make him unique amongst Fiji’s Prime Ministers.

On the other side of the coin (we no longer have heads and tails) the Minister for Most Things opted to restrict his participation to joy riding in the helicopter that was sent to outer islands and inaccessible areas to review the damage and needs of the poor people who were hit so badly. We can only hope that he and his accomplice took time to present an accurate written report on the needs of the people on his return.

SUMMARY:
WELL DONE FRANK, as for the Minister for Most Things, it would be better if you did not make personal photo opportunities out of poor peoples misfortunes.

1. Honorable Chairman and distinguish members of our Constitution Commission. It is a proud moment in our history as we present the RFMF’s submission. There is a sigh of happiness and a stream of sorrow amongst us as we recall the sacrifices made by numerous Fijians and members of the Armed Forces in their endeavors to achieve this milestone. Lives were sacrificed by our brothers and sisters at arms in an effort to steer Fiji on a new course, to happy and prosperous times, towards a better Fiji.

2. The efforts of the Honorable Prime Minister and Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces are commendable. The vision to unite all Fijians, to develop a thriving and harmonious society, a forward looking Fiji that equates and meets the challenges of our evolving society and international setting is commendable. From the outset, we would like to reiterate that the Forces fully support the endeavors of our Honorable Prime Minister and Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces and will continue to do so in times ahead.

Read full submission at this link > rfmf_constitution_submission-final

Theft of current Fiji pensioners funds by reforms made to the Fiji National Provident Fund were essential to avoid bankruptcy, says Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama, omitting to make any mention of the almost three billion dollars owed to the Fund by government, or the decrees his government put in place to stop pensioners taking their claims to court.

Speaking at the Attorney Generals conference in Natadola, Bainimarama said they have ensured the continuity of FNPF for you and your children’s benefit and if they had not instituted the reforms FNPF would have gone bankrupt by 2052. “So for example, if you are 25-years old now, in 40 years time, there would not have been any money in the FNPF for your pension, even though you would have contributed towards it for your entire working life,” said Bainimarama. Bainimarama said they would have betrayed all Fijians who had expected to retire with dignity if the reforms were not implemented. He said these significant reforms have been commended by The International Social Security Organisation.

He also said the topics selected for the conference will help stimulate discussion on a number of key areas of reform and among these are inter-country adoption of children, land registration systems, new company laws, the Independent Legal Services Commission, court procedures and practices and, of course, constitution and constitutionalism.