NATIONAL PARLIAMENT OF
DAILY HANSARD
SECOND MEETING – EIGHTH SESSION
The
Hon Speaker, Sir Peter Kenilorea took the Chair at
Prayers.
At prayers, all were present with the exception of the
Ministers for Lands & Survey, and the Members for
West New Georgia/Vona Vona,
and Small Malaita
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
4. Mr
KEMAKEZA to the Minister for Finance
& Treasury: Can the Minister for
Finance confirm to Parliament that the Family Charity money has been
traced? If so, how much and when will
payments be made?
Hon Ulufa’alu: Mr Speaker,
the answer is ‘no’.
Mr Kemakeza: The same
Minister assured Parliament that the money came in and went out the next day,
and now he is saying ‘no’. Which of his
answers are true?
Hon Ulufa’alu: Mr Speaker,
if the honorable Member wants to know then he has to ask himself
that question. In the press release made
by the honorable Prime Minister on 1st October, there will be a
Commission of Inquiry set up to look into this matter. That has been made public already and so if
there are relevant information that honorable Members of this House have
including the MP for Aoke/Langa Langa then they
should furnish the Commission of Inquiry with those information.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
if the honorable Minister for Finance wants an answer from the MP for Savo/Russells, the finding is what the Governor of the Central
Bank said that the inquiry made by the last Administration found there is no
money for the Charity Fund in any of the Commercial Banks and also in the
Central Bank. That is the answer of the
previous administration.
This question was raised because the MP for Aoke/Langa
Langa who is now the Minister confirmed to this floor
of Parliament that there is money. It is
because of that answer that this question was raised for the Minister to inform
the floor of Parliament and to the members of the Fund and to my people of Savo/Russells who also paid their money to confirm what he
previously said on the floor of this Parliament last time.
Hon Ulufa’alu: Mr Speaker,
the MP for Savo/Russells is referring to what was
said in the last session and not this session of Parliament.
Mr Kemakeza: The same
person who made that statement last time is now the Minister of Finance. I believe he has records but since he said
‘no’, Mr Speaker, I would like to ask a further question. Where did he get his information of the past in
relation to him being now the Minister for Finance?
Hon Ulufa’alu: Mr Speaker,
information will be furnished to the Commission of Inquiry as proposed by the
Prime Minister. That is where such
information can be furnished and also where the information by the MP for Savo/Russells would also be furnished whatever they may be.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, before I thank my colleague, the
Minister for Finance, I would like to make it very clear because the same issue
was also brought to my administration last time. I am asking this question purposely for the
Minister and the Government to inform the people that there is no money, and
that is the answer to everyone expecting money from the Charity Fund. The Minister of Finance, the MP for
Aoke/Langa Langa is now saying that there is no
money. With that, Mr Speaker, I thank
the Minister for his answers.
6.
Mr KEMAKEZA
to the Prime Minister: Can the Prime
Minister inform Parliament of the Government’s present position on
the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) program in
Hon SOGAVARE: Mr Speaker, there is no change to the
position of the government to the position taken by the Parliament in 2003.
Mr Kemakeza: I would like to thank the honorable Prime
Minister for his answers.
Questions No 18 and 19 deferred
BILLS
Bills – Second Reading
The 2006 Supplementary Appropriation
Bill 2006
Hon ULUFA’ALU: Mr Speaker, I
rise to move that the 2006 Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2006 be read the
second time. The Supplementary
Appropriation Bill before this honorable chamber is seeking additional funding
to complete the requirements of this fiscal year for 2006.
Mr Speaker, a total sum of $72.6million
has been sought under this supplementary appropriation bill. On the recurrent $9.5 million has been
requested and on development for SOPAC $0.5 million, which makes it to $10
million.
In addition to that $10 million there
is also in the Bill pressures that have come about during the course of this
fiscal year and this is the first Parliament meeting for this Session. And as a result there would be a requirement
of $42million thus bringing the total to $52 million. In addition there is a new funding being
proposed for poverty alleviation of $20 million which will be the basis of the
new millennium fund. Here Mr Speaker, we
are sure that our good friend, the ROC would provide the funding of $20 million
which will be about $400,000 for each of the constituencies.
The object of this particular fund
is to carry out the process of legalization of our constituencies’ entities so
as to qualify under the laws of the land. At the moment this particular aspect of our
society is not legalized hence legitimate but not legal hence void in law. This means it has no value but is dead, and
therefore something that is dead cannot grow.
No wonder our lifestyle is very difficult to grow because it is void
under the present laws of the land.
The $400,000 hopefully will aid the
constituencies to be able to establish the legal structures. In other words, legalizing the legitimate
structures they have at the moment which will include land holding. That is the new drive way we are hoping this
new funding will provide the base to the bottom up approach to development.
Mr Speaker, $20million would be made
available making the total supplementary appropriation to $72.6million that
Parliament is being asked to approve.
Mr Speaker, to provide further
explanation to this matter, honorable colleagues would note that in the
Committee of Supply there would be a corrigendum to correct some errors in the Bill
itself so as to make it conform to the practices that we have. Therefore, if honorable colleagues are having
difficulty with this at the moment, it shall be corrected in the Committee of
Supply when a corrigendum will be made available this evening to MPs.
Mr Speaker, that is being sought for here and I am pleased to inform this
Chamber that this additional funding will not put a big strain on the budget so
that it becomes a deficit. In fact it
will be still a balance budget as envisaged in the original 2006 Appropriation Bill.
Mr Speaker, I am glad to inform the
House that measures we have taken to optimize our revenue collection has achieved
their desired objective but we still have a long way to go because of debts we
accumulated over the years. We still
have a long way to go. I would like to
appeal to honourable Members of this chamber and other corporate citizens to
observe that under no circumstances shall we practice the usual exemption to the
Goods Tax and import duties and all that.
We will do our best to live within what we have henceforth the principle
of giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.
Mr Speaker, do not give to Caesar a
zero value because that is not fair. So
I am asking the honorable colleagues as well as their friends and our people to
observe the principle of giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God
what belongs to God. I am asking this
Parliament so as to enable us restore financial credibility that will make this
country grow forward.
With the legalization process we are providing funds
for, Mr Speaker, we do hope and pray that we have now, which is 90% of what
Solomon Islanders have at this point in time is of no value to Solomon
Islanders. Only 10% of what they have
has value because it is officially registered under the laws of the land. In other words, Mr Speaker, like I said
yesterday we are trying to evoke, and in fact we have been evoking the anger of
the Almighty God by denying the truth about ourselves. And the truth about ourselves is that we are
what we are. What we were and what we
are and what we will be we are. That is
what we should be all striving towards and not trying to be somebody else when
you are not that somebody.
We should be using the $20million provision to
legalize the legitimate structures in our society, our practices, our norms,
our values. Because only then we are
compatible with the will of the Almighty Father and unless we do His will there
is no other way. There is no other
way. Like I said yesterday there is no
other way. You are the way, the truth,
and the life but there is no other way.
Mr Speaker, with these few comments I beg to move.
(applause)
The motion is open for debate
Mr HUNIEHU: Mr Speaker,
thank you for allowing me the floor of this parliament to contribute just very
briefly to the supplementary appropriation bill.
Mr Speaker, as this is the first
supplementary appropriation presented by this government, it should have
reflected its rural focus and commitment to this country. I fail to see whether this is reflected in
these expenditures that were just explained by the honorable Minister of
Finance.
Of course, we have a history of
supplementary appropriation in this Parliament and government, and it is the
result of under budgeting on various government expenditure heads which
requires Parliament to approve further funding.
At the same time most of the supplementary appropriation bills is the
decision of the Cabinet. After the
budget has been passed, Mr Speaker, there are new
expenditure items that need to be incurred to continue with government services
and therefore, the Cabinet would then approve further spending which requires a
supplementary appropriation bill like this one.
Sir, the supplementary appropriation
bill underpins the fiscal policy and practices and the fiscal behavior and
action of any government. It can be seen
here where the focus of government expenditures are. It is very, very clear in the authorized
expenditures and is very clear where this government is leading us into the
future.
Whilst this government had unleashed
its statement of policy focusing on rural development -rural focused, I fail to
see these commitments reflected in this 2006 Supplementary Appropriation Bill
2006.
The Finance Minister may have talked
about the $20million new millennium but this is a bilateral grant with the Republic
of China. There are no new real increases. It is a bilateral grant labeled here under a
new scheme called the millennium fund. Whatever
happens, the $20million is going to be expended on rural projects
anywhere. The only difference is that it
increases rural constituency commitments from $400,000 to now $1million. But it is a same fund, there are no new funds
added to the rural people of this country.
But yet, Mr Speaker, when you look at agriculture development, tourism
industry, renewable energy, fisheries, infrastructure, forestry, ecclesiastical
development, land reform, Mr Speaker, these are not reflected in this
budget. But these are the key sectors
the government needs to focus and spend its money on.
During the last budget the previous administration
were told that there was a surplus of $200million. Where is that surplus now? Where has it been spent Mr Speaker? Is it spent on rural projects or government
operational activities Mr Speaker?
Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, when we talk so much about rural development
government actions are pointing differently.
We continue approve increases in wages for Public
Servants, for Permanent Secretaries, for Members of Parliament. Are these the new political directions that
we talk about in our rural focus and in our bottom up approach? And how deep is your bottom up approach Mr
Speaker? How deep is that bottom up
approach? It is not reflected in the
supplementary, not one bit, it is not reflected in here.
Minister for Planning (interjecting): Next year.
This is just a supplementary.
Mr Huniehu: Next year is
next year, I want to see it right now. We are talking about today,
we are talking about the supplementary appropriation bill now under discussion.
I would have thought we should be overspending on the agriculture
sector and so asking Parliament to bless the expenditures, but that is not to
be seen here. I would accept more
increased expenditures on tourism, renewal energy and fisheries, but these are not
to be seen and not reflected here. We are
only seeing $40million to be spent on emoluments. Is the new focus increasing our own salaries
and paying little attention to the rural people? That is not how we should be providing
leadership for change and yet this government calls itself the Coalition for Change. Change to where? You are navigating us to the reef.
Mr Kemakeza (interjecting): Change to hell.
Mr Huniehu: That is where
you are leading us, that is where you navigating us Coalition of Change. Where are the changes here Mr Speaker? I would have thought that any changes we make
here must reflect our desirability to improve the living standards in the rural
areas, the impoverished. That is why we
have employed the Secretary to Cabinet, an expert in rural development. But none of his wisdom is reflected in the
first supplementary appropriation, and I did not expect anything better in the
next budget session next year. I don’t
think there will be any change. We started
off doing many wrongs Mr Speaker. We
have started wrongly. We have decided to increase our own pay, which means
paying little attention to the little people of this country who are the producers
of commodities we export. These are the people,
the 5,000 villages in this country that produces the copra, the cocoa and
timber that we export. We are paying lip
service in this Parliament. We are doing
things for ourselves again without doing much for those people. I hope the Minister of Finance will take this
very serious.
I have been a long advocate of renewable energy and at
the moment I want to repeat myself that more than 30% of our import is fossil fuel. There is no reflection in this supplementary
appropriation bill to address the need for this country to become energy
efficient.
The
price of fuel in the next 10 years will be around US$120 per barrel. That is what experts predicted, and it will be
selling in the rural areas at $100 per gallon.
Where are we putting our bets on this issue? Is the Minister addressing this in this
budget? We must start now. It is very important that we start right now.
I thought that a supplementary
appropriation bill is where the Cabinet should be introducing such programs as
and when the time comes. Unfortunately
most of these costs were for holding of meetings, some more meetings
overseas. What sort of direct benefits
do these meetings have for the rural people in this country? What sort of direct benefits? They come here and draw up communiqués and
off they gone tomorrow and nothing happens after. This is what happens after an international
meeting is held. The host countries are
only given a thank you for doing the best for them and nothing happens.
Whatever we do, Mr Speaker, it is the rural people
that must be the cornerstone of our plan.
Mr Speaker, if I can express this statement that our situation in
relation to our foreign relations is not very conducive to further any increased
assistance that we might require from our development partners. We must have a good relationship and maintain
good relationship with our development partners because they are part of our
development process.
We are not an island in the sky. Many people would like to over emphasis
sovereignty in this country but little do they realize that more than 60 to 70%
of our budget is derived from those foreign people whom they view as may be
over selling their products in this country.
No, Mr Speaker.
The diplomatic stand-off between
We are talking about millennium funds Mr Speaker, we
may have started now, but the need is for the millennium funds to be increased
for the betterment of the rural people. We
cannot increase the millennium fund if we continue to have stand-off,
diplomatic stand-off with people who are pumping their tax payers’ money into
this country.
Many people are over emphasis indigenism,
sovereignty. This is where we must
exercise a fair bit of flexibility. If
we don’t then we will be falling victims of our own self in the leadership that
our people depended upon so much to improve their standard of living in the
rural areas.
Sir, I don’t want to speak any longer, I will be
making some more comments at the committee of supplies when the figures are
discussed much more in detail.
In conclusion the message that I have been trying to
express here is that we must do the best for the rural people of this
country.
What has happened in the last 4 or 5 months we have
been saying the right things. The government has been saying the right
things, which is rural focus but it was doing the wrong things. It said the right things in its policy
statements, and in its programs of actions, nobody is disputing that. But their actions, there doings, the way they
conduct themselves does not reflect what they say.
I
always said many times that Solomon Islanders are good at saying the right
things and doing the wrong things. Little
do we realize that the whole of Solomon Islands agree with me now that this
government is good at saying the right things but doing the wrong things. I hope the new government for change, the Coalition for Change will reassess its
priorities, will reassess its conducts, will reassess its relationship with our
overseas development partners and will reassess its commitments with our people
by allocating more resources to the sectors that will help our rural people
more.
I hope that the next budget next year, if this
government survives the vote of no confidence on Friday, it will bring more
welcome news to the rural people in
Sir, I support the supplementary appropriation bill.
Mr
Mr Speaker, I do share the comments raised by the
Member for East Are Are. And I don’t want the government to take me
wrong here. I have been a very strong
supporter of the government and I have always been very vocal on issues raised
in Parliament especially when it comes to government spending.
This Government came into being more than six months
ago. It has delivered some of the policies
it came up with and some of the policies are exactly the right policies at the
right time in the development of our political history.
Mr Speaker, I have read through the Bill and it would
appear to me that unfortunately the Minister of Finance and the Minister of
Planning do not seem to have any control over the drafting of this Bill and do
not seem to be taking control in the direction as to how and where money will
be spent.
I have only read this Bill yesterday but with my
experience in reading bills, I noted this Bill as being poorly drafted. It also raises the question whether this Bill
has gone through the Office of the Attorney General.
I have looked through the Bill and unfortunately in my
view it could have been better presented.
It is quite unfortunate that the Bill has been presented in the way it
appears on floor of Parliament. But that
said, on the other end I do not seem to really see, and I continue to share the
comments raised by my colleague of East Are Are that
whilst the government came up with very good policies, more so focused, people
centered and growth oriented, those policies do not seem to be reflected in
this supplementary appropriation bill.
I am raising this issue, Mr Speaker, because this Bill
is the only instrument by which the government can legally spend money and
unless the policies are translated in this instrument it is quite unfortunate
that those policies cannot be transformed into workable programs.
We only have three months remaining to spend this
money. Three months is a lot of time for
people in the rural areas. Three months
is a lot of time for people cooking copra, cooking cocoa, people who are going
out fishing and cutting timber.
Unfortunately, these policies by the government which have been very
good on paper are not seen on this Bill.
Mr Speaker, if we look at the Bill itself on page 4,
some of these heads appear as funny, and that is why I raised the comment that
the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Planning do not seem to have control
over the drafting of this Bill. Just
look at page 4, for example, under the heads - the recurrent pressures. If you look at the heads at the bottom of the
same lines ‘all heads’, according to the Standing Orders Mr Speaker, this
doesn’t quite reflect what is required of the Parliament.
Some kind of new terminologies have also appeared in
the drafting of this Bill Mr Speaker, and that is why I am raising it.
Mr Darcy: Point of order Mr Speaker. I thought the Minister of Finance in moving
the second reading has clarified that there will be a corrigendum to be produced
to correct the point that has been raised.
I thought it is appropriate to raise it at this stage so that we do not continue
to mislead and misunderstand each other on the debate of this Bill.
Mr Speaker:
The Minister of Finance in introducing did refer to a corrigendum that will be
forthcoming at the committee of supply stage.
Mr Zama: Mr Speaker, I
have taken note of what the Minister of Finance raised in those comments but it
is a matter of concern for Parliament, for this legislature. In future when we bring in bills to
Parliament we must first of all make sure that it is checked and
straightened. The corrigenda will come but
if you look at previous supplementary bills that come before Parliament they
were presented very neatly. That is the
issue I am trying to raise here. I am
also not in favour of officials driving these bills to Parliament. I have been
very well informed when the bill appeared in Cabinet it appeared neatly but
when it appeared in Parliament it is not neat as is what appeared.
But Mr Speaker, I will support this Bill as a matter
of ongoing concern and as a matter for government to spend to
I have read through the bill and what would appear is
that we are offloading. The government or
the officials are simply offloading what they have spent over the recent months
through the provision of the contingency warrant. That is what simply appears on the Bill.
There is very little the government will spend. As the MP for East Are Are had raised very little on government policy is being reflected
on this bill here. That is the
unfortunate part of it.
Whilst I support the Bill to allow the government to
spend it will be spending on a growing concern simply to get this government or
the Finance to spend until December 31st. But to allow the government to make new
spending to reflect its policies, there is nothing in this bill on that unfortunately.
That is why I am bitterly angered because I have put a lot of emphasis on key
sectors to drive the economy but they are not reflected here. I am simply expressing my concern as a supporter
of the government and a person who believes in rural development. That is
simply where I am coming from.
Mr Speaker, I think we could have done a lot better in
terms of presentation. I want the
government to take total control in terms of drafting and in terms of making
sure our policies are driven and reflected in the budget because the budget is
the only working tool of the government, and unless these policies are
reflected, I am sorry regardless of how sweet or good our policies they cannot
be implemented.
Mr Speaker, with those few remarks I support the Bill.
Mr KEMAKEZA: Mr Speaker, I
too would like to contribute very briefly on the bill. In doing so, I would like to thank the
hardworking Minister of Finance for seeing it fit in bringing this 2006
Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2006.
Before I touch on the Bill, the Minister said there are
no other ways but only one way. But I
say that there are ten ways, the Ten Commandments, and the two very important
ones are “Love your neighbor as yourself”.
Do not create enemies. The second
one is “Do not take the name of the Lord in vain”. These are two very important ways, but there
are ten and not one as mentioned by the Minister of Finance.
Mr Speaker, my observation of this bill and in the light
of what the Minister mentioned, I am very happy to see that we go in the
direction of 50 constituencies. However,
what the two previous speakers, the MP for East Are Are
and Rendova/Tetepari mentioned are true, and I do not
want to repeat what they have said except a few points that they missed.
First, in order to legislate
the structure we need some regulations or rules or amendments in the Act
because there are only two authorized tiers of government, which are the
National Government and Provincial Government. The same government, the
same ministers, the same Minister of Provincial Government removed number
three – the area councils.
In the absence of this, and in the light of what the
Minister said there should have been some amendments coming with this
allocation to legalize it as he rightly said.
I am very pleased with this allocation but what are the set of rules
that we the 50 Members of Parliament are going to follow? What would be the set up so that the $20million
we wanted to go down to the 50 constituencies is legislated as set by the
Minister of Finance? That is the point I
would like him to tell me or tell the floor or this nation when he
replies.
The second point is exemption. The 50 constituencies
automatically qualify for exemption as long as there is approval from the Clerk
because the money spent from RCDF or micro or this money for that matter should
be exempted because it is government money.
The Government never taxes itself. The Minister also needs to clarify this point.
But there is smoke inside the bushes that even the new
Minister of Planning who was last time supervising Finance Minister (acting) for
a while and also the substantive Minister of Finance are saying there will be no
exemptions from day one. However, it
seems that exemptions are flying left, right and centre nowadays. I have records and will prove this on the
floor of Parliament.
What is happening here is that we are saying one thing
and doing another thin. I thank the MP
for East Are Are for saying that. We are very good at saying something and
doing the opposite. That is another
point the Minister touched in his speech and that is the reason why I must tell
it out.
Another point that qualifies previous speakers who
both missed this very important point is that we are now in the first
year. In the second year our people would
want to see something. In the third year
I tell you is preparation for election and there will
be no Ministers here. Everyone
of us will go home to talk to our people. Where were you in the last three
years? You better get home. Wee do not have enough time. The fiscal measures stated by the MP for East
Are Are should already be here in this appropriation
bill so that it goes in line with the policy directive of the government for
change.
Sir, the other thing is that three quarter of this
money has already been spent. I want to ask
the Minister in his reply whether you have changed the rules now because in the
previous administration you cannot spend the money until you bring it to
Parliament. Now it is different. You spend the money first and then you come to
ask Parliament for its blessing. You are
going back to the old way once again. You
hate the old way and now you are repeating the same old fashion because three
quarters of this money has already been spent by the bunch of you going
overseas and getting new cars. Some
Ministers are garaging more than one car, and some have three, and four cars. What qualifications do you have, what other
entitlements do you have so that you have many cars? Don’t tell me, no, I’ve seen it. Goodness me!
You are only entitled to just one official car. Or is it one for domestic except for the Prime
Minister who is entitled to three vehicles.
So many new cars. Is that what you call political new
direction? This money is already three
quarter spent.
Sir, I further endorse what the MP for Rendova said that this Bill is poorly drafted. It should not find itself on the floor of this
Parliament. Where is
the Bills Committee and the Public Accounts Committee? The Public Accounts Committee should automatically
reject this Bill. This Bill should not have
found its way into this House. And if you
say it is in the corrigenda where is it. The corrigenda should be attached to the Bill
before the second reading. Don’t tell me
the procedures. The paper is here but
where is the corrigenda so that we can properly debate. We are debating an ill prepared bill.
Mr Huniehu: Point
of order. As the Chairman of the Bills
and Legislation Committee, this Bill came through the backdoor. We did not see it.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
if it is not done procedurally you should reject this. If I was in your chair I would have rejected
this bill straight away.
Hon Sogavare: Point of
order. Supplementary appropriations bill
over all these years have never come through the Bills Committee.
Mr Kemakeza: I do not
remember what the Prime Minister is saying.
If it is there then he must correct his statement. Every bill must go through the Bill’s
Committee.
I was sitting in the kitchen yesterday evening after
Parliament and I heard these people talking about going to discuss this
bill. Has it been discussed at all? If not, how come it finds it way into Parliament? However, we are cowboys, so just go ahead!
Mr Speaker, as I said the money has been spent already
and there is no way that anyone on this floor of Parliament will object
it. But a word of warning that the
policy directive is not seen here and in the reply of the Minister, because of
one Minister and one department from Planning he must confirm to this
Parliament that the European Union Micro projects have closed by last
Friday. What is this a sign of? I want you to confirm this to Parliament. I know the Minister of Planning is fully
aware of this. Things are gradually
taking up their cause.
Here we are talking about our development partners
coming to assist us, which I am very grateful for and I congratulate the
ROC. I thank the Prime Minister for
continuing with that very important relationship but things are creeping behind
the doors.
Sir, I support the Bill only because the money has
already been spent but next time as mentioned by the MP for Rendova/Tetepari,
the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee that he should also scrutinize
this Bill as a very strong backbencher of the Government to ensure that such a bill
comes into this House in the right way, the right manner, the right formula and
must be procedurally done. Here he is complaining
about the Bill. Next time, as Chairman
of the Public Accounts Committee, take control on behalf of the two Ministers
because they have not done their homework and that is why this Bill passes
through because they may have not looked at it properly.
With this, Mr Speaker I support the Bill.
Mr FONO: Mr Speaker,
thank you for allowing me the floor to contribute briefly to this 2006
Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2006.
From the outset I would like to thank the Minister of Finance for bringing
this Bill to ask Parliament to rubberstamp, support or endorse and approve this
Bill which much of the money already spent.
Sir, apart from the contingency warrant as it appears
on page 3, Mr Speaker, other spending would seem to be illegal because the
Parliament has not given its approval but the government continues to
spend.
Mr Speaker, as a member of the
Public Accounts Committee, I totally rejected this Bill yesterday on
technicalities already highlighted by other speakers. For example, some of the spending here do not have any heads at all. Although shared by all other ministries, at
least in previous presentations of supplementary appropriation bills, something
is allotted to every ministry as well so that when it comes to the committee of
supply speakers can make reference to heads. As it now appears here on page 4 some of these
items do not have any head at all. To me
this does not reflect a thorough consideration of this bill at the Caucus or
Cabinet level. This surprises me because
we have very able Ministers in Cabinet, some of whom are former Permanent
Secretaries of Finance who should have scrutinized this Bill thoroughly.
Another technical problem I see is that the
explanatory notes do not have heads as well – on page 7 & 8. So I do not accept the actual presentation of
the Bill at the Public Accounts Committee yesterday. We also questioned as to why there was no
corrigendum attached to this Bill before it comes for its second reading.
Similarly, Mr Speaker, the terminology ‘additional
pressures’ or ‘recurrent pressures’, the word ‘pressure’, my background is accountant
too but this is the first time I see the word ‘pressure’ used here as it is not
an accounting term.
I asked the good advisors, which we have a number of
them at the Finance Ministry to look for any other accounting terminologies. This is my third term in Parliament and it is
the first time I see this word ‘pressures’.
Is it air pressure or what sort of pressure? Mr Speaker, I would like the officials to
replace that terminology with an accounting term. These are the technical difficulties why I
did not accept this Bill at the Public Accounts Committee meeting yesterday. I would like officials to come up with a
redrafted bill so that it does not confuse us when it comes before the
committee of supply.
Turning to the principles of the Bill
and the speech made by my good friend, the Minister of Finance in moving the
Bill, Mr Speaker, I can see the importance of such a supplementary
appropriation to come before the House because we are now in the final quarter
of the year and spending have gone beyond what have been budgeted for. The rationale behind this supplementary is
very much supported to enable the government continue with its services to our
people.
However, Mr Speaker, as also
highlighted by other speakers, the government is now in its sixth or seventh
month and therefore whatever budgets it has, it must reflect the policies of
the government. Policies are mere
policies that must be translated into actions, and that is why a budget is very
important. That is one of the reasons
why we in the Opposition issued a statement prior to this meeting expressing
our disappointment over the delay in tabling the budget this year.
Six months, Mr Speaker, is more than
enough time for officials and Ministers to put together a budget for 2007
reflective of your policies. We are
surprised why well paid accounting officers cannot put the budget
together. Is it because there is fear
donors are not coming out to make any commitment to the government’s budget
because of the current political stand-off that we are now experiencing, may I
ask Mr Speaker?
The reasons for not putting together
the appropriation bill 2007 to be debated at this meeting of Parliament is not
acceptable. Our general populace would
like to see the budget for next year reflecting the bottom-up approach or rural
development strategy the government is producing and has been talking so much
about, which influenced a number of members from the Opposition side going to join
the government because they have seen good policies. My goodness!
Mr Speaker, I am surprised as though the bottom-up
approach is a new concept. It is
not. Previous governments have been
doing it as well. And Mr Speaker, you
know very well being the founding father of the nation, I think during colonial
times until now we have had some developments in the rural areas as well. So for us to say this new roadmap that has
been talked so much about like the Minister for Agriculture has alluded to in
this House, is really not acceptable because it places very little recognition of
successive governments since independence, which have also tried their
best. In fact, on Malaita roads were
constructed after independence, which is rural focused. And that is not a new thing.
I am saying this because since I
entered Parliament, I am now implementing my third constituency development
plan where it is the communities that identify their priorities. That is a bottom-up approach.
Mr Speaker, when you look at this millennium
development budget of $20million, which some called ‘poverty alleviation’, where
are the guidelines and criteria on that policy?
I want the Finance Minister to distribute in our pigeonholes this week
the guidelines of this millennium development.
I have been saying this at the media when some
Ministers have already announced to their constituencies that this year
Parliament Members are going to receive $1million. We have been waiting for the guidelines to
that funding since. Why did you not
produce the guidelines or criteria on how to access this millennium development
fund?
You know what, Mr Speaker, what they
are saying is creating very high hopes and expectations to our people in the
constituencies. The people of some of the
Ministers who have never visited their constituencies are now coming to
Mr Speaker, I want the Finance
Minister or the Planning Minister to distribute the guideline policies on this
millennium development fund. How do we
access that? What will it be used for?
Mr Speaker, much has been said about
policy statements. I think what the
government needs to look at now are strategies on how to implement the policy
statements. Much of this rural
constituency development fund is very interesting. I understand it was introduced in 1989 with
$200,000 per year. Listen carefully to
me
Sir, I entered Parliament in 1997
and since that time $1.6million was given out.
Not even a single project can be seen.
If $1million is given this year Mr Speaker, we are looking at $5.2
million since 1989 up until this year if it is true that $1million will be paid
out to constituencies again. That is a
lot of money Mr Speaker, and honorable colleagues to develop the constituencies
that are very small. You could improve
their living standards by giving them good social housing. Like I have seen recently the Minister of
Mines already paying roofing irons for his constituency. That is very good. We need to improve our people’s standard of
living in the rural areas. People of
I am coming to my point Mr
Speaker. The strategy in which we
leaders implement the projects needs to be reconsidered again whether or not to
distance Members of Parliament from the funds and use government agencies to
implement the projects. Look for a
better alternative. Now that some
officials get their hands on other funding that come through departments, it is
also frightening. Like what we have seen
at Commerce and Agriculture Departments.
There must be a better mechanism to implement projects in our
constituencies so that this funding is tied up in social services projects like
education, health, clinics and water supplies so that it improves the
livelihood of our people in the rural areas.
At the same time Mr Speaker, look at
a mechanism that is empowering people in the private sector. We have also forgotten the formal sector too,
Mr Speaker, the ‘hen that lays the golden eggs’ because it is the one driving
the economy. But our private sector has
not been assisted with this sort of funding.
We only look at the informal sector,
we only talk so much about the informal sector but many of the projects that are
established today in the next few months we look for them.
What I am saying here Mr Speaker, is that it is well
and good to provide millions of dollars for rural constituency funding but we
need to re-look at a mechanism whereby social services projects or income
generating projects are established and sustainable for improvement of the
livelihood of our people. Otherwise as
records have shown since 1989 up until 2005 there was already $4.2million paid
out through RCDF (Micro Projects recently), which is a lot of money for the
smaller constituencies that its impact should have been felt.
What I have observed, Mr Speaker, is
that much of this money, although we have heard about as huge, is used on
consumable items. People come to
I am saying this, Mr Speaker,
because once we have clear guidelines funds would be used to implement projects
according to each constituency plan.
Mr Speaker, I encourage new Members
of Parliament to draw up constituency plan so that we look at different improving
the sectors like education, health, infrastructure so that we try and use this
funding on projects and not used for consumable items. Otherwise at the end of the four years there
is nothing happening in our constituencies.
That is basically the strategy or mechanism the government needs to put
in place Mr Speaker. Otherwise we might hear
of $20 million but it only goes for consumable items and no improvement of
livelihoods in our constituencies.
Mr Speaker, that
is an area I want the government to really look at. I believe we have our expertise, our advisers
to look at that so that they advise government to look at a best mechanism on
how to implement this rural funding, otherwise our people are hearing about this
funding but nothing is happening in their respective constituencies.
Mr Speaker, on the overall budget
allocation, I have no problems with that, which were also expressed in our
meeting yesterday, the Public Accounts Committee. It is the technical areas of this bill that I
want the Government to address. In fact if
I were the Minister of Finance, I would have asked the officials to redraft
this Bill to make it much easier for us to go through at the committee of
supply.
With these few remarks Mr Speaker, I
support the bill.
(applause)
Mr NUIASI: Mr Speaker, thank
you for giving me this opportunity to speak on this supplementary appropriation
bill 2006. Before I speak on this important
supplementary appropriation bill, I would like to thank the Minister of Finance
for seeing it fit to present to this honorable House additional funding we need
to expend until the end of this financial year.
Mr Speaker, I think rather than
confusing ourselves with a normal budget we should see this as a supplementary
budget that the government is asking an additional funding to expend what it
sees as outstanding issues that needs addressing this financial year.
Mr Speaker, a lot of us have been
talking about policies and guidelines to which we need to present them. As the honorable MP for West Are Are I do not expect much to be allocated to my constituency
as yet in this supplementation. Because
it is like a new owner of a house coming into a house and starting to clean it
up. Therefore, Mr Speaker, a lot of
outstanding issues that we are asking for but there is no funding for, are
issues that are outstanding which the government needs to address as from now
until the end of the financial year. Therefore,
Mr Speaker, one can see that a lot of this funding have already been spent, and
a lot of this funding that have already been spent are funds that are essential
needed to be spent and the government has to do so in line with the relevant
regulations or laws that are in place.
Mr Speaker, it would be unfair for
us to say that the Government is not doing anything because as we all have
experienced the Government has been trying to put in place its policies, its
guidelines, and more importantly to see where it can start from.
Looking at this supplementation, Mr Speaker, we are
addressing some very important issues that need to be addressed now before we
can start with new programs to be financially backed up. For example, the salary of Public Service is
a long outstanding issue and unless we give them incentives, production that we
expect from public officers will not be as of expected of the government. Likewise, the salaries of MPs that we have
been talking about are salaries that have been overdue and we are implementing
issues the last government has put in place but has not implemented.
Mr Speaker, the $20million millennium
funding is only here to start us off and to see how best we can utilize that
funding in our own constituency. As
leaders we should not only blame government for not giving us guidelines. We should also contribute towards the
guidelines and work together so that we are achieved what we need to achieve
for
Mr Speaker, as a new MP I need not
to repeat history. I am here not to talk
about the past but I am here to go forward and start to see what will be for
the future of this nation as an honorable MP.
Therefore, Mr Speaker, if we are fair and if we are genuine with
ourselves it would only be good if we put our heads together and discuss things
together especially on such important bills such as this supplementary
appropriation act. And then we should be
contributing towards the effectiveness or efficiency used for the funds as we
see.
Mr Speaker, looking at these
provisions, I think the technicality of it needs to be looked at. But one thing I can see here is that there is
lack of qualified accountants in the ministries. This is the only area I think the government
should look into to try and employ qualified accountants to sit there and
implement things as required by the government.
Having said this, Mr Speaker, I
would be very brief in contributing towards this supplementary, and I would
like to thank the Minister for Finance for seeing it fit for us to clean up all
these outstanding issues so that may be next year we could start with our
program of action.
I am also surprised, Mr Speaker, when
I heard that the Chairman of the Bills and Legislation Committee and the Chairman
of the Public Accounts Committee have not sighted this Bill. I think there is no use sitting waiting there
for information to come. As responsible
officers or honorable Members who vested with responsibilities, we should
follow up and see where these things are, so that we too can contribute as the
responsibility has been vested on us to see that things are done according to
our expectation.
Therefore, it is only proper for
every honorable MPs to work together to find out where we can help, where we
can fit in, in this honorable chamber or in the Ministries or in the Provinces
for that matter and contribute towards the betterment of this nation.
Mr Speaker, rather than going into
detail about this supplementary appropriation bill, I support the Bill.
Mr RINI: Thank you, Mr
Speaker, for giving me the floor to debate the 2006 Supplementary Appropriation
Bill 2006.
Mr Speaker, when I look at this Bill
it only shows two things. Firstly, there
was no proper coordination in the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of
Finance, the various departments concerned and the Attorney General’s Office in
the preparation of this Bill. That is
what can be seen. With all the
experiences of the Ministry of Finance, the Prime Minister’s Office, and even
the Attorney General’s Office, we can just see what they have produced. It is a shame on the government.
Secondly, Mr Speaker, when I look at
this Bill it shows two parts. I do not
have any problem with the first part.
The first part is the Government seeking to legalize spending under the
contingency warrant, and that comes to $10 million. That is quite normal. In the main budget the government approves
the contingency warrant and later on if heads are overspent then the Government
can supplement spending from the contingency warrants. So I do not have any problem with the first
part.
The second part that I have a
problem over is the additional $42.5million under the heading of ‘additional
pressures’. What sort of pressures are these? What sort of pressures are we talking about
here? These are illegal spending by the
government. They are illegal spending by
the government and they are now trying to come into Parliament to legalize this
spending.
Mr Speaker, when this government came into power it was
talking about corruption, it was talking about changing the system and that’s
why it has the name ‘Grand Coalition for Change’. It came in and changed the whole system
again.
The funds in this supplementary
appropriation bill, Mr Speaker, must not be spent first unless they come before
Parliament. When accounting officers saw
that their heads will run out before the end of the financial year, they
prepare supplementary and bring it before Parliament so that Parliament
appropriate the heads to enable the services of the government to continue. That understanding was taken by the previous
administration. No monies were spent
until passed by this parliament. Now this
government came in and changed this by going back to the old system where funds
are spent first before coming to ask the Parliament to legalize the illegal
spending it has made. That is what is
happening here.
Mr Speaker, I am surprised that in
the Translation and Implementation document of the Government launched in
August this year, it talks about the programs of the government starting in May
this year up until 2010. If you look at
this budget there is nothing on that.
Some programs in the document I referred to should start this year. But these programs are not even in the last
budget or in this supplementary. That
shows no coordination in the Prime Minister’s Office where the policies are
developed and in the Ministry of Finance where funds are allocated for implementation
of the policies. I am surprised Mr
Speaker, that none of the programs stated in the document launched in August
this year is seen in this supplementary, nothing.
Mr Speaker, when you look at these pressure
expenditures, which I called illegal expenditures, $30million is for salaries. Is that a pressure, pressure from who? There is $26million for Permanent Secretaries
and Public Service and $4million for Members of Parliament, which comes to
$30million for personnel emoluments.
That is all we come to create. Our
people elected us so that we come here to pay ourselves. That $30million should have gone to the
bottom up approach the government is talking about. There is not even a cent in this budget that
goes to this policy. Nothing.
Mr Speaker, that $42.5million under the pressure
heading is the amount the previous administration put into development budget
for rural development.
If you look at last year’s development budget,
$44million under SIG funding the previous government puts to rural development,
it put to the Ministry of Agriculture for cocoa rehabilitation, it puts to
forestry for replanting, it puts to the Ministry of Commerce for starting of business,
it puts to the Ministry of Tourism for our people to engage in various
businesses instead of relying on handouts that this government is trying to
do.
Mr Speaker, I am surprised that this money was
budgeted for last year for rural development and yet when this government came
into power it spends it on services and salaries.
Mr Speaker, again when you look into this
supplementary it only reflects the government’s attitude of talking about something
but doing a different thing altogether.
Mr Speaker, the only amount you will see here is this
$20million, and this $20million is not a new amount. This amount was negotiated by the previous
administration with the Republic of China, and so it is not a new amount.
Where is that $44million that was budgeted for last
year for rural development? Yesterday we
heard the Minister of Agriculture talking about his department’s priority project,
the Auluta Oil Palm Project. But Auluta is not
even included in this budget and yet it is a much talked about government
project. The Government is saying that
this project is its priority. It’s a
priority project of the government. Is
it priority for nothing? There is no
money for that priority project. It is not
even in the development budget.
If you look at the development budget, the Auluta basin, the Auluta oil palm
project is not in the development budget of this year. No wonder why when Ministry officials are making
payment to the Ministry Finance, the Ministry of Finance does not facilitate
the payments because it is not budged for.
It is not in last year’s development budget, not in this year’s
supplementary budget. How can the ground
breaking ceremony take place in December when there are no funds for it?
It shows very clearly too that this budget did no go
through the Cabinet because if it had gone through Cabinet the Minister of
Agriculture could have asked for his allocation of the oil palm project. Or perhaps the Cabinet was discussing a
different bill and the officials came up with a different bill which eventually
ended up here on the floor of Parliament. I have just heard the Minister of Agriculture
complaining that the Cabinet approved the project but why was it not included in
this supplementary. In your discussion
of this Bill at the Cabinet was it not brought back to Cabinet for finalizing?
Mr Speaker, even in the Governor General’s speech the
government focused on three very, very important issues, which are new political
directions, raising issues and identified prospects. These are very, very, important issues which
are not even reflected in this supplementary. There is nothing in this supplementary to
reflect those three issues.
This supplementary is only full of $30million in
salaries, foreign missions, overseas trips of the Prime Minister costing a
million dollar. Where will the Prime
Minister go in the next three months so that he asks for another million dollars? Security services, general
owners implementation $2million. That
is a big amount of money. I can see
$2million spent on reviewing of the GO’s but not the
implementation. The civil servants were
paid already for implementing the GOs or who are we
paying this $2million? Or are some
foreigners coming to teach us how to implement the GO?
Electricity and water, telephones, Mr Speaker, I am
surprised. There is nothing here for rural
development, nothing on the bottom-up approach. Nothing.
What we are doing here is only giving very high hopes to
people in the rural areas. We come out in
the newspapers, we come out on the radio saying this government is going to do
this and that, the government is now embarking on this project but those are
not reflected in this supplementary.
These are just bare statements.
There are no funding to implement those policies and projects.
Mr Speaker, on the $20million millennium development fund,
as I have said earlier, the last administration put funds in order for our rural
people have access to this fund. Our
people come to the Ministry of Agriculture because they saw the $3million on cocoa
rehabilitation and so they want to know how to access the fund. They were told there is no funding. They go to the Ministry of Forestry wanting
to know how to access the $4million on replanting because they would like to
plant trees. They were told the Cabinet
has to decide on the mechanism on how the fund is to be disbursed. But Mr Speaker, in reality these are just
excuses, all the money has gone which is reflected in this budget.
Mr Speaker, I must stress here again and I am happy
that the Minister of Finance has said that a corrigendum is going to come to
correct the mistakes on this bill. I am
happy he mentioned that because if that is not done then we should not accept this
bill to be brought into Parliament. Now
that he said a corrigendum is coming, I will reserve some of my points, queries
and question when we go into the committee stage of this Bill. With these remarks Sir, I support the Bill.
Hon SOGAVARE: Mr Speaker, I
would like to talk in support of this bill moved by the Minister of
Finance. I am going to be very short in
my contribution because most of the points have already been raised. Basically those who have spoken continue to
repeat the same points and so I guess I can read where the Opposition is coming
from.
Mr Speaker, the Opposition is like a boxer entering a
ring and started throwing punches that do not reach the target and yet he still
throws the punches. That is what it is
like. In fact we are making mountains
out of nothing. Mr Speaker, debate on
supplementary appropriation depends on which side of the House you are sitting
down. When we were on that side of the
House we also fired you. We really
attack you saying the same things that you are now saying to us. Now that you are sitting on that side of the
House you are firing us back because some of you are now in your third term,
some six terms in the House and so we are hearing the same things. So debating supplementary appropriations is
not a new thing. It is time for
political groupings to try and score political points. We are not interested in scoring political
points.
The point that was kept repeated by those who have
spoken is that the government has been saying a lot of things. Yes, we have been saying a lot of
things. The budget we are talking about
here, which needs supplementation, is your budget. This is the budget of that side of the
House. If we understand what
supplementary appropriation is all about is exactly what the law says it
is. It is your budget. We are trying to implement the programs that you
are putting on us. It is just that we
come in at the wrong time that we could not come up with our own budget and so
we need to take up your budget.
The Government is talking about totally redirecting
the direction of development in the country and so we are tied up. First you know that the budget is basically
law and so we need to comply with it. We
are stuck up with our program that we wanted to implement but we cannot and so
we can only operate through the law on what it allows us to operate.
Mr
Speaker, this hot air “where are the things you are talking about”, well, you
will see it in the 2007 budget. That is
where you will find it. If you raise the
concerns you are raising next year when the 2007 budget is tabled here then
this side will have cause to answer you on those issues you are raising. This one is your budget that we are trying to
fix.
Sir rural focus is a very big turn
around. It is not a swing or slight jerk. It is a turnabout. The economy is going like this and you turn
its head, and swing it like this. So it
is quite a drastic change in the approach.
Not only talk about it for the last 28 years. We are now seriously talking about setting up
a framework that will actually drive this thing forward and so it takes time to
settle these things. We are just five
months old buddies. This Government is
just five months old and it is already facing a no confidence motion.
Mr Speaker, I just don’t know where
the line of thinking is here. The
Ministry of Finance and Planning are working on this framework, and as soon as
that is finalised the Cabinet will be looking at it, and then everybody will
know how this bottom-up approach is going to work.
Of course, we have been talking
about it for the last 28 years. That is
only talking. This government is now
trying to look at how to really do something that we have been talking about
over the last twenty years.
The Member for East Are Are raised this
issue about the $200million surplus. We
are also worried. The other side of the
House is talking about surplus, and we have been asking where the $200million
surplus is when we were on that side. We
are still asking that question. Those of
us on this side of the House are asking that question. I guess that is an issue that you yourselves
can sort out.
On increase of MPs salaries, if anyone
of you Members do not want that increase say so and return the money so that we
can give it to may be other places.
Members of Parliament in this
country are underpaid. If you compare us
with small countries in the Pacific like
We are under pressure.
There was much talk of leaders as corrupt and leaders facing charges of
corruption, we are blamed as being corrupt, that can
happen to Members of Parliament because they have to accommodate the needs of
their constituencies. We are trying to
address that, and for us to come on the floor of Parliament and try to shoot
down the government because it is trying to address some fundamental issues, Mr
Speaker, I do not think is straight. We
are just making points because we are on the other side of the House.
Mr Speaker, I do not wish to talk very
long on this. On other issues that Members
have raised will be answered by the Minister for
Planning and the Minister of Finance.
They will enlighten the House on some technical questions that some Members
have raised in this House.
Yes, we can confirm the $1.75million to the
constituencies, and we thank the Republic of China for that. In fact it is the only donor that comes
positively to assist the government in its programs. This is towards the $200million micro project,
$400,000 RCDF and another $400,000 on millennium development and poverty alleviation
assistance. Then we have the $75,000
that comes under the Parliament Office, and so it is $1,075,000. That is quite a lot of money going to the
constituencies.
There was this talk about funds in
the Commerce, Tourism and Agriculture.
You know what? The way those
funds have been disbursed is really not right.
There are investigations going on this time, and that especially
reflects how we set up those systems. This
government does not want to repeat that.
People are paying themselves. The
officers are paying themselves, the officers working in those ministries. There are some serious revelations that are starting
to come up on how the so called funds that are established for supporting rural
people are disbursed. This government is
concerned about that and so it wants to set up a proper framework where the
money is not taken up by people who live here, but it goes down to the rural
areas. This is what this government
stands for.
Yes, we acknowledge the fact that it is in the budget
but the way it was disbursed was really not straight, and it borders on
criminality on the way those funds have been implemented.
Mr Speaker, I do not want to spend
more time on this, but I would like to say that I support this Supplementary
Appropriation moved by the Minister of Finance.
Thank you very much.
Mr LONAMEI: Thank you, Mr
Speaker, for giving me the chance to talk on this Supplementary Appropriation
Bill presented by the Minister of Finance this morning.
Firstly Mr Speaker, I am going to be
very brief and very short because most Members who have spoken have already
spoken on the good and bad sides of the bill.
Mr Speaker, talking about the
bottom-up approach and putting more emphasis on rural development, we all want
that idea and so we must support it.
On the bottom-up approach, Mr
Speaker, to me I translate it as to mean fairness. Fairness in everything that we give whether
it be money, resources, the types of development and
infrastructure. These things should be divided
equally or fairly to all the constituencies in the country.
Mr Speaker, when you look at the Supplementary
Appropriation Bill, one of the things I see that will be fair to everybody is the
$20 million millennium fund, a new item in this supplementary appropriation
bill.
Mr Speaker, we are very good in
saying that money like this and that is going to come, making people to have
high expectation. But now the fund is not
available. We are now just discussing it
for approve.
Mr Speaker, a lot of people in the
constituencies have already come asking MPs about the $1million. They want the money. Mr Speaker, I think it will be this time that
this money will be made available. I
think we should come up with policies on how we are going to spend the
money. I think it would be better if the
Government or the Ministry of Planning come up with the criteria. If you want us to plan it ourselves then
inform us properly so that I can start drawing up my own criteria on how I am
going to spend this money.
Mr Speaker, others have already
raised the RCDF, the micro project and now this millennium fund that MPs are
going to receive. The constituencies
that have a good Member, the people will benefit from these funds and they will
appreciate these funds. But the
constituencies whose Members are not good and do not recognize their people, no
matter how many millions are given in the form of the RCDF and micro projects,
the people are still going to say that they are not seeing anything or there has
been no better things happening in the constituencies.
I think we need to have policy
guidelines that all of us will work according to. I think that was the point raised by others
in here. Mr Speaker, I think for
fairness of this money that is going to come, I think all the 50 constituencies
will have a very good fair share of money to spend on our constituencies.
Mr Speaker, the Government has said that
a lot of improvements and many of the things we are talking about will be
included in the 2007 Budget. I would
like to say that any developments, for example, cocoa, coconut and others should
be equally distributed to the constituencies so that every constituency should
at least have a cocoa project or a coconut project or something like that. I think many constituencies are really
missing out on areas like this.
The same is on tourism, Mr Speaker. I see in the Supplementary Appropriation Bill
we are discussing now we are going to approve $309,000 for the MSG Meeting that
is going to be held on Buala, Isabel. Mr
Speaker, other previous MSG Meetings held in Auki, Gizo, I heard and know that
millions of dollars were spent on those MSG meetings. For Buala MSG Meeting, it is only
$309,000. “Million
dollar lelebet”.
If we had asked the MSG Meeting
monitors, they will tell you that the Buala Meeting is
the one they will never forget with this $300,000 only. I heard the delegates saying that if they
were to come back for another MSG it must be Buala
again.
Mr Speaker, I think for fairness of the things we are
talking about, if millions of dollars are spent in Auki
and million dollars in Gizo, why not spend million dollars too in Ysabel?
Mr Speaker, I am going to talk again
during the debate on the Speech from the Throne in regards to fairness when I
will elaborate further on what I am trying to say here.
With those very few and short
remarks, Mr Speaker, I support this Bill so that the government can continue
with its services and projects.
Mr SOALAOI: Thank
you Mr Speaker, for allowing me the floor of Parliament to contribute to this
supplementary appropriation bill. I
would I like to stress it again that it is supplementary.
Mr Speaker, first of all I want to thank the Minister
of Finance for the supplementary appropriation bill and I think this a timely
bill. To me Mr Speaker, when I look at
the heads under this supplementary appropriation bill it reflects a very nature
of the 2006 budget.
When we have such supplementary appropriation bill Mr
Speaker, it simply means that do not make any proper estimates in this budget. And I would like to say here Mr Speaker, that
it is not good for you to say all sorts of things in this House. To me this bill it looks very simple and I think
it is good that it is simple because there are people here who cannot even
understand simple things.
When we talked about the technicalities of this
supplementary appropriation bill, I note all of us know that the purpose of
this supplementary appropriation bill is for legalizing the spending of the
government.
And I have a lot of trust in the experience of the
Minister of Finance then I don’t think there is any illegal or any corruption
in this supplementary appropriation bill as I have already heard some of the
statements are not good in my ears.
Mr Speaker, what I would like to say is I think its
hypocrite critical for someone to standing up and say, MPs salary is not
appropriate at this time when you are a Member of Parliament. The public knows that you are not saying the
truth when you are a Member of Parliament and you against increase of Members
salary. And I believe our public
officers and the public also knows that it is only natural for decision makers
to facilitate for increases of other officers if they are well paid Mr
Speaker. I don’t think somebody in a
decision making level body will be willing enough to facilitate any demands
from lower officers if you will see himself or herself is underpaid Mr Speaker.
I also believe the increase in Members
of Parliament salary will improve or will help Members of Parliament to give to
the people what belongs to the people.
Mr Speaker, what has been happened in the past I don’t
want to dwell on it but I just want to mention the reason why most members of
Parliament have to choose RCDF Mr Speaker, is because the constituents is
asking money from them everyday without knowing that pay day is only twice a
month, and it is not every day.
So Mr Speaker, what you usually find is that members
of Parliament misuse the RCDF not because they want to misuse it, but because
they do not want to turn back their constituents because members do not want to
lose in the next election.
Mr Speaker, like I already said on my contribution to
this supplementary appropriation budget, I don’t see anything wrong or anything
suspicious in this supplementary appropriation bill Mr Speaker, except that I
think we need to know the reason why we have a supplementary appropriation bill
because we cannot move programs or we cannot move on without this supplementary
appropriation bill.
Let me re-emphasise it once
again Mr Speaker, Sir, that the reason why we have a supplementary
appropriation bill shows that the current budget which we are operating in
fails to make accurate estimates so that is why we have to supplement.
Mr Speaker, I hope this is very clear and I am not
saying any parables here. The other
thing in this supplementary appropriation bill, I am very delighted that there
is a $20million allocations for a millennium development fund which will be
used in the rural areas and that is one beautiful thing about this supplementary
appropriation bill.
And I think our people will receive this with open arms
since this $20million can be spent in the rural areas Mr Speaker.
I fail to see Mr Speaker, that we need to say a lot of
things especially the new spending in here.
If I weigh it there are 11 heads and about three quarter of it simply
there is a need to make a supplementary appropriation like I already said Mr Speaker,
if we don’t do it then where else do we get the money to carry on the normal
business of the government.
Had the former Finance Minister and my good friend the
former Prime Minister coordinate well on this current budget I think there would
not be any supplementary appropriation or maybe the supplementary appropriation
bill might be less than $72million as this one in here Mr Speaker.
Lastly, before I finish Mr Speaker, I would like to
say that the reason why we don’t have the budget debated in this sitting is that
I don’t know about others but I understand that this is not the right time as we
have only been in power for 5 months, and I am urging all members of Parliament
to understand the amount of work that needs to be done when you have the new administration,
new Permanent Secretaries and if we continue to act anti government then we are
not providing any direction for government to follow the right part.
All my good members on the Opposition side as far as I
know he was supposed to be an alternate government. Mr Speaker, the way I see it today start come
yesterday when I heard some MPs contribution.
Not the alternative government we have on the side looks like we have
anti government no more.
How will you playing the as a watch dog or somebody
for you directing the government for running this country, the thing we can do
better than that if we work together and this is I am urging all of us to work
together for the good of this nation.
I believe Mr Speaker, and I know that if during the
time we like to implementing the policies that are in the interest of the
population, some of our people which are been in the policies for quite some
time and just for interest for one person, it will not good to him yea Mr
Speaker. And I think not every good
policies will be receive with open arms and I understand why there is a lot of
criticism against this bottom up approach.
Let us differentiate between talking about rural
development and doing it I think we been talking about it for the last 28 years
337
TAPES 337 TO 341
Hon Soalau: rural
development and doing it. I think we
have been talking about it for the last twenty years. Mr Speaker, excuse me, I was born when our
country was born, and I would just like to say that if this government wants to
do it rather than continue to talk about it for another four years, we really
need understanding and support both from the Opposition and government
officials to push this bottom-up approach forward.
Without saying much Mr Speaker, I
would like to conclude by supporting the motion.
(applause)
Mr HAOMAE: Mr Speaker,
my contribution will be very brief. I am
duty bound at the outset to thank the Honorable Minister of Finance for
bringing this important Supplementary Appropriation Bill to Parliament for its
deliberations.
I will offer a few observations on
this bill. The objective of my
observation is to be helpful to the government.
The first observation is that this
bill is a last meeting bill. I can bet
that the corrigendum to this Bill is being prepared on the drawing boards of
the Ministry of Finance as I speak, and that is why I think this Bill is a last
minute bill and is injustice to the dignity of Parliament, if I may say
so.
I think this last minute bill comes about because the
Ministries appear to be building separate empires within the government
circle. One ministry is doing its own
thing and another ministry is doing it own until they are no longer working
together as one government for purposes of advancing the policies of the
government to be in place.
For purposes of coordination, I
would like to press on my friend the Prime Minister to coordinate the ministries
and departments so that they work together and not building of empires like an
empire in the Ministry of Mines and Energy and so on. That is just an example and I do not want to
pick on any particular ministry. But I want
to offer that particular observation, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I want to know whether
the salary of teachers is in this bill to increase the salaries of the public
servants. I have just returned from
Small Malaita last Friday, and the teachers in my constituency are not teaching
the students because they are concern about their conditions of service.
What is happening?
I understand that the last government has sorted the terms and
conditions of teachers already. Up until
now nothing has been done. Why, Mr
Speaker? It is the Ministry’s problem or
what? I want to know whether any
increases are included in this bill.
I know that there has not been any agreement yet in
place, and I want to know from the Minister of Education what is happening
here. If this is not sorted out soon our
children will not be going to school, the primary schools. That is my concern.
I wonder whether discussions by the
government with appropriate authorities representing the teachers, the
conclusions or agreements are reflected in this supplement. I am very concerned about this Mr Speaker. I do not know about the Members who do not go
to their constituencies. But I have
already said that I have just returned from the Small Malaita Constituency, and
I feel sorry for the children in primary schools in my constituency that they
are not at school.
If that situation replicates the
situation all over the country, Mr Speaker, then I am very sorry for our
children throughout the four corners of this country. I want you to address this problem as soon as
possible. What is so fussy about it? The Police, the Nurses and the public
servants have already been addressed so why not address the teachers. Or are teachers second grade public
servants. We must address this very
quickly and I ask the Government to explain whether any agreements ready so far
pertaining to negotiations between teachers and the government is reflected
within this supplementary. Otherwise I
do not have any problem with this Bill.
It is just a straightforward bill.
Part of it is already dead and we are now doing a postmortem of it. But I want the government to explain why the situation on teachers are dragging on so long and whether
any agreements in place is reflected in this Bill.
Sir, in any case I have no choice
and so I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Just
a point of order. With all due respect
to the honorable Minister for Finance, he may be in breach of Standing Orders
37(d) making unnecessary noise when someone is talking.
Hon DARCY: Mr Speaker, first
of all I would like to thank the Minister of Finance that in spite of his
physical health condition he was able to bring this Bill to this House.
Mr Speaker, when I heard a lot of
things being said by some of the speakers in relation to the debate of this
Bill, I wonder whether or not we really understand what is being put forward to
this House now. As the Prime Minister
has rightly stated, this Bill is just to supplement the Appropriation.
The Appropriation Bill for this year
is something that those of you on that side of the House have already
passed. What we are basically doing here
is bringing in a bill to supplement what has been seen now as inadequate
provisions in the budget or it may not have been provided for in the
Budget. And there are constitutional
basis for these items.
The Constitution provides power and
what will be the make up of a supplementary appropriation. I would like to remind this House of those
provisions in the constitution. The
first provision is section 103(2) of the Constitution, which provides for a
supplementary appropriation to be brought to legalize and authorize the
expenditures that are provided under a contingency warrant. If you look at it, this contingency warrant
is in relation to expenditures that have been put in the appropriation act and
may be because the provisions in there are not sufficient and therefore the
contingency warrant is there for the Ministry of Finance to execute an
additional provision of expenditure to be allocated to that particular
budget. That is the basis of a
supplementary appropriation.
The second provision for a
supplementary appropriation is section 102(3) of the constitution. It reads, “If in respect of any financial
year it is found that a sum appropriated by the appropriation act for any
purpose is insufficient or that a need has arisen for expenditure for a purpose
for which no sum has been appropriated by that law, a supplementary estimate
showing the sums required shall be included in a supplementary appropriation
bill for appropriation. That is exactly
what we are doing here.
As soon as this government comes into power we found
that the sums or there are certain expenditure levels that need to be, and it
is essential for the purpose of running of the government but is not provided
for in the Appropriation Act and therefore, the law says you have to bring it
to Parliament in the form of a supplementary appropriation. Those are the two basis of the supplementary
appropriation.
If you look at the make up of this bill you will find
that that is exactly what is being shown here.
Mr Speaker, in terms of the
execution of the contingency warrant, if we had done our estimation properly at
the time when we make up the appropriation act, there would not be any need for
a contingency warrant. If you look at
the expenditures we are required to supplement by way of contingency warrant,
those activities have been set by the previous government. They have agreed upon them and instead of
providing the appropriate provisions for those expenditures in the budget, they
have under estimated them, and therefore, when the time comes for us to deliver
the expenditure we find ourselves in a situation that there is a shortfall in
the provision, and therefore we have to execute the contingency warrant to
provide for them.
We can be critical about these
expenditure but these expenditures are not ours. For instance, Forum Economic Ministers
Meeting, which is a very important meeting we have hosted organized was well
implemented, it went on very well. That
was a bid made by the previous government.
But when the time came for us to host that meeting there was insufficient
provision in the budget to provide for it.
You cannot say why has this government brought this supplementary to supplement
that particular head. There is a need
for it and that is why we have to provide for.
But who planned for that expenditure?
It was the previous government.
I am saying this just to show that
we have to really understand what a supplementary appropriation is. I am saying that there are constitutional
bounds of how a supplementary is made.
And there are only two provisions in the constitution that allows us to
do it. Section 103(2) of the
constitution in relation to legalisng a contingency warrant and section 102(3)
in the case of a new expenditure we find that during the course of the year
there has to be expenditure expended to carry out those activities but there are
inadequate provisions of expenditure for those purposes.
Mr Speaker, I feel it is important
for us to understand this so that we do not go outside of the way we talk. I would like to refer to the way, for
instance the MP for Savo/Russells who said that he sees this bill in two
contexts. One – we must not create
enemies, and secondly we must not use the name of God in vain.
Mr Speaker, this bill does not in
any way create an enemy with anyone. It
is basically bringing in something the Constitution says it must be done in
this House, and that is to legalize a contingency warrant, and extra
expenditure must also be brought into this House. That is all.
This Bill does not say that we want to gear up some
kind of war against somebody somewhere.
No! I do not see that in
here. Nothing in here too shows that this
Bill in a way is trying to portray that this government in a way is taking the
name of the Almighty in vain. No. Nothing at all.
When this kind of debate happens in this House, we are
basically getting ourselves away from really the subject of the matter that is
being presented in this House. I feel
very sorry when we started to hear all these things because it really put us in
a very awkward situation to be seen by people, our public and our citizens in the
way we debate in this House.
But let me just say about some of
the points that have been raised in relation to guidelines in the way that we
should be setting out the funding. Mr
Speaker, people have been saying about so many funding that have been made and
geared towards rural developments, and some mentions have been made about
allocation to tourism, forestry, cocoa and copra, small business assistance,
which are all aimed at promoting rural developments.
Of course, Mr Speaker, in the
current year’s appropriation act we have seen a lot of these funding geared
towards rural development. The sad thing
is that right now as we are speaking, there is an investigation going on in a
good part of some of these funding as the Prime Minister has been saying. And in fact some of those initial findings
borders around criminality and this is why we have to
be very careful in the way we bring in this kind of scheme into this House, in
the way we want to try to appropriate them to deliver to the rural people.
This government is very careful
about that. Guidelines will be given out
as and when decisions are made. As soon
as Parliament passes this supplementary appropriation bill, guidelines will be
put out on this new Millennium Development Fund so that we do not fall into the
same pitfalls that we have fallen into in some of these previous rural
development funding arrangements Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, something has been
mentioned about the situation of why is it that we have seen the pressure for
expenditure on the salaries of pubic servants.
Mr Speaker, the composition of the public service in
It is not the question of funding
that is the question here. It is really to
do with negotiating and agreeing on certain formulas on the demands that have
been put forward by the unions and the Teaching Service Commission. But in terms of provisioning it is included
and therefore the MP for Small Malaita should be rest assured that as soon as
those negotiations are concluded, the provision that is before us in this
Supplementary will enable that new scheme of service to be implemented.
Mr Speaker, on the question of the
format there will be a corrigendum brought in, and it is quite normal that any
changes to a bill can only be made, not in the second reading, but it has to be
in the committee of supply. That is why
the corrigendum has to be presented at that time so that the appropriate
changes we have to make have to be made, but it does not change the allocations
in the bill.
What we are basically saying is that the formatting of
the bill has to be made in the right way so that it can be properly understood
as and when the bill is put into operation. Therefore that will be made as and when we
reach the committee of supply stage.
I think with all the comments that have been put
together this Bill is well understood and I don’t intend to dwell much on it. The two points I would like to raise is that
the constitutional basis of a supplementary appropriation are those two parts -
section 102(3) of the Constitution and section 103(2) of the Constitution.
With those remarks, I support the Bill.
Mr TOZAKA: Mr Speaker,
as a new Member of Parliament, I still have to learn the nuts and bolts of the
procedures and systems in Parliament and so there is not much choice for some
of us to be able to constructively and meaningfully contribute as other Members.
This Bill has come at hand to some of us just this
morning. I did not have the time to be able
to go through it to be able to make constructive and meaningful
contribution. We have already heard the
level of debate on this Bill. There were
some comments made that this bill is very simple and therefore it should pass
through this House without any problem.
Mr Speaker, as I understand it
anything that comes into this House is not simple. They are very important and so we are
supposed to attach importance to this Bill.
Mr Speaker, I too like other honorable
colleagues who have spoken do not have much choice in supporting this
bill. My people of
Sir, most of the debate on this bill I think came
about basically because our people including ourselves know that according to the
ministerial system of government this is normally the time to debate the
national budget. This is the day to do
that. They expect that this time we
should be debating the national budget, a budget that should be reflecting the
policies of the government. My people
are very happy and pleased with the policy directive of the government almost
100% based on turning our direction from where we are now back
to the rural areas. That is what is
called the bottom up holistic approach Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, when I come here after visiting my
constituency, I am expecting a budget so that we can start afresh next year. I accept the explanation by the honorable
Prime Minister of the awkward situation this government is in when it came into
power because a budget was already approved.
And that is the budget of the previous government.
Sir, I would have thought therefore that priority
should be made for us to come up collectively.
The debate on this small piece of administrative bill should not have come
had we come out with a national budget.
Mr Speaker, the inability or the
lateness for us in producing a national budget for our country is very
disappointing. I am very
disappointed. And if I am disappointed
and my people of
Mr Speaker, most Honourable
Members and Ministers from the other side know very well that the situation we
are in is not new. The overlap situation
between this present government and the outgoing government that produced this
situation warranting the introduction of this supplementary bill is not
new. At that time we do not have the
capacity or we do not have the manpower capacity that the government of today
has. The luxuries of
manpower that we have in the departments. I am amazed that we have the capacity. We have the skills it is here with us, it is in
our hands. The question is why are we
not producing, why are we not delivering or not producing? What is the problem? It is six months or five months now since this
government came into power. The Honorable
Prime Minister will know himself as a former Permanent Secretary. We have been given less time, but because of
our commitment, of our discipline and of our allegiance, we have to do the job
and come up with what the government has directed today. The very big question here is that the
harvest is ready, the people in the rural areas are
ready to start working.
We cannot produce because the budget is not
ready. I do not want to speak at length on
this Bill as it is merely an administrative piece of bill that we have just to
prove. But I just want to say it is sad
that we are supposed to be debating a government budget together with its
policy directives, and that is possible.
Mr Speaker, as other MPs have
already said it is important at this crucial time of our country, it is very
important that we revisit once again our government machineries. They are important. Government organizations are variables or
means of moving the government as has been highlighted in this honorable
House. Most important of all is
coordination and leadership. These are
important components. We need to give leadership face on this situation. We cannot just play politics and continue
debating and boast here. There is no
time for boasting here. There is no time
to boast. We are in a time that we have
to work together.
Sir, I would like to support this bill. As I said we cannot object it because most of
what is in it have already been spent, and it is a spending bill and so I would
like to accordingly support it. Let it
be down in the records that I am supporting this bill with disappointment that
the budget proper is not ready and is not late and we are not in a position to
oppose it. Thank you.
Mr TORA: Mr Speaker,
thank you for allowing me this chance to take the floor this morning to
contribute briefly to the 2006 Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2006. Let me first of all thank the Honorable
Minister for Finance and Treasury and his officials for making this document
possible to be tabled in Parliament for endorsement or blessing.
Mr Speaker, much has been said about
this Bill by both sides of the House.
Sir, without prolonging the debate on this Bill, I would like to
contribute briefly of my observations on this bill.
The first observation is consultation. In my view, there are lots of criticisms and
arguments about this bill this morning because of poor consultation between
departments and the appropriate committees.
I wonder whether there are any inputs from the departments on the draft
before the bill is finalized finalization ready for the Minister to table in
Parliament.
In my view, I believe there is no input and that is
why you hear criticisms in the debates by this side of the House. Criticisms, as we all know, are sometimes constructive
criticisms and some are not. I would
like to ask the other side of the House, the Government to take note of
constructive criticisms made about this Bill.
It is very important to take note.
To admit mistakes is another thing. Sometimes we human beings know we make
mistakes but do not want to admit it. This
is a good advice to the government side that if there are any mistakes,
anything we may have cited that are not in line with the thinking of the 50
Members of Parliament for the good of the people in the rural areas and this
nation as a whole, before this bill is to be tabled in Parliament it must be
well scrutinized by appropriate committees or authorities.
Mr Speaker, I wonder whether this bill is properly
scrutinized before it is brought into Parliament. There are lots of loopholes in this bill that
needs patching up before it is brought to this House so that it narrows the
debate on this very thin, six pages paper. This is because it means a lot to us.
Sir, I do not object the Minister of Finance for bringing
this bill to Parliament because he must do it for the sake of delivering goods
and services to our people. Mr Speaker,
we have heard a lot of criticisms about this bill from this side of the
House. That is usual, and we must accept
it because without constructive criticisms we cannot learn or realize the
mistakes we make.
Like other speakers have said in their debate this
morning, there is something missing in this bill - something that would benefit
our people in the rural areas, like agriculture and so forth.
One of my colleague MPs mentioned something about the
teachers’ salaries and the Minister responsible for Planning and Aid
Coordination told the floor this morning that the salaries of teachers is
included. I am going to keep his words because
most teachers are still in
Mr Speaker, I do not have anything to object this bill
because it must pass this morning and it must go through the procedures so that
the government can continue with its services. But again I want to reiterate that in future
any criticisms of this bill by this side of the House must be accepted so that
we can correct it. So that when we bring
in any bill of this nature in the future both sides of the House are happy
because it will benefit respective constituencies or people in the rural
areas. Of course, not forgetting our
city,
Mr Speaker, let me reiterate what I had just
said. Consultation is very
important. Permanent Secretaries go back
to your departments and talk with your senior staff. What about the Department of Infrastructure,
do you have money to subsidize all local ship-owners so that sea fares and
freight charges are affordable to our people, our travelers.
Today, Mr Speaker, our people find it very hard to bring
their produce to
Just a reminder again that I would like to see in
future national budgets an increase allocation to Infrastructure Development so
that it can subsidize our local ship owners. We must help them because they are carrying
out services instead of the government.
They are doing it on our behalf - they service our people.
Mr Speaker, nothing is wrong with this bill as it is
done according to the constitution. Otherwise
I want to see a well prepared paper before presenting to Parliament, and that
is why you hear a lot of criticisms from this side of the House. If it is straight and nothing wrong with it
or everything that 50 MPs would like to see for their own constituencies are
included, then I do not think the debate on this bill will take a whole day.
Mr Speaker, with those few remarks, I would like once
again thank the Honourable Minister and I believe may
be after two or three more speakers he should wind up the debate so that we can
continue with other business.
With
those few remarks, I support the bill and resume my seat.
Sitting is suspended for lunch break at
Hon TOSIKA: Mr Speaker, I
too would like to contribute to the debate on the 2006 Supplementary
Appropriation Bill 2006 moved by the Minister for Finance. Before doing so, I first of all would like to
thank the Minister for presenting the Bill to the floor of Parliament.
Mr Speaker, if we look at the RCDF (Rural Constituency
Development Fund) together with the Millennium Goal of $400,000, which is just
recently introduced under this bill, a Parliament Member will be entitled to
get $3.2million per year. This will go
towards all developments in our respective constituencies.
My opinion in here is that the present government has,
in the next three months, placed as important to see that all MPs should
actively participate and involve the constituency with this $400,000 to see
people starting to do things in the productive sector, like cocoa and copra in
most of the constituencies.
Mr Speaker, from past experiences we
have been giving free handouts to people and there is no production taking
place in all the constituencies. For
example, if you open a market for people in the respective constituencies by
buying copra and cocoa with this fund (this can be a revolving fund for all the
constituencies) you will see a turnout in rural development and also the
millennium goal fund. Take for example,
If we would like people to
participate in the productive sector, it means we set a buying point and our people
from elsewhere would come in to buy copra and cocoa.
At this point in time whilst we are talking, there is a
European group who is now already engaged in buying copra in
Sir, I am a new Member of Parliament and I see this as
a growing concern for all of us. That
when the RCDF is dished out to MPs and soon the Millennium Goal, which we will
be dishing out to people very soon you will see people coming in, trying to
force their way in just to give them what they wanted and after consuming it, the
money is gone.
My thinking is if we want to see this money evolve for
the next three years we have to put it into the productive line where there is
an input transformation and an output, otherwise even though we might talk
about this over and over again, there will be no increase in production, there
will be no participation by rural dwellers.
Sir, the bottom up approach must begin from a
constituency set up. A person has to
have a vision and the vision must be part of that person before he can have an
innovative mind and discipline to go forward.
If a person has no skill, no vision how can he
fulfill the desires that he wants because there is nothing implanted into his
conscience to see that the future is there for him. At least in most cases it happens. You just give money to people who vision, and
even we ourselves do not have visions for our constituencies.
Unless and until such time we have a vision and we accept the visions of those people,
we can put it into a vibrant strategy to organize ourselves to see development
activities happening in our constituencies.
We have talked about all these for the past 28 years now and little seen
in those constituencies.
Sir, I urge all parliamentarians that as soon as we
receive the $400,000 under the millennium goal poverty alleviation, I hope we
will not do the same with it like the RCDF.
I am surprised that some Members who have been in
Parliament now for quite a number of terms are questioning where the
development fund is. Don’t you know that
you have taken the Rural Constituency Development Fund all those terms? Don’t you realize that those funds are for
rehabilitation of our people to ensure they participate in the productive sector?
I believe if all of us had injected that money into
the productive line, we will see a difference in our constituencies throughout
the nation. For example, if each Member
gets $1.6million, 50 Members would get $80million per term and if a Member is
here for 10 years you would have received $320million for four terms. If you are here for four or three terms it
means you would have received $240million. So this is quite a substantial amount of money
that we have been injecting into the rural sector already. But we haven’t seen any positive outcome of those money.
I urge all Members not to point fingers at each others
but try to coordinate ourselves into a community or a constituency whereby we
would fully realize the importance of those monies so that we can develop our
constituency into a vibrant and self reliant constituency.
With those few remarks, Mr Speaker,
I support the bill.
In the absence of the mover of the
motion, the debate on the supplementary appropriation bill is adjourned for the
next day.
MOTIONS
Vote of Thanks
The debate on the motion to thank His
Excellency the Governor-General for the Speech from the Throne by the Deputy
Prime Minister continues
Mr NUIASI: Thank you, Mr
Speaker, for allowing me to briefly contribute to this very important Speech
from the Throne delivered to us by His Excellency, the Governor General.
Mr Speaker, I for one as a new MP is
gaining experience and when this Speech came in front of me, it was to me an
overview plan of the government of the day’s program of action that it intended
to carry out over the four years that it would be in office.
Having looked through it, Mr
Speaker, I found that the speech was eloquently presented by His Excellency,
the Governor General. It detailed
programs to which the new government is intending and it contains areas which
the government intends to work on. To me
the speech itself is very clear and understandable.
Mr Speaker, as it is a report we
cannot expect detailed information about the government’s program of action. It will be very brief, but brief as it is, it
gives me an overview and it gives me an outlook of what is and what will be
happening over the next four years.
Mr Speaker, the speech in itself is
very clear and I would like to thank His Excellency for presenting a clear
speech that has detailed and contains the programs and activities the
government of the day intends to present.
Mr Speaker, all of us are talking about
the 85% population in the rural areas. As a new MP I have always said that I will not
talk about the past. My interest for
being a MP in this honourable House is for me to
rather see all parliamentarians, whether we be from Opposition or from the
Government side, I consulting each other.
In this regard, Mr Speaker, I would find it very easy to work along with
the National Parliament.
Mr Speaker, it is surprising to me
to see us pointing fingers at each other.
I think that is not a Melanesian way of working and doing things together. In the societies we come from things are
talked about together regardless of differences, regardless of what area they
come from, their difficulties and differences are talked about together and a
solution arrived at whereby leaders and chiefs will work on and peace prevails.
Likewise, Mr Speaker, I am thinking along
this line if we parliamentarians could think like this. As all of us are Melanesian in our own
society having our cultural background which we were brought up in, it will be
only good that we should all put our heads together to discuss issues of
concern for the betterment of
Mr Speaker, I am not accusing anyone
but I am a man of my own principles. What
I would like to see regardless of which government comes into power is that
there are funds available to develop West AreAre Constituency.
In think over the past years we have
been neglected. Not one single
development is even established in West Are Are. To date we are trying our best to identify
and to come up with some programs to be presented to the government so that at
least we get a share of the cake as well with others when it comes to rural
development or for that matter industrial development.
Mr Speaker, people in my
constituency were happy when they heard about the Warokai
Industrial Centre. To date nothing has
been heard, and I am sorry to say that we have been left out again to make way for
major development in my constituency.
I am not too sure what is wrong but as far as the landowners are concern they are
more than willing to offer their piece of land for the development. However, Mr Speaker, as I have just come in
I’ll follow up this issue and see where this issue has been laid and may be
persuade it so that development takes place in my constituency.
Mr Speaker, having no difficulties
and finding no difficulties in reading this speech, and having a clear mind
with this report, I am asking all honorable Members to support the speech and
give time to the government of the day to establish and ensure these policies
are put in place by having a budget that would reflect all these program of
actions.
Without further ado, as I have
already said I would be very brief, I would like once to again thank His
Excellency the Governor General for having presented this important speech and
to ask each and everyone of us the parliamentarians to work together so that we
put in place in 2007 an appropriation ordinance that would reflect what we are
concern about, the rural development as far as I am concern that is where I
want things to happen and to start off.
People in the rural areas are the resource owners and
unless we give the opportunity to start exploiting their own resources and
identifying projects that are conducive to their living, nothing much will
happen. If we give them the responsibility
in identifying all these things, they will see that these people will feel
owned and they will just be proud as anyone to implement and to work with the national
government in trying to achieve objectives the government puts to them. There will be a difference.
When
we talk about changes, to me changes do not happen when we talk about it. Changes must happen with us the parliamentarians
as individuals. We must accept each
other, we must accept ourselves to work together before we can change or we can
redirect developments in our own constituency Mr Speaker.
With these few remarks, Mr Speaker Sir, I have no
difficulties as I have already said, but just to say thank you and I support
the speech that has been presented to Parliament. Thank you Sir.
Hon SANGA: Mr Speaker, I
rise to contribute to the debate of this motion. I wish to thank you, Mr Speaker, for the
opportunity to contribute to the debate.
But before I do so let me say that His Excellency has graced this
Parliament with his presence. He has
delivered a splendid speech and I wish to thank him on behalf of my constituent
for his kind words.
Mr Speaker, I will be brief and will confine myself to
His Excellency’s remarks on the Public Service.
But before I do so, I wish to say something generally about the
speech. Sir, a lot has been said already
about that speech during this debate. Many
have spoken in support while others either made very useful observations or were
quite critical. Some have claimed that
the issues contained in the speech are no different from what they were doing
in the past. In fact one particular
speaker said that the issues raised are no different from what they were trying
to also address in previous years.
Sir, no matter what angle the speakers might have come
from, I nonetheless wish to commend them for being able to recognize the
issues. However, Mr Speaker, I wish to
make this observation. What we need to
realize is that in the last 28 years or so of political independence, what each
successive governments have been good at is answering the questions ‘what’ and ‘why’. They championed identifying what they
perceive as problems. They were good at
stating what they want to do. They are
good at arguing for and giving reasons as to why they want something done. When it comes to the question how should we
organize or strategize, this is where the problem lies with the past governments.
How to get things done is past governments have
limitations on. Past governments did
very little so that the approach has always been top down. Past government readily accepted what was
proposed by donors.
Mr Speaker, when we scan the very important programs in
the past such as cattle-under-trees, the multi-million dollar rural services
project, the many fisheries centres throughout the
country, to name a few.
We find that there were misfits between the projects
and the context within which the projects were located. There was lack of enthusiasm from local
stakeholders or if there was any at all, the excitements were short lived. If you ask what happens to this multimillion
dollar projects, no one in the present generation would know something about
them or trace their remains.
Mr Speaker, if I were to make any observation at all,
the speech from the throne merely reinforces this Government’s effort to try
and address the issues that this country has been struggling with for the past
years.
Really Sir, this government is trying to say that how
to get things done is through the bottom up approach strategy. People in certain quarters might say this is
rhetoric, but I would like to suggest that this Government has for the first
time in the country’s history come up with a strategy on how our people in the
rural areas can be effectively empowered.
The Government acknowledges in a tangible manner that
our people in the rural sector are the ones that own the resources. They must be given the opportunity to be
active players in development. They must
access finance, they must not be alienated or sidelined
and be spectators with arms folded. They
must get involved and not just watch while others seem to be enforcing things
on them. They must be supported and the
Government is creating opportunities to empower them. This is where this government is coming
from.
Mr Speaker, I would like to say although this may
sound good and appears attractive, our own people must respond to this.
First, we as Parliamentarians must provide leadership. A lot of resources are now being shifted
under our care and therefore we must be honest with our people and guide them
in identifying what is best for them. We
must also be careful not to use people’s name to qualify usage of funds which
are due to them in order to amass huge assets which we later may claim as our
own.
Secondly, Mr Speaker, our own people must be willing
players, they must free up resources, they must be reasonable and nurture the
efforts. They must have a new mind set
and have good attitude towards business.
They must not kill the business when it is still not making any
dividend.
In essence, Mr Speaker, my observation is that what
the bottom up approach is all about is partnership between government and
resource owners. It is about creating
opportunities for our people and empowering them.
Mr
Speaker, I said earlier that I will confine my contribution to the Public
Service. Sir, it is common knowledge
that the Government relies on the Public Service to deliver its policies. His Excellency in his speech has put it quite
consciously that the Public Service is the conduit through which services are
delivered, and yet over the years the Service received a lot of criticisms from
the public and at times from this chamber.
There were negative comments on the Service than praise for the good
work that Public Servants have done.
Mr Speaker, I think it is fair to say that it is the
Public Service that has provided services to citizens. In the difficult years it is true that
services were at the lowest, but in spite of very limited resources, many
Public Servants have shown resilience, commitment, and dedication despite being
under very difficult situation. Some
risk their lives for standing up to try and enforce the rules of law and good
work practices.
Mr Speaker, now that we have come this far, it is the
Government’s intention that we revitalize and improve the service. Sir, we would like to look at the reforms and
with the assistance of RAMSI we will take the lead in mapping out the kind of
reforms that are envisaged.
In this regard, we will look at the structures. The new direction is to support the government’s
bottom up strategy. The obvious thing is
therefore to review the structures in order to facilitate government
policies.
Mr Speaker, such review is likely to affect areas that
will support our effort to empower the rural sector. That being said, I would like to personally
incline to see that an overall review of the government ministerial structure
should also be done. This is to allow
for redirection of resources to provinces to improve advocacy for each province
so that each province has a voice directly in both the Cabinet and Parliament. We have to respond in reviewing and improving
processes, systems and procedures of the government.
Sir, the new development approach will engage rural
people, but I think we have to realize that we have obstacles such as low
literacy and ignorance about government workings. Therefore, a lot of processes and procedures
may have to be simplified in order for rural people to understand and be more
responsible.
Mr Speaker, we must also acknowledge that although we
will pay more attention to the rural sector, it is important that issues of
good governance must be heeded. That is,
there must be transparency, there must be accountability and people must be
responsible for what they have been empowered with.
Mr Speaker, it is also important that we maintain a public
service that is capable of delivering quality service. Sir, capacity building will still be an
important issue for my Ministry. It is
not enough to remain with the conventional way of doing things.
Sir, we have to respond to the changes that come with
new technologies and we no longer are on our own in this regard. We have to take onboard the changes that come
with globalization.
We have to be innovative and look at new ways of
providing service. We will be looking at
adopting e-governance to speed up how services are to be delivered. The recent commitment with the ROC Government
amongst other things to introduce e-governance is really welcome news.
Sir, on the area of reform, we will continue with the
reform program that is ongoing. In fact
we are lucky to have the RAMSI Government machinery working closely with my
Ministry. Sir, we will soon address
areas that will improve the management of the Public Service.
Now that the Public Service Commission has delegated
some of its powers to responsible officers, it maybe timely to look at whether
we should give the Commission a management role. Better still, it would be compelling on the
government to review the Constitution with the view to have only one employing
Commission rather than four (4) as at present.
Sir, we are currently looking at areas that will take
care of the welfare of public officials and their social security when they are
retired. Sir, this government has
recently addressed public officers’ salary.
Contrary to what others have said that MPs are getting higher pay,
whilst that is true, these speakers have failed to tell Parliament that this
government has had to correct the silo situation created by the former
administration. And we have to resort
back to the unified salary structure which should cater for all professions
within the Public Service.
Sir, that aside I wish to state that we are also in
the process of upgrading terms and conditions of Public Officers to take
account of the changing circumstances.
The point I wish to bring home is that this government sees the
importance of fairly rewarding its workers if the rural development strategy is
to be pursued passionately by public officers.
Sir, public officers have been criticized many times
for bad work attitudes. I wish to say that
I do not like to defend such officers in Parliament, but I wish to say also
that this government will not tolerate bad work attitudes. We will try to arrest bad work attitude.
This Government would also like to insist that public
officers must take pride in the fact that they are working for the government
and the people of
Sir, on the same vein, I would also like to state that
this government will not tolerate corruption within the service, and in that
regard the government will want to see that those who have been implicated in
the various Auditor General’s report be dealt with in accordance with the laws
of the country.
Mr Speaker, with those few remarks on the Public
Service, I wish to thank you again for giving me the opportunity to contribute to
this debate, and I wish to support the motion.
Mr KENGAVA: Mr Speaker,
thank you for giving me this opportunity to also contribute in this motion to
thank the Speech from the Throne. First
of all, on behalf of people of North West Choiseul, I would like to thank his
Excellency for the kind, encouraging and hopeful words, which goes to underline
the Speech from Throne. I would also
like to thank the Prime Minister and his government for seeing it fit to allow this
speech to take place. I also thank the
Deputy Prime Minister for moving this motion.
Mr Speaker, the Speech from the Throne,
in my view, is a historical one because the last one was made eight years
ago. This is the first one after the
ethnic tension. In this period when we are
trying to rebuild the nation, our beloved
Mr Speaker, I think the Speech from
the Throne merely presents the government’s mission and vision in a more royal,
traditional and somewhat conservative approach.
Although I would say the speech is quite late, nevertheless the
intention of the speech was made and presented on Monday this week.
Mr Speaker, I think the Speech from
the Throne was made rather quite late because one can understand why because
the government came into power due to unforeseen circumstances. One can understand that, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, I would like to touch on
something, which perhaps many of my colleagues might disregard. That is, the presentation of the Speech from
the Throne was rather spoilt by the rain. If we had followed the program fully on a
sunny day, I am sure it would have been more splendid with the Police Band, the
royal parade and everything. However,
that was not so because of the weather. To
me as a man who comes from a particular part in Choiseul, from a culture way where
we have various gathering, big events, holding feasts or time to mourn when
someone dies, if that day is ruined by rain there are two things that came to
our minds, superstitious probably, I am not sure but it is a cultural belief. One, we would say the Spirit of our ancestors
really support this particular event and so they are crying in their favor. Secondly,
it is a sign of bad luck, misfortune to come.
Maybe the spirits of our ancestors were angry because we did not do the
event properly.
Sir, I only hope that the rainy day on Monday does not
mean the second option that the situation must be controlled so that what was
presented throughout the speech is implemented for our people.
Looking at the speech, some observations, I would like
to say that the terminology and words used are too abstract by ordinary
people. And I for one is trying my very
best to get the meaning of the speech because words such as pillars of
democracy, sovereignty, empowerment of the people, constitutional reform, all
those terminologies were used in the speech, which makes me wonder whether
people in the rural villages will understand what it means. But I for one who represents people in the
rural constituency, I know that ordinary people would like to hear more on where
the next wharf will be built, when is the copra price will rise, where will the
roads be built, where will the next school and clinics be built. These are the languages and words that people
in the provinces are ready hear.
However, Mr Speaker, the Honorable
Minister of Finance took some 15 minutes yesterday to explain the intention of
the Speech to us. For it is the Government
of Change, it is a Grand Coalition change, our
government must change the mission and vision of this nation. That was the intention of the speech. And I would like to thank the Minister of
Finance for taking time to explain what the Speech is intended for.
Mr Speaker, I think the promises and
plans put on media are what the rural people want to hear, want to see now put
in place. It is very important that we
must implement the speech more in a concrete manner, take what was put on the
media but was raised in conferences, seminars, and presentation and make it
into a reality. As I said earlier people
down in the villages are more interested to know where the next wharf, road,
clinic shall be built. All the
terminologies of sovereignty constitutionality, and freedom have no meaning to
our people, it is only for us politicians.
There are three aspects of the Speech I would like to
comment on, and these are the rural development policy aspects. It is very important, been repeated many
times over the media by various people and so we all know what this is all
about. The bottom up approach is to
redirect the development of this nation back to the rural sector.
However, I would like to stress on a point I raised
sometime on the media that whilst it is good to embark on this rural
development policy, we must make sure the provinces are part and parcel of this
program. And the provinces mean not only
the politicians, the decision makers to come and understand the policy but must
go right down to administrators’ right in the provinces. Those whom we expect to implement the rural
development policy. The administrators,
especially the key divisions in the provinces, the workers manning the
agriculture division, the workers manning the fisheries division and the
workers manning the forestry division in the provinces Mr Speaker.
Sir,
I would also like us to encourage small businesses to be established in the
rural areas as part and parcel of rural development policy and we must
reestablish the cooperative division in the provinces. We must reestablish the business division in
the provinces so that we can help poor families start their own canteen, own a petrol
depot, small businesses, groups that want to form cooperative run their
farming, piggery etc. There is no use
telling politicians in the provinces this is what we want to do and they do not
know how to implement it because provincial workers are busy running their own
businesses too.
I know as well as many of you know, Mr Speaker, that
some seconded officers when coming to
Sir, if you want the rural development policy to be
implemented, to be a success then you must crack down this kind of practice by
officers down there in the provinces. You
must restructure, strengthen and give strength and capacity building to the
various divisions in the provinces because those are the divisions that will
actually implement the government’s program.
Those are the divisions that will actually work so that we would not
have a lot of questions raised to the Minister of Agriculture like yesterday on
why is it that the Agriculture Extension Service is not performing. Sir, it is not performing because the
Agriculture Division in the provinces is not restructured, is not strengthened.
But this is a must in order for the rural
development policy to become a success. I am very much concerned because I come from a
province where I know this is happening.
Mr Speaker, a promising aspect of
the Speech, a second point I would like to stress on is the State Government
System. I think it is a relief to know
that Government has plans as presented here in the Speech from the Throne that
by mid-next year we should be able to have a complete Federal Constitution for
From our own point of view, I can see that is the where
the future of
The third aspect I would like to stress on, Mr Speaker
is the educational progress that is taking place in this country. I think we must emphasize more the importance
of education and I would like to see the government to even increase the 2007
budget on educational development. This is
where the future of this country lies.
It is where we must tell our people that we are one people, one
country. Education is where we can
develop nationalism, patriotism, and nothing else.
I would like to see the government coming to a point
where it stops building community high schools because community high schools
encourage regionalism in the various provincial areas. When there were no community high schools in
existent except for Church schools, it encourages people throughout the country
to come and mix together in one place, boarding together. That is how we understand each other. That is how I come to know a man from Shortlands, man from
Sir, the Community High Schools whilst they serve
their purpose of enabling education reach as many children as we can, the
negative side of it is that it restricts our children not knowing children from
other provinces. The education must look
at probably encouraging at a particular point in secondary education that there
must be a boarding school.
Provincial secondary schools or national secondary
schools must be developed so that we can revive again the lessons that the
missionaries, the colonial governments that built
I can recall before when you walk through
Education is an essential part of developing this
nation so that we become more understanding, avoid mistrust etc. And therefore I am very happy to note that
the Speech from the Throne mentioned that the Solomon Islands College of High
Education would be developed to become a University.
I can assure you, Mr Speaker, that
the
I am also happy that the USP wants to extend its
figures throughout the region. Whilst I
accept USP wanting to establish a fourth campus here in Solomon Islands, it
reminds me of the school of Marine where it was supposed to be established here
but in the end it ends back in the Laucala Campus in
Fiji. Let us hope the same thing is not
repeated. We will encourage USP to try
its very best to come and establish this fourth campus Mr Speaker.
Sir, I for one would like to say that education is the
right of our young people in
I would like to urge the government to encourage the USP
to quickly set up this fourth Campus. If
the USP is dragging its feet in establishing a campus in this country, I would
like to encourage the Solomon Islands Government to quickly establish its own
Mr Speaker, those are the three most
important points I would like to stress which encourages me and I would like to
expand on it for the sake of telling this nation how I a representative of the
people of North West Choiseul is happy about those particular three areas
raised, but with suggestions on how to improve it cautioning the
government.
Mr Speaker, I would like to make some points of concern. A concern which is not very much
anti-government as the Minister of Health raised today when he debated financial
matters, but I think it is a point to raise for taking
note in our attempts to try implementing the policies that we are telling this
nation.
These points are areas which I thought should be
stressed more, should be raised more from the Throne because it concerns
everybody in this country and yet it was treated very lightly. The Speech touched too much on institutional
matters, policies, visions and not the practicality of them. One of them is the Integrity Bill. This was mentioned on Monday but I would like
to hear more of when is it going to be tabled on the floor of this Parliament
and what is it going to be like.
The Integrity Bill, as all of us knows, if put in
place in this country will be the future in resolving how we choose our leader -
the Prime Minister. It would also create
political stability in the sense that there would not be any vacuum if there
are motions of no confidence or people moving from party to party.
Lastly, Mr Speaker, the integrity bill will also
create the growth of political parties.
I know many young people in this country are interested in joining political
parties in this country. You only need
to read the newspapers to will see how many young people are politically minded
in this country. But we must create the
avenue for them by encouraging the growth of parties in this country, which is
an ingredient of parliamentary democracy.
We must do that and the sooner we do introduce that bill the better it
is for
Another area I do not hear from the Speech from the Throne,
and which I said to myself that probably we are thinking too much about the
future that we forget about the present, and that is, rising
unemployment in this country especially in
There was nothing stressed in the Speech from the Throne
on how we can address unemployment which is now becoming a problem in this
country, especially in
But this is not only for
Mr Speaker, we must turn a blind eye to unemployment. And I as someone having the privilege to
contribute to this motion would like to say, may be
food for thought for the government to have a look at or I am just thinking of
bringing a motion to Parliament on this matter. We cannot wait for investors to create jobs in
Sir, to wait for investors to create jobs would mean
following the conditions and interest of the investor. If 10 investors come into this country, which
is now happening, and eight of them want to stay in
As the Honorable Minister of Finance said yesterday
the answer is with us on this floor of Parliament. We make a law passed here in Parliament
allowing short term employment for young people while waiting to find a
permanent employment can be done. They
don’t have to pay NPF, they don’t have to pay taxes so that they can find
something to do both gaining income, be useful, training until they find
permanent employment in the private sector.
Sir, this has been done in many countries around the
world to meet the problem of unemployment. I know the Minister of Commerce is listening
very attentively. If you are thinking of
embarking on this idea, and you need a consultant, just see me.
Mr Speaker, we must tackle the problem now. Don’t wait for 2007. I think this is the other area I want to
raise as it is not mentioned specifically or not emphasized so much in the Speech.
Another third area I would like to stress on before I
resume my seat, Mr Speaker, is on what I term as the destabilization of
government machinery.
We are always worried about political stability. Politics must be stable so that the government
is in place so that things will move on.
But we forget sometimes that the administration, the government
machineries must be stable too. I only
want to ask a question on this matter that we must be careful not to
destabilize the government machinery that we have for reasons that only
ourselves know.
We must be careful not to destabilize the judicial
system. We must be careful that we do
not destabilize the Public Service by appointing political appointees that
raises a lot of question. We must be
careful that we do not destabilize our diplomatic relations with other countries. Because in the end, I can say that we are
going to be the losers in the international scene. Locally, yes we can be the winner but
internationally
Mr Speaker, stability must take place both within the
country and also outside
The way we are going, Mr Speaker, is creating
uneasiness for our people. We are
creating questions and worries amongst our citizens in this country. If we spend 50% of our time trying to sort out
a problem that deals with international matters, we would not have the time to
address the rural development policy. This
is a fact, and this is what is happening now.
Mr Speaker, the government is so busy dealing with how
to resolve this political row with
Mr Speaker, in conclusion I said what I want to say on
very important matters that I feel needs to be said on the floor of this
Parliament and as the Parliamentary Wing Leader of the Peoples Alliance Party,
a party that once flourished, became a leading party leading this nation in the
very beginning of Independence, the same with the party led by you Honorable
Speaker. I think it is very important
that we bring to mind one essence that must center around
political parties, and that is the importance of our people. Whatever we do, whatever our undertakings
are, we must put our people first and our own interests second. By doing this we will be able to redirect
Solomon Islands to make changes, changes not to destabilize the country but
changes to make our people progress and turn Solomon Islands into a more
powerful, one nation, one people.
With these comments, Mr Speaker, I support the motion.
Mr GHIRO: Thank you Mr
Speaker, I rise to join my other colleagues to firstly thank His Excellency the
Governor-General of Solomon Islands Sir Nathaniel Waena
for his challenging speech to this Honorable House on Monday 2nd
October 2006, and to briefly contribute to my colleagues’ response to the
speech. However, before doing so may I
take this opportunity to once again congratulate each and everyone
of us for being able to make it to the last honorable positions we now hold a
elected members of this honorable Parliament and as leaders of this country and
his people. I say this because it is
indeed a great achievement. However, I
wish at this point, to remind ourselves that what comes with these personal
achievements are responsibility and accountability. As leaders, the Bible says, we are watched by
hosts of witnesses everyday, thus our credibility is on the line upon our
assumption of the positions we now hold as leaders of this country and our
people.
Against the understanding Mr Speaker Sir, may I now
turn to the theme of ‘creating a new and better Solomon Islands’ as leaders who
now have the opportunity to do so.
However, may I remind this honorable House that my response will relate
directly to the issues read in the speech that recount to portfolios of my Ministry.
As the Minister responsible for ecclesiastical
matters, youth development, sports, children rights and human rights and other
vulnerable groups, I take this very seriously.
The challenge is, ‘what can I or my Ministry do
to contribute to creating this ‘new and better
Mr Speaker Sir, I strongly believe it is time as
leaders begin to trust our civil society to help the government to create this
new and better
Much has been said locally, regionally and globally on
the subject of empowerment of the civil society and or as commonly known in
The Grand Coalition of Change Government this time
round is serious about revisiting the concept again and this is highlighted in
its Policy Statement and the Policy Translation and Implementation
Document. What this entails is the
continuous reform of Public Service that will eventually result in having lean
but effective, efficient, ethical and professional organization which is vested
more with regulatory powers than service delivery as has been the case for the
last 28 years.
Mr Speaker Sir, change of mindset from central
government being the service provider and deliverer to being the service user,
is a must if we are indeed serious in creating a new and better
What this implies Mr Speaker, Sir, is the civil
society can and must be trusted to take over the production and delivery of
much-needed services to our people in our communities.
Serious consideration must therefore be given to the
ensuring the capacity of the civil society is adequately built and strengthen
the level whether their ability to plan, coordinate and manage the production
and delivery of services effectively, efficiently, ethically and
professionally. The Civil society, in
this context Mr Speaker sir, includes NGOs, the private sector, Churches and
other well established organizations as non state players.
To do this effectively Mr Speaker, an appropriate
mechanism must be develop to ensure the principles of good governance and not
undermined in any way. To that effect Mr
Speaker Sir, the Ministry of Home Affairs is currently working on a framework
that will see the stakeholders activities are ‘mind-streamed’ into the normal
government structure that has the community at the base, the provincial level,
the national level and the regional international level. From the top down you would have the
international provincial and community.
This is also in line with the Pacific Plan 2005 to 2020.
The Ministry is in process of planning a national
workshop for the stakeholders before the end of this year. The occasion should give the stakeholders the
opportunity to see the plan and contribute to the final outcome. A frame work that is simple but effective and
efficient that could be used by every sectoral
ministry is very important, and may I, at this point, Mr Speaker Sir, assure
the honorable House that indeed my Ministry is confident that the concept we
are working on now does have the potential of have the of meeting that
requirement.
Yes, Mr Speaker Sir, Churches are some of the non
government organizations that do have well-establish structures in the country
and if I may also add, their structures do reach right down to very individual
in our villages.
These organizations need to be open up beyond their
traditional pastoral (spiritual) focus to embrace other sectors of developments
that are cradling some of the serious challenges to their Members today.
Some of the issues include the need for good
parenting, health issues that the church often feels uncomfortable to discuss
freely, poverty and many more. The
challenge is real and we urgently need national decisions from church leaders to
allow their followers freely and actively participate in dealing with these
issues. Many of these are national
issues and require the effort of every Solomon Islanders to tackle.
The grand coalition government is committed and
fulfilling the international obligations and this includes full compliance to
the International Convention Rights of Children in accordance with the
principles proclaimed in the charter of the United Nation and Universal
Declaration of Human Rights ratified by the
Mr Speaker, they need to have the active coordination
body to oversee the effect implementation of these conventions therefore,
justifies the need to establish such a body.
Thus, my ministry through the Children’s Development Division will shortly
be engaging in some serious consultation with other stakeholders on the idea to
establishing a National Children’s Development Council.
Like the other divisions within the Ministry of Home
Affairs Mr Speaker Sir, plans are in place to establish children’s advocacy
offices in all the provinces. Increased
awareness about parents, communities and provincial officials on why children’s
rights are important must be given priority.
Thus, these provincial offices would require qualified staff, and MHA is
serious prioritizing capacity building for these provincial offices.
Each of these provincial offices will have their own
Coordinating Committees, whose responsibility would be to ensure children’s
needs and rights are given priority at provincial and community levels. Similarly all stakeholders must cooperate by
pulling all the resources available to them to ensure all human right issues
are attended to.
Children in SI include boys, girls, handicapped,
disabled and the vulnerable between the age of 1 and 15 years of age.
Pursuance to the requirements of the
United Nation Conventions on Rights of Women and linked to eliminate violence
against women, the grand coalition for change government is seriously committed
to fulfilling its international obligations and answering determination to ensure
that relevant domestic laws are reviewed to confirm within international and
regional human rights standards.
Naturally, the existing international and regional human rights standard
will be formulated within the primary level, perspective and will insufficient
gender sensitively and sometimes fail to provide protection for the gender
specific interests of women.
It is therefore, an urgent need to
formulate specific rights for women, particularly in economic and social
fields. The need for women to be centrally
involving in decision making at all levels and become active partners with the
government in the development of the country cannot be undermined.
Men in
Children need to feel secure in
their families. They are affected by the
way their parents treat them at home. A violent, abusive and unsupportive parents are highly
likely to bring up children who are more like themselves. A lot of children today are forcefully pushed
out of their homes into the streets because of the violence environment in
their homes. They find love among their
peers on the streets because they do not find it at home.
Violence, abusive, arrogant, destructive and
rebellious children strongly underscore the problem of children neglect in this
country and serious action must be taken now.
This is a problem that requires the attention to every Solomon
Islander. Virtue development is a must
action of every good parent.
Youth unemployment Mr Speaker, is an issue every aspiring leader often wants to
talk about. Unemployment by definition
refers to the idleness, jobless and redundant to sight a few. While this may refer to wages or paid
employment it is also incorrect to assume that there is virtually nothing for
the youth to engage in.
The Grand Coalition for Change
government’s policy to encourage the community to actively participate in the
development of this country is considered a positive way forward to tackling
this problem. This is so much
opportunity for the engagement of youth in productive activities.
Leaders of our youth must therefore,
be people who are creative, innovative and have a broader view of challenges
facing our youth of today.
There are opportunities in the community awareness programmes in every sectoral
ministry of the government for which all the youth of
Youth leaders need to be creative,
innovative and resourceful to be able to see where the resources are and to tap
these resources which are already available and under these sectoral
programmes.
However, having said that Mr
Speaker, the urgent need is to seriously get some of the major economic
developments like the Auluta Palm Oil Project on
Malaita and Vangunu cannot be undermined as it will
greatly assist in releasing the pressure on people, including the youth who
continue to migrate to urban centres seeking paid
jobs especially in Honiara.
Mr Speaker, my Ministry is currently
investigating the possibility of incorporating the functions of the Solomon
Islands Youth Division with the National Youth Congress into a new body called
‘Solomon Islands Youth Authority’. The
new body will be given powers to make decisions on matters relating to youth in
The authority would also be given
the responsibility of administering and managing a national youth corporation
which intended to require all young people at an appropriate stage to undertake
national service through government driven programmes.
In sports development, attention
must be paid to the needs of developing our provincial sports
infrastructure. National representative
in sports at both the international and regional are often confined to the
boundaries of
On the economic development Mr Speaker,
land availability in my view remains supreme, and serious attention therefore
must be given to both the national and provincial governments to avail
financial resources to individual tribal groups who wish to move ahead to
record their tribal genealogies and land boundaries.
Equally, important Mr Speaker,
serious consideration should also be given to provide similar assistance to the
land owning groups of the locations that are already identified for national
development projects, such as Bina Harbour, Suva Bay, Wairokai and
many other national project sites in other provinces. This will assist the government in solving
many of the problems our country is currently facing, which I deliberately do
not intend to go into in any detail.
Generally the people are ready to actively in the economic development
of this country and we as leaders of this beloved SI need to grasp this
opportunity.
Finally, I wish to conclude by
briefly touching on the need to recognise the role of
our traditional chiefs. Since
independence, traditional chiefs and their role in the community as custodians
of the
Twenty eight years, after
independence and still our so called traditional chiefs are yet to be given
true recognition as legal custodians of our cultures and customs.
I wish to confirm to this honourable Parliament Mr Speaker, that my Ministry is
taking this very seriously and in line with the GCCG policies investigating
plans to equip and strengthen the capacity of our traditional leaders, and also
examine ways and means that their services can be fully recognised
by bringing them into the mainstream.
The potential in peace building
within our communities is undoubtedly enormous.
The means of positively involving these leaders in the activities is an
issue that the relevant sectoral Ministry would have
to determine. However, let us recognize
our experts in culture and customs and grant due respect to them by fully utilising them in the fields of expertise.
Thank you honourable
colleagues for listening, and I resume my seat.
Mr GUKUNA: Thank you Mr
Speaker, for allowing me to make a short contribution.
Firstly, Mr Speaker, let me
sincerely thank His Excellency the Governor General for delivering this speech.
Mr Speaker, I wish to contribute
because this Speech from the Throne is meant to reassure this House and the
people we represent out there in rural
This speech is meant to also give
some insights to how exactly this commitment …….. In other words we ……
And
yes, Mr Speaker, there is a lot of hope in the Speech. Our future is presented in a very glaring
manner. We have been late to expect
nothing………..
In doing so the content of the
speech is an …. of …. to present to us the perimeters of the fundamental changes
that was promised early this year in what is supposed ………… And to ensure that we are convinced the
government has made sure to the delivery of these promised changes directly
from …..
Mr Speaker, this speech in many ways
mounts an admission that this country has failed. We have failed because we have not and I
quote from the speech again “use all of
legislations, policies and regulatory mechanisms in the manner worthy of our
sovereignty, a mandate to govern and develop this nation”
At the same time in this speech also we have been told
that in order for us to be able to use our legislation and policies in the
sovereign manner for our development we must bottom-up Mr Speaker.
So the catch word this speech Mr
Speaker, is this so called bottom-up approach.
So this is fundamentally what we have been promised then a bottom up
approach. Mr Speaker, I read through
this entire speech and I still cannot understand what this bottom up approach
is. It is now being seen as the saviour of this country.
What I can tell you sir, is that according to this speech we have been
apparently doing the wrong thing over the last thirty years. So where is this person who is telling us
that we have been doing the wrong thing has been hiding? Why has it taken him thirty years to come out
and tell us that we have not developed that is why we have problems?
In other words Mr Speaker, the top
down approach which is I take it as the opposite to
the bottom-up approach which we have been using will not create a better
Also and according to this speech Mr
Speaker, we achieved this, and we will have created a much, much better
My concern Mr Speaker,
is that as I look through this speech, I saw nothing in it but would suggest to
me if we are ready to come out. Mr
Speaker, you read through this stated approaches in the logging sector,
fisheries, mineral exploration, land and the finance, investment and so on and
you will see no bottom up approach. ………., it is the same. I have seen them before. We have read about them before. That is really non incentives in this speech
Mr Speaker. The approaches as I have
said are the same, except that they have been relabeled as bottom up
approaches.
Mr Speaker, one thing that has been
explicitly told in this speech is that this bottom up approach will only work
in this country under ethical. This is a
tough requirement, a tough condition for bottom up approach to work in this
country. But first we have to be talking
about ourselves and that it is tough because most of us in this House will have
to play double standard. Most of us in
this House will have to liar and most of us in this House will have to hide our
true motives before we talk about bottom up approach.
Mr Speaker, most of us in this
House, personally we have to be hypocritical.
We have to overstress this ethical leadership matter of bottom-up approach
Mr Speaker, my other major concern
is that what has been happening over the last few months appeared to be not in
line with the normal ideas carried out in this speech.
Mr Speaker, we have either been
sending out the wrong signals or our real motives have been kept away from the
speech.
Mr Speaker, is it really true that
our trained people in this country cannot implement our approach and they
cannot do this for us? Is it really true
that the qualified permanent secretaries who have served this country for many,
many years are not good enough to implement this bottom-up approach?
Mr Speaker, allow me to ask you
again this question. Is it true that
this bottom up approach does not need our public service laws? Mr Speaker, some of the people we have hand
picked do not even know how to write cabinet papers. Some of them do not have any slight idea of
how to write up a policy Mr Speaker, let alone implement it in the public
service. Some of them have no
performance record with the service. I
mean the public service. So what is it
that we had just rewarded to the massive pay rise?
I just have to ask you again Mr Speaker, is it true
that we really need a foreign lawyer to advise this government of the legality
of this bottom up approach.
And what is it in this bottom-up
approach Mr Speaker, that really needs a brand new
foreign attorney general to advice us on this?
Mr Speaker, I put you through these questions because I have a feeling
that this speech is incomplete. I sense
Mr Speaker, that this speech is not telling us the other intentions of the
government. In other words Mr Speaker,
with your respect this speech is not forthcoming in my opinion.
One of the reasons why I have to ask
you these questions Mr Speaker, excuse me, is that my people had asked me these
same questions and I told them, I will ask Mr Speaker, because I do not have
the answers. Whilst I do know that this
will need a huge amount of money in order to implement this bottom up approach,
I also know that we do not have it. We
do not have it. The basic truth here Mr
Speaker, is that you will need a lot of help from our friends to achieve this
bottom up approach. We will not get this
money by being embarrassingly undiplomatic.
We do not have to challenge our neighbours to
achieve bottom up approach. We do not
need to intimidate our judiciary to achieve bottom up approach. In fact Mr Speaker, our best approach to
achieving bottom up if there is such thing as bottom up approach, is to leave
our neighbours alone.
Leave our judiciary alone, leave RAMSI and our law officers alone, and leave
our public service also.
And more pressing Mr Speaker, is
that let go of our new Attorney General.
We do not need him. And having
said this, I read in the media this morning that we have done exactly
that. It is unfortunate and regrettable
that we have done so after putting ourselves in the public media with the wrong
reasons.
Mr Speaker, there is no need to
overstress sovereignty here. Mr Speaker,
if the writer who boldly told this nation in this speech, that the way we have
been doing business with our neighbours had seriously
undermined our sovereignty. Then he may
as well tell this country. Tell us that
we do not need their aid money, and that this bottom up approach will fully
finance without abuse of aid money.
Mr Speaker, sovereignty is something
that we all treasure and you suppose too because it gives us an identity as our
people of our nation. With this
identity, excuse me Mr Speaker, comes (supposed to come) social security with
health. I need not remind you Mr Speaker,
of power of sovereignty as spelled out miserably in our recent …… Mr Speaker, our sovereignty is our sovereignty. Our friends are not here to take it. First of all it is ugly right now, and theirs
is much better than ours. It is going to
be ours forever.
What we need and contrary to the
speech is to follow our friends to help us make it function for us. If we achieve that we can all jump up and
down and be protective of our sovereignty.
Mr Speaker, thank you that is my
short contribution, and I resume my seat.
(applause)
Mr LONAMEI: Thank you Mr Speaker, for allowing me the floor
of this Parliament to contribute very briefly to the Speech from the Throne
delivered by His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Premier
of Isabel Province, with the Bishop and the Diocese, and also the chiefs and
people of Isabel, I want to take this chance to thank His Excellency the
Governor General who has visited
The Governor General himself has
already received first hand concern of the people of Isabel during his tour
around
Mr Speaker, I think the concerns
raised or the message the people of
Mr Speaker, I think this bottom-up
approach that the government is doing now is that we want to treat everybody fairly
and equally on the services that the government is going to do to its people.
The fairness in distribution of
resources:
Mr Speaker, some of the concerns raised by the Premier
of Isabel Province with the churches and chiefs that were highlighted in the
function of Governor General, the Premier mentioned that Isabel is the longest
island with the shortest road. The
shortest road –
Mr Speaker, the premier said that he
has submitted the project to release the fund of $1million to build roads in
the province. The Ministry of
Infrastructure informs them to fill up another form and then another one and so
the process of filling up forms continues.
Why making things difficult for the rural people in the province if it
is already budgeted for here. We should
give them the money or we help to fill up the forms so that the money can go
down to the grass root or to the provinces to improve the development there.
Mr Speaker, the Minister of
Infrastructure must release the money so that my province can build the road
further more so that Isabel the longest island can also have the longest road.
Mr Speaker, fair distribution of
human resources – the Minister of Public Service has made clear the position of
Public Service about its workers. Mr
Speaker,
The Ministry of Education – the big
Education Office of Buala only have two officers
working there. There is no Chief
Education Officer, nor Senior Education Officer, nor Principal Education
Officer, nor nothing in there. No wonder
all Isabel Teachers run away to other provinces. They do not want to teach at Isabel. Those areas needs fair distribution of
manpower.
In Agriculture side – the Minister of
Agriculture has also advocated the activities that will be done in his
Ministry. The Isabel province will also
want some shares on the coconut or copra development in future. In all other projects shared to other
provinces there is nil for
Tourism – Mr Speaker, Isabel
province too is totally missed out on tourism project. Our genuine people who
wants to run tourism when they apply for such project come back and say,
because we are from Isabel they do not want to accept our application. If we are genuine about true rural
development, true rural bottom up approach should be all fairly treated. No matter you are from Isabel or no matter
you are from one of the least province at least fair distribution from the
Ministries must go down to those places.
Home Affairs – If there is any money
where Home Affairs assist churches, churches in the province want the share of
those activities so that the rural people can build church house in the
villages. Those are some of the comments
on the side of fairness and also concern raised by churches.
Mr Speaker,
Government should provide shipping
services for our people because that is the only communication that can link
whole SI. And if we are truly concern about our rural people to improve
shipping services throughout the SI or shipping within SI and if we are not
able to provide such services, the government should at least assist the
private shipping companies that are currently operating at the moment. They have done a good job for providing
services and also running their commercial services. Some of the routes done in Isabel is not economic. It
is not economic for the private company to operate there but because of the
service to the people of Isabel and because of that IDC continue its
operation. No matter
the shipping company run lose it just continue its services. The government or parliament should seriously
consider such shipping services to help the companies to make money but at the
same time they are serving the people.
We should subsidize some of the
routes where may be is not economically viable on the business side to assist
the local companies struggling to meet their ends and also for providing
service to the people.
Mr Speaker, through the meetings of
the Chiefs and people in Isabel they want RAMSI to stay in our country and they
want RAMSI must stay in our country for 30 years or may be if they want to live
here or for how long they want to live here they are welcome to do so.
Mr Speaker, the current standoff
between
If we can solve our political
standoff quickly we will continue to be their good friend because as other
speakers said we are the ones that will lose at the end because such big
countries like that might be able to count us.
We still need their assistance.
They do not need our assistance.
With my few remarks I once again
thank His Excellency for the speech from the Throne and also I want to put it
across very briefly few concerns that was raised by
the Leaders of Isabel Province. That’s
all I want to say thank you very much.
Mr Speaker: Before I ask
the honourable Prime Minister to may be move a motion
of adjournment of the debate of this particular motion, I’d like to acknowledge
the presence of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of
(applause)
MOTIONS
Debate on the motion to thank His
Excellency the Governor-General for the Speech from the Throne is adjourned for
the next day.
Motion of Adjournment
Hon Sogavare: I beg to move
that Parliament do now adjourn.
The House adjourned at