NATIONAL PARLIAMENT OF
DAILY HANSARD
THIRD MEETING – EIGHTH SESSION
The
Speaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter Kenilorea took the Chair at
Prayers
ATTENDANCE
At prayers all were present with the exception of the Minister
for Department of Provincial Government and Constituency Development and the Members
for West New Georgia/Vona Vona,
PRESENTATION
OF PAPERS AND REPORTS
QUESTIONS
AND ANSWERS
Mr SPEAKER: Before
Parliament continues with its business on asking and answering of questions, I
just want to inform the honorable House that a technician would be going in and
out testing our sound system. Please
just take note of that and don’t be worried about him.
REPLACEMENT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF
POLICE
1.
Mr HAOMAE to
the Honourable Minister for Police and National Security: What action(s) have the Minister taken to
replace the Commissioner of Police?
Hon TOSIKA: Mr Speaker, as
he is well aware, section 43(2) of the Constitution is the power to appoint the
Commissioner of Police vested under the Governor General acting in accordance
with the advice of the Prime Minister in consultation with the Police and
Prison Service Commission. The procedure
is the same for termination of such appointments.
However, in accordance with the
advice tendered by the Attorney General to the Government to advertise the post,
actions taken to date by my Ministry is that documents containing relevant
background information, responsibility, job description, qualifications and
experience required in this regard to the post have been forwarded to the
Public Service Division.
As I have said earlier, I do not have power under the
Constitution to appoint or to revoke the appointment of the Commissioner of
Police. It is the full responsibility of
the Governor General and the Prime Minister in consultation with the Police and
Prison Services Commission.
Mr KEMAKEZA: Can the Prime
Minister or the Minister confirm to this House that section 44 of the
Constitution has been fully complied with on this particular issue?
Hon SOGAVARE: Mr Speaker, I
do not have the Constitution here with me, but if the honorable Member can read
me the provisions of section 44 I may be able to respond.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
what I meant is that the appointment and termination of the Commissioner of
Police is under section 44 of the Constitution.
Termination of such offices has to be complied with similarly to the appointment. Whether or not on the advice of the Prime
Minister through the Governor General to officially terminate the Commissioner
of Police which the Minister for Foreign Affairs did not allow to come into the
country then you can advise the Governor General again to make a new
appointment of the Commissioner. The
question is whether that section is fully complied with.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, that
process is going ahead now. Submission
has gone to the Police and Prison Services Commission to advise His Excellency
to revoke the appointment of the incumbent.
Only if that happens we can then proceed on to appoint a new
commissioner.
Mr HAOMAE: Mr Speaker, I
am well versed with the fact that the appointment of the Commissioner is done
by the Governor General after consultation with the Police and Prison Service
Commission but the actual recommendation for appointment is an executive
function therefore it is done by the Prime Minister and I think the Minister
for Police being responsible for national security and police will also have some
views on the courses of action pertaining to the appointment of a replacement for
the commissioner of police.
I want to ask this question for the Prime Minister or
the substantive Minister for National Security and Police to answer. Does the government envisage that the new Commissioner
of Police will be a local person or someone from overseas?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
that is an administrative matter. We
will cross the bridge when we reach it but the first thing to do first is to
officially get His Excellency to revoke the appointment of the incumbent first
before we can deal with that question.
Mr Haomae: Does that
imply that no action has been taken by the government to replace the
Commissioner of Police?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
the actual process to replace the Commissioner has not happened yet although
there are discussions going ahead but that is normal Mr Speaker, to look at
names and things like that. But I want
to assure this House that any appointment of a new Commissioner will have to be
done through the normal process.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker,
just in case the Commissioner of Police comes from overseas (an overseas
personnel) can the Government guarantee that the Commissioner will not be
declared persona non grata?
Mr Speaker: That is a
hypothetical question and I will not allow it.
It is asking for opinion and I will not allow it.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, I
am sorry I did not get the last part of the answer given by the Prime Minister
on whether or not this particular provision of the Constitution has been
followed.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
if the Member for Savo/Russells referred to section 44 of the Constitution then
what I said was that the process is going ahead now. Submission has gone to the Police and Prison
Service Commission so that it sits down and deals with this appointment because
it is actually frustrated by the exercise of another power by a Minister of the
Crown so that process is going ahead.
Only after the Police and Prison Services Commission has finished with its
deliberations then it will make submissions to His Excellency to revoke the
appointment before we can talk about a replacement or recruitment of a new
commissioner.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, I
am clear with the appointment but what about the termination of the last
commissioner of police? Is this
particular provision followed so that it is done according to our Constitution? That is the point I am driving at because as
soon as that is cleared the government can do otherwise. That is the point which I want either the
Prime Minister or the substantive Minister to answer.
Whilst I am still on the floor, Mr Speaker, I would
like to say that the Minister for Police cannot be excused that he is not
responsible. It is under the
Constitution that in the absence of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Police
has total rule.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, I
do not know where we are taking this question to but I have already answered
it. On the process of terminating the
incumbent, submission has been made to the Police and Prison Service Commission
to deliberate on it, and then to advice His Excellency to revoke it. That is the process that His Excellency wants
to follow. Mr Speaker, I think I have
answered that question.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker,
in fact I am entitled to an answer to my earlier supplementary question because
precedence has already been set. The
Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and just add on to it, Immigration, so
that he can go ahead to use it, has declared the Commissioner of Police a persona
non grata. So it is a matter of national
interest that the government must guarantee that if it recruits a commissioner
of police from overseas it will not declare that commissioner ‘persona non
grata’ again because the precedence has already been set. I am entitled to an answer to my
supplementary question. The government
must not brush this aside.
Hon Tosika: Mr Speaker, I
think to further clarify the issue, section 44 in this case cannot be applied
on the basis that the former Commissioner of Police has been by an ordered from
the Minister of Foreign Affairs declared a ‘persona non-grata’ not to enter
this country and therefore section 44 in this case cannot be taken into
consideration. He was bound by the
Immigration Act that he is not allowed to enter the country therefore the due
process of appointing a new commissioner of police which comes under section
43(2) is the process the Government is looking at.
Mr Speaker: Subject to the
Attorney General’s assistance here, section 44 does not specifically refer to
the appointment of a Commissioner of Police.
It is just a provision for the Prime Minister and the Governor General
to constitute further officers if they want to, and it is a general section
rather than a section specifically referring to the Commissioner of Police’s
appointment.
In other words, under this provision the government
can make appointments for offices of the government. But I suppose Parliament cannot interpret its
own law and so the Attorney General’s advice might be useful here.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, the
last part of this particular section says
“may constitute offices for
Mr Speaker: Yes, but it
does subject it to this Constitution, which means that appointments of other
offices does not necessarily come under this particular provision. Anyway would you like to make any comment
A.G. to help us out? Otherwise we bush
lawyers just confuse ourselves.
Attorney General: Just on the
second question, the Chamber is not aware that the Commissioner of Police has
been declared a persona non-grata.
Hon OTI: Point of
order Mr Speaker, are we on my question now or are we still in the first
question.
Mr Speaker: They are trying
to help us clarify what section 44 of the Constitution is for.
Attorney General: Section 44 is
basically a general provision which empowers the Governor General to make
appointment and to terminate appointment upon the advice of the PM. It is not the relevant section to debate upon
in this Chamber.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker, I
would like to thank the Prime Minister for answering the question and the acting
Attorney General.
I am only concerned about my last
question on the persona non grata issue otherwise we are looked upon as a
banana nation.
Mr Speaker: Maybe you can
raise that in your question number two?
PERSONA NON GRATA – COMMISSIONER OF
POLICE
2.
Mr HAOMAE to
the Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade: What is/are the reason(s), if any, for
declaring the Commissioner of Police persona non-grata?
Hon OTI: Mr Speaker, I
thank the MP for Small Malaita for his question. I have not declared the previous Commissioner
of Police or the incumbent a persona non-grata, so therefore there are no
reasons I can give in relation to this question.
Mr Speaker: The same
reason why he has not declared the reasons for taking the action he did still
applies and he does not wish to declare it in relation to this question.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker, I
have just returned from my constituency and the radio waves always say
‘referred to persona non-grata’. I will
resubmit the question.
ROAD NETWORK –
4.
Mr
RIUMANA to the Minister for Infrastructure and Development:
Hon SOFU: Mr Speaker,
first of all I would like to thank my good Member of Parliament for Hograno/Kia
Havulei for his unselfish concern for his constituency and to also put straight
some facts concerning roads in
Sir,
Hograno actually has 13kilometers road from Kaevanga
to Kolomola and with its high agricultural potential and also other important
social services infrastructure, this particular road is a potential candidate for
inclusion in the Ministry’s reconstruction program in the near future.
Secondly, it is the current government’s policy to open
up new development infrastructures around provincial economic growth
centers. What this simply means is that
economic growth centers will pull infrastructure developments even in large
areas that are densely populated such as the honorable Member’s
constituency.
Building roads is an expensive exercise and therefore
it would be irresponsible on our part to just build roads for approximately
$40million when there is uncertain potential return on such huge
investment.
Mr Riumana: Mr Speaker, first
of all the 13kilometer road from Kaevanga to Kolomola was built by manpower,
which means no proper engineering work and so the road conditions are not safe
for humans to travel on. Since there is
no road, the coffee project in Kolomola finally collapsed. I would like to know the time frame for these
roads to be constructed.
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, I
would also like to thank the honorable Member.
The 2007 recurrent budget, I think, caters for technical engineers to go
out and do assessments work on new roads like the one you are talking about.
Mr Riumana: Mr Speaker, since
Isabel is completely without road, can that study be prioritize for my
constituency?
Hon Sofu: Thank you
again honorable colleague for Hograno/Kia. Your point is well taken. I take note of it.
Mr FONO: Mr Speaker, can
the Minister inform the House as to why the Buala-Gozoruru road appeared in
last budget but was not constructed and so it appeared again in this year’s budget. This road is in
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, I
would like to thank the honorable Leader of Opposition for that very important
question.
Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Infrastructure is still waiting
for more information about the road from the Provincial Government but it is
yet to give us that information. Mr
Speaker, we are still waiting for further information from
Mr
Take a case in point, Mr Speaker, Rendova has had the
same thing. (I have a map here that
shows the
What I want to raise here, Mr Speaker, is that we
cannot reinvent a wheel in terms of these roads. What is the government’s plan to assist Isabel
with these logging companies and maybe some of the aid donors in trying to
facilitate and maybe rehabilitate or improve the existing road infrastructure
that is on Isabel now?
Mr KEMAKEZA: Mr Speaker I
think the MP for Rendova/Tetepari is on the wrong boat. The question is straightforward just asking
the Minister and the government.
The supplementary question is like this. The Minister has assured the House that a feasibility
study will be carried out. What
proportion of the 2007 development estimates is allocated for this particular
road and the one he assured me for Savo/Russells too?
Hon DARCY: Mr Speaker, I
guess supplementary questions that have been drawn into this question involved
budgetary figures and I suggest that any questions that may relate to the
budget should be left to the budget when we come to discuss it so that Members
will know additional information that may be required on questions of this
nature.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, in
fact the question should be answered correctly. We are just asking if there is any allocation
in this budget any proposal or plan for this road.
We have in the budget the Buala-Gozoruru road but this
particular road being questioned is not in the budget. If the Minister assures Parliament that there
is an allocation, it appeared in the 2006 budget but the Minister failed to
implement it. That is why I am asking
this question on what proportion of the $16 plus million which appears in the development
estimates would be considered for the Hograno/Kia Havulei road. And then I just add on Savo/Russells because
the Minister assured me as the MP for Savo/Russells that my road will be in the
2007 budget. That is when I will
question the Minister because his letter is already with me.
Mr Speaker: Could we
restrict our questions on road to
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, I
would like to answer the question asked by the Member for Rendova/Tetepari
earlier on today.
Mr Speaker, it is in the policy of the government that
existing roads constructed by logging companies must be permanently constructed
to the required standard.
I think it is very important for any logging companies
that construct roads to construct them to the required standard. Thank you.
Mr Fono: The Minister earlier
on informed the Chamber that the reason why they did not implement the
development budget estimates for the Buala-Gozoruru road is because they are
waiting for information from the Province.
Can the Minister outline what sort of information is
he waiting from the Isabel Provincial Government so that if they are listening
in they can provide that information. I
say this because the implementation of development budget estimates for Buala
Gozoruru road in 2006 was not done.
What sort of information is he still waiting from the
provincial government?
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, the
Buala-Gozoruru road is still waiting for the Province’s engagement with one of
the logging companies in Isabel that is doing that project. My Ministry is waiting for invoices to be
sent to us in order for us to make reimbursements.
Mr Fono: Is the
Minister saying that the logging company will construct the road and the
government reimburses the company? Is
that what he is saying rather than the government committing its own funds to
build that road?
Hon Sofu: Yes, an
arrangement was made between
Mr Zama: Mr Speaker, I
am not quite pleased with my colleague for Savo/Russells for injecting into my
question. But I thank the Minister for
answering the question.
Mr Speaker, like I have said, not only this government
but previous governments do not have the capability and the capacity to
effectively construct or even to supervise roads in the provinces. And that is why I am asking the honorable Minister
if his ministry can work closely with provincial authorities and donors.
Many of those logging roads are very good roads – they
are properly surfaced and so I would like to know what is the government’s plan
in terms of getting our donors and the operators together as this bottom up,
partnership, people participation kind of approach to seriously look into road issues
like this.
Mr Riumana: Mr Speaker, first
of all I would like to thank the Minister for using the logging companies to
construct roads. However, we must be
very cautious because sometimes these logging companies use that as an
incentive to import machineries on duty remission but in turn use them for
logging.
Does the Ministry have any mechanisms in place to
ensure the machineries are used for road construction?
Hon Darcy: Mr Speaker, I
thought the Minister has already answered the question. The way the government finances these roads
is on reimbursement basis and not through duty remissions.
Duty remission is different from reimbursement of the
cost of the construction that companies normally request reimbursement from the
government.
But in the case of companies that have been granted
remission and have used them for other purposes, we are not aware of that. It is good that the honorable Member has
sounded it out so that we can extend our monitoring system to cover such an
abuse.
Mr Zama: Mr Speaker, I
want the Minister of Works and maybe Finance to clarify this one.
Can the honorable MP for Kia/Hograno/Havulei go ahead
to engage private contractors and then come back to the government for
reimbursement for constructing the roads in Isabel?
Mr Darcy: Mr Speaker,
the Minister of Infrastructure has already stated that we are encouraging provinces
that would want to build roads that they see as absolutely essential for
development in their province to go ahead with that kind of arrangement and the
government will assist on reimbursement basis.
The Minister has already stated that and so that is the policy we will
embark on.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, next
time do not rule off Savo/Russells because I am entitled to an answer in
relation to the same subject matter.
Mr Speaker, the point raised by the MP for Hograno/Kia/Havulei
is a valid point, but the MP for Rendova/Tetepari confused the whole thing as
well as the Minister for Finance.
I want to know any monitoring mechanism by the Department
of Finance and Treasury that is complementary to the point raised by the MP for
Rendova, which I do congratulate him for raising that point.
I think the question is, what are the mechanisms so
that when the Minister of Finance gives logging companies a certain percentage
of exemption the exemption is for a particular road or clinic or school. Because if there are no mechanisms in place it
is very likely to end up in the hands of landowners like what has happened to Rendova
and sometimes ends up in the nightclubs.
What are the mechanisms purposely for development purposes in a
particular area?
It is a very good strategy and the Minister of Finance
is a logger himself and he has done several projects with his logging company. It is just the mechanisms that we want to
know, which is the point raised by the MP for Kia/Hograno/Havulei and also the
MP for Savo/Russells.
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, the
Ministry or the Government for that matter does not have any arrangement with
loggers. No. For this particular case on
Mr GUKUNA: Mr
Speaker, the problem with this is that it looks like this arrangement to
involve logging companies as getting very attractive and we are shifting the
responsibility of the government to logging companies.
My concern is that Rennell has no logs and so that
kind of arrangement is very difficult and we will have to depend on central
funding for construction of roads if it is going to be built on my island.
My question is, and that government must answer this
straightforward. Is there money for it
or not? If the government has money why
not construct the road itself?
Hon Darcy: Mr
Speaker, I think we are drawing this question too far to point at logging
companies. This is not a logging company
issue. It is the question of financing
road construction in the provinces where they believe it is absolutely
essential for the development of the provinces, and the Minister has already
answered it that if the provinces find a contractor to construct the roads the
government will reimburse them. It is
basically a financing arrangement the government has entered into.
On the issue of duty remissions to logging companies
is a separate issue altogether from this question but because the MP for Savo
mentioned it, and you have allowed him, let me just tell this House that the
conditions for granting exemptions normally includes the monitoring of how the
recipients of remissions use the concessions, and we follow them. The last government did that. It dispatched a mission to go and monitor how
the applicants use the remissions. But
this government does not grant any exemptions. It has strictly enforced guidelines to ensure
that whatever remissions are granted will pass certain tests, which is not an
issue for this particular question. But
let me just say this because we have never granted any exemptions to any
companies in the nature that the MP for Savo has mentioned. Thank you Mr Speaker.
Mr HUNIEHU: Mr Speaker, I
think the Minister of Transport and Works needs to inform Parliament just to
quantify his statement today because the only allocation for infrastructure
development in the development budget is the $10.8million which will be funded
by ADB and whether the project of my good friend here is part of that
program. This is already a negotiated
work program and so whether this project is also included in this program.
Hon Darcy: Mr Speaker, as
I have said there are a number of supplementary questions that pointed to some
of the issues that will be dealt with during the debate on the budget itself
including the Rural Road Transport Plan and the fund that is envisaged from donors. To give justice to possible questions that
may arise, perhaps we should leave it until the budget is presented so that we
can all have the benefit of those information.
Thank you Mr Speaker.
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker, I
am sure the Minister did not answer my question. I just want the Minister for Infrastructure
to quantify his statement. He has
already informed this Parliament that the program for Isabel in terms of road
development is now on. In the
development budget only $10.9million was allocated for road infrastructure and
normally when aid donors are identified in the development budget, it means the
programs have already been negotiated.
My question is whether the project of the questioner is part of the
project program.
Hon Sofu: Mr
Speaker, we have not yet debated the 2007 budget. But to answer the honourable Member’s
question, $1million is in the development budget for this particular road in
Isabel that we are now talking about.
Mr KENGAVA: Mr Speaker,
my question comes with a comment. I
think from the answers we are getting, it is clear to me that the government
has no policy on how and what procedures to follow in the construction of roads
in rural areas. Therefore, I would like
to ask whether the government will come up with a policy to look at constructing
of roads in rural areas accommodating logging roads.
Hon Sofu: The present
government has policy on the construction of roads in the rural areas. This comes under the National Transport Plan
of the present government.
Mr OLAVAE: Mr Speaker, before
I ask my question I would like to inform Members of Parliament that the
colonial masters ruled us for 85 years and all the roads we are talking about need
improvement because they have been built for the last 85 years and they are now
in deteriorate state. And not Isabel
alone wants improvement to its roads.
When we talk about roads, we are talking about
billions of dollars for improvement of roads throughout the country. We want a recovery program to improve the
deteriorating roads throughout the country.
This government is talking about the bottom up
approach and the growth centre to start stimulating rural development and so we
have to start somewhere, and not necessarily a 30km road for the government to
fund. May be a 5km road where the growth
centre will be to start off so that the people mobilize themselves to start
revitalize commodities like copra, cocoa.
My question is, does the government for that matter
already negotiated with donors because we are talking about billions of dollars
here, not ten million because it is for roads throughout the nation. If we are really serious in revitalizing the
rural economy we are talking about billions of dollars for the 50 growth
centres. Has the government already
looked ahead five to ten years plan down the road?
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, I
think the questions we are asking on the floor of Parliament on roads have been
there for a long time now. Successive
government comes and goes and this present government is only in office for
about 10 months and it has put in place a policy to provide road access to our
rural dwellers in terms of infrastructure, which my Honorable colleague is
talking about.
I mentioned already in my answer that we have created
a National Road Plan where each province comes up with its own plan on their
priorities so that we can work according to the plan so that when any aid donor
comes along it will pick it from there whether it is for this province or this area.
Mr Kemakeza: The Minister mentioned aid donors. Is there any consultation by the Minister
with aid donors on this particular sector?
Hon ABANA: Mr
Speaker, the Ministry of Development Planning has had its first consultation
with donors a week ago and this will continue on six weekly basis.
Mr Kengava: I
think the National Road Plan
mentioned by the Minister is a welcome. My
question is whether there is consultation with the provinces in drawing up the
National Road Plan because if the national government had done so then I am
expecting to see the road plan for
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker, I
think it is very clear that when Cabinet passed the National Transport Plan
last year, we contacted the Provinces whereby the Provincial Secretaries and
Chief Planning Officers came and attended a workshop.
Mr TANEKO: This question
is very important to the nation as a whole.
Since the good Minister is new in that area, I want him to tell the
House whether before the Budget was set he consulted his colleague ministers of
the nine provinces on the roads throughout the nation because the topic raised
on the floor of Parliament today is about roads.
I want to inform the Minister that we must be serious
to consider building roads in the rural areas. In Shortlands when logging companies left the
roads are no longer used. I want the
government of the day to commit itself to this budget, and not only for roads
but shipping as well.
Mr Speaker, the Minister must know that
the strength of the nation is in this Ministry.
When you talk about copra you have to have proper roads everywhere in
the rural areas.
I want the new Minister to consult with his provincial
ministers of road infrastructure to have strategic plan everywhere. TA’s must be sent everywhere throughout the
nation to identify where road is needed because that is the strength of the
nation. So many TA’s have been allocated
millions of dollars. The nation needs TA’s
to go down to the rural areas because both the previous government and this
government are talking about the bottom up approach. We want to see TA’s to be in the rural
sectors to identify where roads are really needed.
Mr Speaker, as I stand here, how are my thousand bags
of copra going to come up here? I want
my Minister to hear me.
I want the Minister to construct roads in every
constituency in
Hon Sofu: Mr Speaker,
thank you for that question or statement, I am not sure. Sir, I think I have made myself clear today
that this present government has put in place a national transport plan.
On participation of provinces, I sent letters to
provincial governments and even to Members of Parliament. I would like to thank the Honorable Member
for Central Kwara’ae because he is the first one to respond to my letter.
Hon Speaker: Could we
restrict ourselves to Isabel again please, honourable Members. It is a network on
Mr Riumana: Mr Speaker, I
wish to thank the Honourable Minister for Infrastructure and Development for
his answers and may I on behalf of my people thank him for his assurance that it
is a blessed New Year’s news for my people.
RURAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT – MINISTRY OF
AGRICULTURE
5.
Mr RIUMANA
to the Minister for Agriculture and Livestock:
Can the Minister inform Parliament of the rural development concept to
be adopted by the Ministry?
Hon KAUA: Mr Speaker,
the general policy of the government to assist rural development concept to be
adopted by the Ministry is like this.
This time we would like to involve the rural people to participate. The general policy of the Ministry is that we
will enter into a partnership approach where rural development resource owners
participate with the government and we will enter into a MOU in any program
that involves the people. That is the
process policy that we will adopt to involve rural people in the first
place.
The Ministry provides technical assistance and
resource owners on their part secure land before any activity or project can be
entered into with resource owners so that the onus is on resource owners to
start developing their own projects in their area. But in other areas this policy is well
featured in the development budget and the budget itself, and it would be
remissive to preempt what is going to be highlighted by the Minister of Finance
when he delivers his budget speech.
Mr HAOMAE: Will the
concept be plantation driven or smallholder driven?
Hon Kaua: It will be both,
smallholders and big plantations. But we
will also adopt the subsidy system like before for coconut and cocoa.
Mr Haomae: What would be
the ratio of emphasis? Would it be on
smallholder or plantation? Because it is
both, what would be the ratio of emphasis?
Hon Kaua. It will be
both. The ratio will depend on the
volume of activity that is going to be adopted whether by smallholder or the
plantations. The same process and policy
will apply to both.
Mr Riumana: The current
extension approach has shown no significant impact to rural development
farmers. Does the Ministry any plans to
change the extension approach?
Hon Kaua: Certainly,
this is an area that is very important and the Ministry is seriously addressing
it to find where it would be much more appropriate to apply this system in
order for it to work.
Mr Kengava: I think any rural
development concept especially in agriculture requires a strong and very active
manpower down in the provinces, like the Agriculture Division. Are there any plans to accommodate and
strengthen that capacity? At present
that is the greatest weakness in the provinces and that is why agriculture
development really goes down.
The Agriculture Division in the provinces is not
working. For example, my rural
development program under the RCDF requires people to get recommendation or
report from Agriculture Officers, but the Agriculture Officers instead tell
people that that they do not have canoe, engine and money to inspect their projects. This is where the problem is, and because of
that I cannot implement the RCDF effectively because government officers in the
provinces are not working or may be they are not capable. We should put senior capable officers in the
provinces and expand the role of the Agriculture Division in order for the new rural
concept to work.
My question is, what are you going to do in relation
to that to make this concept work?
Hon Kaua: Yes, certainly
the Ministry is aware of the problems affecting the past and we are
aggressively addressing manpower strengthening so as to give the right people to
the rural area to do the work.
I can assure you that this is an area the Ministry is
addressing very aggressively with the Public Service to ensure right people are
placed to carry out rural services in the rural areas.
Mr
Mr Speaker, what is the Government going to do to
really drive this concept? The issue
here is that people in the rural areas would want to work but they find extension
officers, whether it be agriculture or forestry or fisheries, not at post or
are almost non existent, those extension arms of the government.
In order for the government to really drive this
concept, there has to be well focused coordinated approach to really drive this
rural development concept. What is
government at this stage has in mind or plans to have the ownership in driving
this program?
Hon Kaua: I think I
have already answered that question because that is what the government is
looking into at this time. You cannot do
any work if you do not have tools and the manpower to carry it out, and
therefore the government is making as part of its policy tools and manpower to
ensure the right people are recruited to do the work because we want to see
action. There is enough of talking,
enough of planning and we want to see action at this time. In order to do that you have to have the
right people and the right tools for the people to do the work.
Mr Huniehu: The
development budget is already given to Members of Parliament and there are statements
made by Ministers against the development budget already.
The Minister for Agriculture stated this morning that
the Government has established new work based on a memorandum with our rural
farmers and they have only allocated about $3million for this program to kick
start cocoa and coconut investment, and we must be fair to our people. How could this new policy initiative work
with that kind of money?
Hon Kaua: As I said
earlier on, anything that concerns money will come at its right time. When we debate the budget we will then see how
it will work because money will come from that side. At this point in time, as I said, it is not
appropriate for us to preempt things that we will talk about in the budget
because the answer is in the budget.
Mr SITAI: This
supplementary question relates to the strategy in applying this rural
development concept. The question is,
will this be applied on a national basis or will it be worked out on a first
come first serve basis?
Hon Kaua: As we can see,
the constituencies too have their plans to make it happen. But I hope this policy will help to make the
stages apply the same thing to meet the different areas that needs to be
developed.
Mr KEMAKEZA: I am happy
that the Minister is looking at manpower strengthening for this important rural
development. Commercial undertaking has
stopped. It almost died out and similarly
smallholders. What is the Government’s
position on new crops and the legislation part because that is part and partial
of this drive towards rural development in agriculture. Staff training is fine right, but new crops
and also reviewing of legislations is what I would like to know. What is the position of the department?
Hon Kaua: Those are
areas the government is looking into at the moment. How are we going to make these things
work? Therefore, we have to address
manpower, logistics and so on. These are
part and partial of the whole process in order to implement the policy, and the
government is conscious of this and is currently addressing it at this
time.
The government is looking at some of the failures we
have done in the past and try to remedy it. How would it be possible to short circuit some
of the things we find are wrong in the past and put them right? This is part and partial of the whole process
the government is looking into, to implement this policy.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
the Minister has not answered my question.
The program of the department is diversity bill as well as a bill on
quality to assist smallholders in the rural areas. How far has the Department in preparing these
important legislations to take care of this important development?
Hon Kaua: As I said
that is part and partial of the whole preparation. If the bill needs to be changed because the
bill will address these things but it does not do what it is supposed to be
doing then certainly it must be changed. This is part and partial of the whole thing
that we are looking into.
Let us not forget that these things do not happen in
the past. In terms of regulation to make
it work we have to change the regulation so that it makes the situation we face
to work. We just cannot delay because of
the bills. The Ministry and the Government
is working on this at this time because we want to see things happen. We just do not want to talk about them and we
do not want to see this only happen on papers.
The government is conscious of all these things and we hope these things
will be addressed before things can happen.
Mr TOZAKA: In relation
to the coordination and implementation of this policy, in the past the functions
of Agriculture were devolved to provincial governments, but today the functions
have been centralized. Because of this
situation, the staff at the rural level are waiting for instructions to
implement the policies from the Ministry.
Is the responsible Minister aware of this deadlock?
Hon Kaua: We already
have people in the provinces that do not have work. And so I hope this time we will make them work
by giving them these things to work on. If
there is need to go back to what is workable in the past, certainly we will look
at that to make it work because we are the ones to make it work. If it needs new people or injection of
equipments and all that then it is something that we have to look into. This is part and partial of the whole process
to make the things we want to happen must happen.
Mr FONO: This rural
development concept has been very widely publicized. What makes this new concept different from
previous rural development concepts by successive governments since
independence? What are the expected
outcomes that the nation would anticipate in implementing your new
concept? Can the Minister inform the
House and the nation?
Hon Kaua: The only
difference is the involvement of resource owners in the first instance. The resource owners work in their own areas
and the government helps them to own those things. That is the difference.
Resource owners are involved in it and it does not
involve people from outside coming in to do it. It is the involvement of resource owners
themselves to own things and they work on it and manage it. That is the ultimate objective the government
wants to see so that resource owners own the things and they work to own those
things and whatever money that comes in from their work is also owned by them. That is the difference
We are not giving it to different people to own it. We are now changing the policy from the third
person to become the owner or resource owners to be the owners of the things
that we want to do. That is the
difference from the past and previous government’s policies.
Mr Fono: Mr Speaker,
the Minister did not answer the other part of the question as to the expected
outcomes of this new concept. In the
agriculture sector smallholders is owned by local people. That is not new. May be this is new in your constituencies but
not in my constituency. Local people own
agriculture. They export cocoa and
copra.
The question that other colleagues raised was how that
will translate into the budget. That is
what we failed to see with only $3million for cocoa and copra. What are the expected outcomes if the
Minister can inform us with his new concept because agriculture is
predominantly smallholders, local people own it, and only plantations are owned
by overseas investors?
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker, I
thank the Leader of the Opposition for informing us of this very important
issue. I think I have said that the
outcome is that they will have money and they will fully contribute to the
national economy. That is the
outcome.
You made an example in your constituency. I hope the people own the money and not
somebody else owning it and the people working for him. If that is the case then it is not the
outcome. The outcome is that people should
have the ownership and economically they have money and they are masters of
their own sweats. That is what we want
from the outcome. We should not work for
someone else and he gets the benefit and we sweat for nothing. That is the outcome, and I hope I answered
the question by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker, what
will be the difference with the scheme that is currently operating in the
former SIPL and the proposed plan that is intended for
Hon Kaua: The
difference is that land will no longer be alienated land but it belongs to
people. That is the difference on what
is happening this time. The government
is intending to give back all alienated land to the owners so that when
projects are developed, the owners will benefit from it.
I think we have recognized what is happening this time
at Gold Ridge and that is why landowners are still asking to get a full share. Not just one or two person but the full
share. That is the difference on what is
happening now and what we want to do and see happen.
The total ownership of things becomes the resource
owners’, the people of this nation, the people of this country, those in the
community because that is what we want.
We do not want it to be half, half and people just go on crying. That is the difference.
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
the
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
this is the intention for the
Mr Kemakeza: Mr Speaker,
on small holders. People are already cooking
copra, cocoa is being cut, fishing and timber are going ahead and the list goes
on and on. The only problem is capital to
run. Is the approach the present
government is taking to give smallholders money to go ahead because some of
them are already running? Is the
approach of this government is to give money to smallholders to run things
themselves?
I am already satisfied with the diversity bill the
Minister has assured us that he is going to look into it. But in this case, people in this country,
farmers and smallholders are waiting. That
is the difference, let alone what has gone through the constituencies where
Savo/Russells has given quite a lot of copra buyers to buy copra out of
this. Not only engine and roofing iron
because roofing iron will rust and so we must give some money to buy copra,
cocoa, fish or timber.
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
you will see provision for that in the development budget. When the development budget comes, certainly. But you need to have a good house too before
you can do these things, so roofing iron is needed too. May be you will provide it for the people of
Savo/Russells to have good housing first before they can do those things. I hope the honourable Member for
Savo/Russells takes into consideration to give roofing iron to his people so
that they live in good houses before they can take the projects.
Mr Tozaka: Mr Speaker, I
totally agree with you on work. We have
been talking too much and not putting this development concept into
action. To give a time phase on this, Mr
Speaker, what sort of timing are we talking about to implement your program?
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
the time frame is when funds are approved we are going to start. What are we waiting for? Start now and stop talking. Let us start.
Setting the time frame will depend on when the budget is approved for us
to start.
Mr Riumana: Mr Speaker, does
the Ministry of Agriculture have support of development partners to physically
address his rural development plan?
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
certainly the Ministry has support in the development budget to make it
work. I think there is a little bit
proportion in the development budget for agriculture because we want the
activities to happen.
Mr Riumana: What is the
time frame for the ministry to formulate the rural development concept?
Hon Kaua: If you look
at it properly I think we are making it to go into strategies for
implementation. We must not wait. It is already in the strategy to be
implemented and if you see that it has been reflected in the budget it means
that it is now time for implementation because the concept is already finished.
Mr Kengava: I think the
new concept implies that alienated land will have to be returned to landowners
in order to participate. I can see a
little bit of problem in this one, and I want the Minister to further clarify
whether what he said that alienated land will be affected. Are there criteria or conditions or
regulations that will regulate the return of alienated land? Otherwise landowners will want to get back
land that schools are on to do development?
Or clinics to do agriculture development or even church land where mission
stations are on.
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
we know that land that is good for agriculture is what we are talking
about. Land that is not good should be
left out. If there is land that is good
for agriculture then certainly that is what we are going to address. Other land for other things should be left
out.
Mr Kemakeza: Supplementary
question for the Deputy Prime Minister.
This government is now one year but it is still living on last
government’s budget even at the beginning of the first quart of this year.
Mr Speaker, what will be the
difference from that budget you are living on to that of the new one that is
going to come?
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
as you rightly said, right now we are waiting for the budget. And this is the budget that belongs to this
government. What we are working on this
time belongs to the previous government.
So until we pass this budget and if you look at the development budget
it has some big money there. That is the
difference. We will sure that what is in
the development budget is going to be implemented because the money is
there. It is not going to be like before
that we talk about something in the development budget but there is no money
attached to it and as a result projects that over the years are over and over
again. But the difference between this
budget is that what is in the development budget is definitely going to be
funded because the money is there. That
is the difference.
Mr Speaker: The
Honourable House is still very interested but I thought in terms of the concept
of development of rural concept, we seem to have properly answered the
question.
Mr Zama: Mr Speaker,
firstly I wish to thank the hard working Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for
Agriculture.
When we look at
Mr Speaker, I want the Minister to
make it clear, what is the government’s plan to evenly distribute developments
in the 50 constituencies because when we talk about rural development all these
50 constituencies are separate entities and that the engine of growth must
participate to wrap up this whole bottom-up rural development concept. What is the government’s plan to evenly push
these developments into the 50 constituencies?
Hon Kaua: Mr Speaker,
we have almost covered everything on rural development. I thought we were talking about the
agricultural sector but nevertheless it is an interesting area that we want to
cover. To answer the honourable Member,
if you look at the appendix of the development budget, it spreads out areas the
government wants to develop across the provinces in different sectors and all
that.
I hope as the Chairman of the Public Expenditure
Committee, he should have already realized that under the budget. But certainly these are areas we are looking
at now to sectorise things and to proportionate them in the different
provinces. They are already inside the
development budget. I hope with that
answer it will complement what is already in the development budget.
Mr Speaker: I wonder
whether in view of the fact that a lot of these debates will come again during
the debate of the budget whether the honourable Member for Hograno could accept
the fact that at least the concept has been well covered of his question and he
might wish to now thank the honourable minister.
Mr Riumana: Before I
thank the Minister for Agriculture just allow me to make a brief
statement. Judging from his answers it
is very clear that there is no development concept in the Ministry and they are
only talking about implementing strategies. Before and after independence and still now there
is no farmer in Solomon Islands that turns commercialized despite millions of
dollars therefore it is a crystal clear
message that rural development concept needs to be reformed and restructured. With that I encourage the Minister for
Agriculture to reform the Ministry and I thank him for his answers.
Hon Kaua: Point of
order Mr Speaker. Can I just thank the
respondent for his comments? I would
like to thank him because he was in agriculture before, and he should have
looked at these things. Since he was
with agriculture and he just finished last year why didn’t those things
happen? So the onus is on the person who
works there, I just came in this year.
And if there is anything that has not yet happened which you have not
seen any tangible impact in the Ministry then I think you are part of the group
that needs to make it happen.
COSTS – SUSPENDED ATTORNEY GENERAL
6. Mr
FONO to the Prime Minister:
(a) Since the appointment of the
Australian to the post of the Attorney General, is it true that the Solomon
Islands Government is meeting the cost of his stay in
(b)
If Solomon
Islands Government is meeting the cost, how much has it cost the government to
meet his cost of accommodation, food, telephone bills etc since his appointment
up until the end of December 2006?
Hon. Fono: Mr Speaker,
was there any agreement signed as an employment contract with the suspended
Attorney General and the Solomon Islands Government?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
yes I can confirm that there is a brief agreement signed between the SIG and
the Attorney General, but the legal advice we got was that though suspended by
the Public Service Commission, he is still the Attorney General, not until his
appointment is being terminated or provoke until he will not be entitled to his
accommodation bills paid by the Government.
Mr Fono: Further
supplementary question. When was the
agreement signed?
Hon Sogavare: As soon as
the Attorney General signed it was sent to him by fax and he signed it. The fact that he is purportedly suspended by
the Public Service Commission, the Public Service Commission agrees that he is
duly appointed.
Mr Fono: Can
Parliament be given a copy of that agreement for purposes of transparency
because there are allegations that the post was offered to him but there was no
contractual agreement to formally appoint him as a public officer or Attorney
General and now the Government is continuing to meet the cost? Can Parliament be given a copy of that
agreement Mr Speaker?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
the fact that formal institutions in the country continue to entertain issues
about this man, it is just common knowledge that there is a document like
that. But if Parliament wants to see it
is a simple document that the government made and signed to inform the
government that he accepts the job on a fixed salary and that agreement also
stated that his other terms and conditions will be dealt with as soon as he
formally signs the full contract. Mr
Speaker, we can make that particular document available to Parliament if you
desire so.
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker,
now that he is suspended has the government any plans to terminate him?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
the process is still going on. He is
still challenging in Court his suspension and until that process is completed
before we can decide what we can do next.
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker now that he is suspended and yet he is
incurring committal and legal expenses for the Solomon Islands tax payers to
pay?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
the legal opinion I got was that the appointment, as I mentioned already, until
all issues surrounding his suspension are dealt with by the Court because he is
challenging that, at this point in time we are advised that it is perfectly
legal to continue meeting his bills.
Mr Kemakeza: The
appointment of the suspended Attorney General was done when he was abroad
overseas and at the same time whilst he was still overseas certain commissions
revoked his appointment. Who executed
that contract on behalf of the government abroad? And if it is so how did they legalize this?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, to
correct the Member for Savo/Russells, the appointment was not revoked. Under Section 42(2) only the Prime Minister
has power to advise the Judicial and Legal Services Commission. I do not want to go through these things, Mr
Speaker to advise the Legal Services Commission to make appointment or revoke
it. These are issues before the
Court.
I do not know whether you want me to go through
discussing things that are before the Court.
His appointment was not revoked and the only person that has the power
to advice on his revocation is the Prime Minister of Solomon Islands.
On the contract, yes it was signed by me, I sent it
over and he signed it, and the legal systems of
Mr Tozaka: In the light
of capable Solomon Islanders who can fill this post substantially. One of whom is now acting and one is
administering the Attorney General.
Mr Speaker, suspension means there is a question attached
to his character. If we have our own
Solomon Islanders who are capable, they are available in the government. Can we give this post to them, to our Solomon
Islanders, Mr Speaker?
Mr Speaker: It is a
totally new question Prime Minister. If
you want to want to answer you can answer.
Hon Sogavare: It is a totally
new question and I think it is intruding into the area that only the government
can decide on those matters. I would
rule that question out.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker, I
have not heard the Hon. Prime Minister well, but in terms of the bills,
telephone bills etc, whether the suspended Attorney General is paid salary from
public funds.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
that is an issue too. He is suspended
without pay.
Mr Huniehu: Can the
acting Attorney General give legal clarification to this issue where the Prime
Minister of the nation signed an Agreement with someone who is holding a constitutional
post and where the Public Service Commission failed to appoint him.
AG: Mr Speaker, I cannot clearly
hear the question. Can the Honourable Member
repeat himself please?
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker my
question is that the Prime Minister mentioned that he had an employment agreement
with the Attorney General. According to
our constitution this is supposed to be appointed by the Public Service Commission. Who has the power to make the appointment?
AG: Mr Speaker, the legal position
in relation to the appointment of the substantive AG is that he did enter into
a contract of employment with the SIG. The
issue of whether he was legally employed or not is a non issue on Her Majesty’s
Government. It has never been
challenged. The issue now before the
Courts is his suspension. And that is a
matter which the Court is yet to decide on and pending the outcome of any court
ruling, I cannot dwell on details in relation to his suspension. But the issue of whether he was legally
appointed or not is a non issue as far as Her Majesty’s Government is
concerned. It has never been challenged
at all whether the substantive AG was constitutionally appointed or not.
Mr Speaker: Excuse me. I am now being enlightened by the explanation
that in fact we are discussing an issue before the Courts because you are
referring to suspension and apparently it is a suspension issue is being
challenged. At the moment I cannot allow
continuing debate on the issue of suspension of the AG because it is apparently
before the Court.
Mr Haomae: Mr Speaker, I
am not talking about the suspension but the cost implications as envisaged by
the question. It is a precedent in the Public
Service that when public servants go on suspension are they are half pay or
full pay. I think the Prime Minister
said its cost implication is without.
What is the difference as a matter of precedent?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, I
have said already he is suspended without pay.
But in terms of the costs that he incurred in here in bills and
accommodations, we are legally advised that it is appropriate for the government
to continue meet them until his issue of suspension is dealt with.
Mr Haomae: I know that
but the other public servants, for purposes of applying the law across the
board, it appliers to all public servants that when they go on suspension they
receive half pay or full pay. What is
the difference here, Mr Speaker? That is
the point I would like explanation.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, I
am not worried about the other things but the question is about the suspended
Attorney General and I can only answer on the basis of legal advisor tendered
to me.
If you want to question other public servants then that
is not the issue here. Mr Speaker, if
you are aggrieved by this decision then take us to court.
Mr Speaker: As far as the
present procedure is concerned and as far as I am aware, suspended officers can
be paid either on half pay or full pay until the issue is clarified.
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker, just
a point of concern, and the precedent now is that a suspended public officer without
pay can continue to incur costs on the government.
I hope that this is not treated in the future with our
local Solomon Islanders and even with expatriate officers employed by the
Solomon Islands Government.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
this is not a new precedence because people suspended are still occupying
government houses, and so it is not a new thing.
Mr Speaker: The point
should be clarified that a suspended public officer who is on half pay or not
paid is still an officer until his case is fully dispensed with.
Mr Fono: Mr Speaker, looking
at the cost incurred during the two months of November and December, it is now
costing taxpayers SI$50,000.00 for that cost.
We anticipate him to remain in the hotel in the next
couple of months and so within one year or 12 months he could be incurring more
than $300,000.
Can the government look at the possibility of
providing him a residential property so that it is cheaper in the long run?
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
we will take note of that.
Mr Huniehu: Mr Speaker,
this is only addressing the cost of accommodation in
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker, that
is a new question and I don’t want to answer it.
Mr Tozaka: Mr Speaker,
we used to be very mindful of costs when suspending public officers. Sometimes they were advised to go back home
but on full pay so that we don’t pay expenses like this.
In this case can we make decision like that in the
interest of cost to the government? In
the light of the Leader of Opposition’s question that we look at alternatives
so that we can save money like we used to do to our public officers.
Hon Sogavare: Mr Speaker,
the government also does not want to incur costs if his coming is not
frustrated by some people. We are forced
into this situation Mr Speaker to be like this. We will take note of the comments by the MP
for
He is taking this matter to court and it might end up with
the government paying a lot of compensation on this matter. We could be talking about more than
$50,000.00 because somebody forced us into this situation.
Mr Fono: Before I
thank the Prime Minister for the answers, this is a concern to us because his
parents are with him already and the government has allocated a government
vehicle to him. So to double this cost
is a concern to us as national leaders. What
is so special that we are incurring these costs on this suspended Attorney General? Given the situation we have gone through
there are qualified lawyers that we can employ at a reasonable cost.
With these few comments, Mr Speaker, I thank the
honorable Prime Minister for his clarification and answers.
Statement of Government Business for the
week ending
Bills
– First Reading
The
2007 Appropriation Bill 2007
MOTIONS
Hon Sogavare: I beg to move
that this House do now adjourn.
The House adjourned at