Fijileaks
  • Home
  • Archive Home
  • In-depth Analysis
    • BOI Report into George Speight and others beatings
  • Documents
  • Opinion
  • CRC Submissions
  • Features
  • Archive

Fiji TV is no dead parrot – but Sayed-Khaiyum very much wishes it were and is doing his best to make it thus! No Casino, No Promised Jobs, No Tax Revenue etc etc etc, and YET...!

20/12/2014

10 Comments

 
Picture
No Casino, No promised Jobs or Investment, No Tax Revenue, No Fines, Not even a functioning OneHundredSands.com website, yet the No Clue Attorney-General who issued the 15-year exclusive licence no-one in the country wanted, begs – ‘please get in touch, tell me what’s going on’ – meantime less than seven working days to go before Fiji TV’s licence expires …

Traditionally Christmas is a time of giving but the priorities of the Attorney-General in the past few days have strongly suggested that whatever everyone else in Fiji is doing at least one member of the Cabinet is focussed on taking.

“We have written to [One Hundred Sands Ltd]  to show cause as to why we should not cancel the licence that we gave to them [in 2012] and they have to respond. There are obviously a number of other milestones they did not achieve so we hope to hear from them by 4pm this [Friday] afternoon,” Khaiyum told FBC this week.

http://www.fbc.com.fj/fiji/25436/casino-developers-given-ultimatum-

Sadly FBC did not think to ask Sayed-Khaiyum  what the difference was between this December 2014 ultimatum and the October 2013 ultimatum in which Sayed-Khaiyum announced,"Today (October 3), I have written to the chairman asking him to show clear cause why government should not cancel the licence."

http://fijilive.com/news/2013/10/govt-threatens-to-cancel-casino-licence/55231.Fijilive

Or the difference with the ultimatum given even earlier in 2013 – barely a year after the ground-breaking ceremony.

“They have been given until the end of May to come through," the Attorney-General told the Fiji Times in an April 2013 article headlined ‘Deadline for Casino’.

http://www.fijitimes.com/story.aspx?id=231251

That the One Hundred Sands Ltd deal is dead in the water is obvious to all but the desperate Attorney-General. Not only is there no development and none of the 1900 jobs promised in the construction phase, the fiction of the casino is not even hiding behind a functioning website.

http://www.onehundredsands.com/

Like the parrot in the famous Monty Python sketch, the casino project is dead. It has ceased to exist. It’s passed on! This casino is no more! It has ceased to be! The project’s expired and gone to meet its maker! One Hundred Sands is a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj8RIEQH7zA

Except in the mind of one person …  (perhaps two. because we know that Aunty Nur’s Suva company did much of the corporate filings for One Hundred Sands Ltd) who, by his actions, is still clinging to the promises of the hundreds of millions.

Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has been the lead government figure at the centre of the controversial Denarau sandpit pretending to be a $290 million casino and convention centre since the controversial project was announced in November 2010, with Larry Claunch’s One Hundred Sands Ltd announced as the exclusive licensee in December 2011.

Although it was prime minister Frank Bainimarama who officiated the ground-breaking in April 2012, all along this project was the baby of, and driven by, Sayed-Khaiyum, as the Ministry of Tourism, with all licences and approvals fast-tracked by Sayed-Khaiyum, the Attorney-General.

[In much the very same way that the Television (Cross-Carriage of Designated Events) Decree 2014 was the baby of, and driven by, Sayed-Khaiyum’s empire-within-an-empire megalomania.]

So it was Sayed-Khaiyum who beat over the head anybody from within civic society that dared criticise the casino licence (and the Television Decree 2014).

Like Hassan Khan from the Fiji Council of Social Services (FCOSS) who said the ground-breaking ceremony was nothing short of the introduction of ‘a social cancer’.

Khan pointed out (perhaps naively) that under the terms of the military government’s National Charter for Peace, Progress and Change civic society groups were promised a consultation and social impact study on the casino project – neither of which occurred.

‘A publicity stunt’ said the Attorney-General of Khan, dismissively, in April 2012.

It was Sayed-Khaiyum that announced in June 2013 the regime of penalty payments: USD100,000 per month starting that October for each month of delay. Proving once again that Sayed-Khaiyum has a lead touch when it comes to business,  it’s believed only one months’ worth of fines have been paid. And more than 14 months (or USD1.4m) remain overdue.

And still the 15-year exclusive casino licence has not been cancelled …

Yet the license that the people of Fiji desperately care about – Fiji TV’s six-month licence – ticks closer and closer to expiry. Taking into account the public holidays on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day there are as few as six working days before December 31, when the country’s most popular TV station could be forced to go off air.

Fiji TV is no dead parrot – but Sayed-Khaiyum very much wishes it were and is doing his best to make it thus.

10 Comments
Sad-Kon
20/12/2014 08:45:02 am

Khaiyum & Aunty & Co. should come clean and TELL the People of Fiji, simply and honestly, exactly how much of their money has already been sunk into this sinking sands saga.

Reply
Fiji TV Insider spills beans
20/12/2014 03:45:31 pm

BULA VICTOR. LETS SEE IF YOU PUBLISH THIS, IN THE INTEREST OF BALANCE:

Tania had been at Fiji TV for too long. She thought she was above company rules and policy. She had become so big-headed, she actually thought she knew better than the board and shareholders what was good for Fiji TV! Talk about arrogance and total lack of self-awareness.

Not only that, Tanya started to disregard and circumvent board policy, as well as plot against the board. This is not only insubordination, it's being traitorous. No company worth its salt can afford to employ a person that cannot be trusted to implement board policy. Tanya, as a trained lawyer should know this, but that would depend on how good her training was!

If Tanya could not give her employers and the board her full loyalty, or comply with board decisions because it was was against her conscience or political beliefs/affiliations, she should have done the honourable thing, which is to resign. Otherwise face the sack, which she did.

Tanya was known for making anti-government political comments both publicly at forums and privately. It's her big mouth that got her in trouble. Her strong and passionate political beliefs were starting to cloud her judgement and affecting the company in major and serious ways.

The situation wasn't helped by a weak, ineffectual and inexperienced CEO. He was listening too much to Tanya. She apparently had too much influence over him. Look where it got the CEO. Tanya was acting like the de-facto CEO. If the CEO can't do his job, assert his authority and make his own decisions, than he has to go.

CEO shouldn't have allowed his junior to control him. We started to wonder if Tanya was running the company; if she was behind some of the CEO's decisions. That's how bad the management side of Fiji TV had become.

The CEO became a casualty of Tanya's big-headedness and immaturity. This is not how corporate companies with shareholders operate. The board was left with no choice but to give them the boot.

Reply
mack link
20/12/2014 05:51:22 pm

I think this lady needs to understand she is working for the Fijian people, if she fails to acknowledge this than it will be a problem for her vision.Its not only business that matters here because Fiji TV was allowed to operate on this Land for the interest of the Fijian People,Making profit was on the other half of the cross Carriage Decree and all that was needed for her was to understand and have dialogue with Govt if she had Problems with CC Decree.The other way was a disaster

Reply
Baloney
21/12/2014 04:54:51 am

Tanya’s work was constantly being exasperated by relentless dictatorial Decrees (of disgrace) which certainly would have pricked the conscience any intelligent person.

It is obvious to all that Tanya’s job would have been further frustrated by the Dictator Khaiyum’s appointed lackey’s on Fiji TV Board –vide FHL. Tanya being the content manager Fiji TV, with a passion for ‘Freedom of Speech and Expression’ and unable to question the Dictator and/or to be constructively critical of the Regime – would have driven even the saint Gandhi insane.

Tuma
20/12/2014 06:42:47 pm

Post reeks of jealousy and sour grapes Fiji TV Insider. No matter how you put it, sugar coat it, whatever, fact of the matter is the Fiji Government and in particular the AG f'ed up with their draconian decree. To save face after being called out by World Rugby, the 2 execs from Fiji TV got the boot. You know it, we know it, the people of Fiji and the whole world knows it. Decree was put in place to help out younger Bro Riyaz at the ridden FBC TV. Corruption and continuous flaunt of power at the highest levels. You dont need to be a rocket scientist to figure this out. So "Spill the beans", suggest you put more effort into trying to attain the levels of success that Tanya has achieved rather then reporting work place kakase or resorting to back stabbing.

Reply
Jona
21/12/2014 03:39:53 am

Yes Tuma, and if Tanya doesn't like what's happening, she should have the good sense to resign from Fiji TV and join politics.

UNFAIR Treatment
21/12/2014 12:33:12 pm

If the Board of Fiji TV were unhappy with the performance of Tanya’s duties and or any non-observance by Tanya of any of the Board’s specific directive(s), then the Board has certain (civilized) procedures to follow.

The Board has the prerogative of bringing the same up with Tanya for corrective action, and/or as a warning – as would be expected in any professional, individual employment contract.

But the Board in this case has either summarily dismissed Tanya (and the CEO) of FijiTV, [that can only happen in case of gross misconduct, fraud or stealing] or the Board, as everybody says, was ‘unduly’ influenced and ‘blackmailed’ by the CHOR Minister of Communication, (who is again, acting in glaring ‘conflict of interest’ helping HIS junior BROTHER), to summarily dismissal Tanya (and the CEO).

This is very, VERY unfair for Tanya and the CEO, and their families, to endure such faith just before Christmas.

In the case of undue influence by the CHOR Minister, Tanya and the CEO MUST be entitled to a colossal amount in damages in direct losses of income and as well as pain, suffering and humiliation and a lack of chance for future planning.

Reply
Anit Singh
21/12/2014 01:12:18 pm

It is not only unfair but inhumane, to be treated in so wantonly a manner, specially at Christmas.

The dismissals of Tanya and Gonelevu, (as a reaction of the Sevens Rugby blackout), are very unfair, vindictive, irrational and erratic behavior on the part of the Fiji TV Board. The Board must show some spine or lose credibility, totally.

Tanya and GoneLevu are made scrape-goats whereas the real CRIMINAL the CHOR Minister Aiyaz, acting [Again] in total conflict of interests, gets off scot-free.

But no, this CHOR's cross-carriage decree (of disgrace) has back-fired tatti all over his face.

Kavita
21/12/2014 02:34:19 pm

The Insider justification given on the termination of Tanya's contract is nothing but shallow and is no different from Riyaz's other propoganda threads coming out of FBC media outlet. If performance was an issue then what about the processes set up for it? If the board was unhappy when did the the board institute enquiries to evaluate Tanya's performance and why did some other board members resign ? Performance issues are measured annually and any shortfalls are noted, discussed and further training/improvements are facilitated and monitored by management over a period of time. Were all this done over the years?

And, termination of contract on performance issue also has proper decision structure which allows for natural justice to prevail. Has Fiji TV been operating outside of the business and employment laws and norms?

Interesting to note the insider view that the CEO was also sacrificed due to non performance of another employee. How was the board monitoring the company operations and setting directions that it could not isolate and sent the right person home?

The truth is the Insider view is trying to defend the indefensible and attempting to do damage control. It is a hard sell.

Great piece by Narsey
20/12/2014 11:56:32 pm

Pleas publish the following by narsey on your blog:

http://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/the-work-and-the-power-of-professors-and-journalists-21-december-2014/

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    editor@fijileaks.com

    ARCHIVES

    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    Picture
    Picture