 | "This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his [Biman Prasad's] control and in my opinion I have seen the frustration and anger in his demeanor and that is the reason why he and his MPs have opposed this motion, aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235,000 to $200,000." |  |
*In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament. This is calculated as follows: Fiji First 26 MPs x $15000 = $390000, PAP 21 MPs x $15000 = $315,000, NFP 5 MPs x $15000 = $75000, Sodelpa 3 MPs x $15000 = $45000. Hon Prasad paid his own party an extra $240000 without consultation or Cabinet approval. This is a figure that is more than the total increase in salaries for ministers recommended by the independent consultant $175000, just to put things in perspective.
*In my own ministry, Hon Prasad unilaterally changed the payment of bus fare subsidies to our elderly and disabled in the current budget from $25 a month to utilisation basis without consultation with me as the line minister or Cabinet approval. Other ministers may have their own experiences which is theirs to tell.
LYNDA TABUYA
TERA Kya Hoga Kalia, Biman Prasad? Aab Lynda Ke Goli Khao?
*Tabuya strips NFP leader and Finance Minister down to his 'underwear'.
*Ironically, NFP and Prasad had chosen to remain silent when Lynda Tabuya and Aseri Radrodro, in August 2023, had pulled down their own 'underwear' in Room 233, brutally bonking on Fiji Taxpayers money, that the next day she could not walk properly on the streets of Melbourne.
*It was one month after she had been appointed Chair of the Parliamentary Emoluments Committee in July 2023.
*Tabuya BRUTALLY savages Prasad over Pay Rise and Allowance Report
*When NFP did not get their way at the Wednesday caucus meeting last week, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process from July 2023 did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it."
 |  |
 |  |  |
LYNDA TABUYA: NFP glorifies itself in being principled but this is not about principles, this is about control, the need for Hon Prasad to control what is paid out, when it is not his place to do so. This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his control and in my opinion I have seen the frustration and anger in his demeanor and that is the reason why he and his MPs have opposed this motion, aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235000 to $200000. They were never going to oppose the recommendations, but wanted more time and used the party directive as an excuse to try to control the process. NFP was given ample time to consider the report from 9th of March, and Hon Prasad has lied to the public about only getting notice of it 48 hours before the motion was moved.
*He [Biman Prasad] blocked the 20 per cent payment earlier this year owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment which the prison officers felt was because he found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections.
*Several coalition members lobbied for the minimum wage increase to be implemented with immediate effect last year when the coalition government came into power, but this in my opinion has been stalled by NFP who hold the employment portfolio and continue to appease their party backers who are business owners as well as using it as their own political platform.
*In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament.
"Hon Prasad has lied to the public that no independent consultant was engaged. There have been a lot of attacks on the committee members and the praising of NFP for their vote against the motion. However, this is the process of parliament and it was my duty to table the report and move the motion for debate. I was to do this on Wednesday of parliament week last week but NFP tried to stall it with no good reason to disrupt the processes of parliament. I reconsidered my duty and proceeded to give notice for the motion to be tabled and debated as that is the proper parliament procedure and I could be referred to Privileges Committee by any MP for a possible breach of the standing orders. When NFP did not get their way at the Wednesday caucus meeting last week, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process from July 2023 did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it."
"He [Biman Prasad] blocked the 20 per cent payment earlier this year owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment which the prison officers felt was because he found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections."
Dear NFP, the prison officers and high ranking officials in the Corrections Service already knew about it and expressed their deep hurt and disappointment to me that PAP who stood for them allowed for NFP to stop it.
So NFP that didn’t come from me. So don’t hide behind cabinet confidentiality now to answer for what they already know Hon Prasad and which Fiji has a right to know. Respond to the allegations and do not hide now behind cabinet confidentiality as it does not apply here, because nowhere in my media release did I ever refer to a cabinet deliberation or decision on this issue.
Dear Fiji, here is the full media release I gave out yesterday to media outlets that contains the explanation of the parliamentary processes as well as the allegations I have made against Hon Prasad and NFP.
MEDIA RELEASE BY HON TABUYA ON TUESDAY 27th May 2024
I am responding to explain the parliamentary process as well as I feel the need for the public to know the truth about the involvement of all MPs, including NFP.
The Emoluments Committee was a committee established by Parliament under the Standing Order 129 to be tasked to review the Parliamentary Remunerations Act and the Parliamentary Retirement Allowances Act. This committee was established under the Standing Orders of Parliament which all 55 members of parliament unanimously endorsed in July 2023. It is a parliamentary process that reports to parliament, not to cabinet, not to a political party, not to Government or opposition. The committee decided to engage an Independent consultancy firm or individual as it strongly felt it should not be reviewing its own salaries and allowances. The Committee published an advertisement calling for independent consulting firms or individuals to undertake the review and make recommendations to the committee. With no success locally, we reached out to UNDP to assist us to find an independent consulting firm, noting that UNDP would be funding the independent consulting firm, they identified Mr Kevin Deveaux. After conducting the review, the independent consultant reported back to the Emoluments Committee, which endorsed the recommendations. There were some increases, some reductions and some retained.
The legal process of the Emoluments Committee is that it is part of the parliamentary process and reports to Parliament. It does not report to the government or to cabinet. It is for parliament to reject or approve the recommendations. Should it be approved, then the committee will work with Parliament and the Solicitor General’s office on the proposed amendments to the Acts to give effect to the recommendations, but the proposed laws will go through the normal consultation process of any proposed bills.
The draft report of the independent consultant was ready in March and it was circulated to the three political party leaders in government. Members of the Fiji First party in the committee also shared it with their party. The leader of NFP Hon Biman Prasad lied in parliament and to the public in stating that he and his party only got notice of the report 48 hours before I moved the motion in parliament. NFP chose not to be members of the Emoluments Committee. I raised the membership in caucus and spoke with the NFP Whip Hon Tikoduadua who stated for us to go ahead and that they did not need to be in it. At no time did they protest or raise the concern to be a member of the committee. They endorsed the motion for the review to be undertaken when the motion was moved in Parliament last year. They have been part of the process every step of the way. To change their stance last minute and vote against the motion because of a party directive is simply an excuse to stall the parliamentary process when he had the time from March to take the report back to his party. There was nothing rushed about the tabling of the motion for debate last week. It is simply me doing my job as the chair to follow the parliamentary process under the Standing Orders to table the report and to be debated. That is the legal process. The motion approved on Friday stipulates the effective date from 1st August to 31st December 2024. The next step in the process is for Parliament to work with the Solicitor General’s office and it will go through the process normally laid out for proposed bills. Then it will be brought back to parliament for debate and decision. This will be undertaken in that six month period stipulated in the motion. Members of the public are free to submit their views during this period.
Now I wish to respond to all the criticisms leveled at members of Parliament who voted for the motion by NFP. Hon Prasad has lied to the public that no independent consultant was engaged. There have been a lot of attacks on the committee members and the praising of NFP for their vote against the motion. However, this is the process of parliament and it was my duty to table the report and move the motion for debate. I was to do this on Wednesday of parliament week last week but NFP tried to stall it with no good reason to disrupt the processes of parliament. I reconsidered my duty and proceeded to give notice for the motion to be tabled and debated as that is the proper parliament procedure and I could be referred to Privileges Committee by any MP for a possible breach of the standing orders. When NFP did not get their way at the Wednesday caucus meeting last week, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process from July 2023 did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it.
But in my opinion this is not a new pattern of behavior for Hon Prasad. He blocked the 20 per cent payment earlier this year owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment which the prison officers felt was because he found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections. Several coalition members lobbied for the minimum wage increase to be implemented with immediate effect last year when the coalition government came into power, but this in my opinion has been stalled by NFP who hold the employment portfolio and continue to appease their party backers who are business owners as well as using it as their own political platform. In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament. This is calculated as follows: Fiji First 26 MPs x $15000 = $390000, PAP 21 MPs x $15000 = $315,000, NFP 5 MPs x $15000 = $75000, Sodelpa 3 MPs x $15000 = $45000. NFP paid itself an extra $240000 without consultation or Cabinet approval. This is a figure that is more than the total increase in salaries for ministers recommended by the independent consultant $175000, just to put things in perspective. In my own ministry, Hon Prasad unilaterally changed the payment of bus fare subsidies from $25 a month to utilisation without consultation with me as the line minister or Cabinet approval.
NFP glorifies itself in being principled but this is not about principles, this is about control, the need for Hon Prasad to control what is paid out, when it is not his place to do so. This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his control and in my opinion I have seen the frustration and anger in his demeanor and that is the reason why he and his MPs have opposed this motion, aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235000 to $200000. They were never going to oppose the recommendations, but wanted more time and used the party directive as an excuse to try to control the process. NFP was given ample time to consider the report from 9th of March, and Hon Prasad has lied to the public about only getting notice of it 48 hours before the motion was moved.
The Hon Prime Minister is correct in stating that the increases have not been implemented yet. There is still the process of changing the laws to give it legal effect, which in the normal process of any proposed law, public consultations and views will be received by the Solicitor General’s office before it is brought to Parliament for debate and passing. That is why the motion gives up to 6 months from 1st August for this process to take place.
The public have the right to know the full story of the Emoluments Committee’s duty to follow parliament processes as well as the accusations being leveled at those that voted for the motion by NFP. I would implore members of the public to obtain a copy of the Emoluments Report which is public record, and note the the reductions as well as things that did not change. You will have the opportunity to be heard when the normal process of proposed laws are undertaken, which includes public consultation.
Hon Lynda Tabuya
Chair Emoluments Committee
Minister for Women, Children and Social Protection
So NFP that didn’t come from me. So don’t hide behind cabinet confidentiality now to answer for what they already know Hon Prasad and which Fiji has a right to know. Respond to the allegations and do not hide now behind cabinet confidentiality as it does not apply here, because nowhere in my media release did I ever refer to a cabinet deliberation or decision on this issue.
Dear Fiji, here is the full media release I gave out yesterday to media outlets that contains the explanation of the parliamentary processes as well as the allegations I have made against Hon Prasad and NFP.
MEDIA RELEASE BY HON TABUYA ON TUESDAY 27th May 2024
I am responding to explain the parliamentary process as well as I feel the need for the public to know the truth about the involvement of all MPs, including NFP.
The Emoluments Committee was a committee established by Parliament under the Standing Order 129 to be tasked to review the Parliamentary Remunerations Act and the Parliamentary Retirement Allowances Act. This committee was established under the Standing Orders of Parliament which all 55 members of parliament unanimously endorsed in July 2023. It is a parliamentary process that reports to parliament, not to cabinet, not to a political party, not to Government or opposition. The committee decided to engage an Independent consultancy firm or individual as it strongly felt it should not be reviewing its own salaries and allowances. The Committee published an advertisement calling for independent consulting firms or individuals to undertake the review and make recommendations to the committee. With no success locally, we reached out to UNDP to assist us to find an independent consulting firm, noting that UNDP would be funding the independent consulting firm, they identified Mr Kevin Deveaux. After conducting the review, the independent consultant reported back to the Emoluments Committee, which endorsed the recommendations. There were some increases, some reductions and some retained.
The legal process of the Emoluments Committee is that it is part of the parliamentary process and reports to Parliament. It does not report to the government or to cabinet. It is for parliament to reject or approve the recommendations. Should it be approved, then the committee will work with Parliament and the Solicitor General’s office on the proposed amendments to the Acts to give effect to the recommendations, but the proposed laws will go through the normal consultation process of any proposed bills.
The draft report of the independent consultant was ready in March and it was circulated to the three political party leaders in government. Members of the Fiji First party in the committee also shared it with their party. The leader of NFP Hon Biman Prasad lied in parliament and to the public in stating that he and his party only got notice of the report 48 hours before I moved the motion in parliament. NFP chose not to be members of the Emoluments Committee. I raised the membership in caucus and spoke with the NFP Whip Hon Tikoduadua who stated for us to go ahead and that they did not need to be in it. At no time did they protest or raise the concern to be a member of the committee. They endorsed the motion for the review to be undertaken when the motion was moved in Parliament last year. They have been part of the process every step of the way. To change their stance last minute and vote against the motion because of a party directive is simply an excuse to stall the parliamentary process when he had the time from March to take the report back to his party. There was nothing rushed about the tabling of the motion for debate last week. It is simply me doing my job as the chair to follow the parliamentary process under the Standing Orders to table the report and to be debated. That is the legal process. The motion approved on Friday stipulates the effective date from 1st August to 31st December 2024. The next step in the process is for Parliament to work with the Solicitor General’s office and it will go through the process normally laid out for proposed bills. Then it will be brought back to parliament for debate and decision. This will be undertaken in that six month period stipulated in the motion. Members of the public are free to submit their views during this period.
Now I wish to respond to all the criticisms leveled at members of Parliament who voted for the motion by NFP. Hon Prasad has lied to the public that no independent consultant was engaged. There have been a lot of attacks on the committee members and the praising of NFP for their vote against the motion. However, this is the process of parliament and it was my duty to table the report and move the motion for debate. I was to do this on Wednesday of parliament week last week but NFP tried to stall it with no good reason to disrupt the processes of parliament. I reconsidered my duty and proceeded to give notice for the motion to be tabled and debated as that is the proper parliament procedure and I could be referred to Privileges Committee by any MP for a possible breach of the standing orders. When NFP did not get their way at the Wednesday caucus meeting last week, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process from July 2023 did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it.
But in my opinion this is not a new pattern of behavior for Hon Prasad. He blocked the 20 per cent payment earlier this year owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment which the prison officers felt was because he found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections. Several coalition members lobbied for the minimum wage increase to be implemented with immediate effect last year when the coalition government came into power, but this in my opinion has been stalled by NFP who hold the employment portfolio and continue to appease their party backers who are business owners as well as using it as their own political platform. In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament. This is calculated as follows: Fiji First 26 MPs x $15000 = $390000, PAP 21 MPs x $15000 = $315,000, NFP 5 MPs x $15000 = $75000, Sodelpa 3 MPs x $15000 = $45000. NFP paid itself an extra $240000 without consultation or Cabinet approval. This is a figure that is more than the total increase in salaries for ministers recommended by the independent consultant $175000, just to put things in perspective. In my own ministry, Hon Prasad unilaterally changed the payment of bus fare subsidies from $25 a month to utilisation without consultation with me as the line minister or Cabinet approval.
NFP glorifies itself in being principled but this is not about principles, this is about control, the need for Hon Prasad to control what is paid out, when it is not his place to do so. This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his control and in my opinion I have seen the frustration and anger in his demeanor and that is the reason why he and his MPs have opposed this motion, aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235000 to $200000. They were never going to oppose the recommendations, but wanted more time and used the party directive as an excuse to try to control the process. NFP was given ample time to consider the report from 9th of March, and Hon Prasad has lied to the public about only getting notice of it 48 hours before the motion was moved.
The Hon Prime Minister is correct in stating that the increases have not been implemented yet. There is still the process of changing the laws to give it legal effect, which in the normal process of any proposed law, public consultations and views will be received by the Solicitor General’s office before it is brought to Parliament for debate and passing. That is why the motion gives up to 6 months from 1st August for this process to take place.
The public have the right to know the full story of the Emoluments Committee’s duty to follow parliament processes as well as the accusations being leveled at those that voted for the motion by NFP. I would implore members of the public to obtain a copy of the Emoluments Report which is public record, and note the the reductions as well as things that did not change. You will have the opportunity to be heard when the normal process of proposed laws are undertaken, which includes public consultation.
Hon Lynda Tabuya
Chair Emoluments Committee
Minister for Women, Children and Social Protection
From: Lynda Tabuya <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 7:19 PM
To: Rosi Doviverata <[email protected]>
Cc: Sosiveta Korobiau <[email protected]>
Subject: Response to Emoluments issue and NFP accusations
Bula Rosi
Though Fiji Sun has not reached out to obtain a response from me as emoluments chair and minister, I am forwarding this response to Fiji Sun which I have provided to Fiji Times and ABC Pacific Beat.
I am responding to explain the parliamentary process as well as the need for the public to know the truth about the involvement of all MPs, including NFP. If NFP had just let the public make its own judgment based on their vote, then there would have been no need for me to respond. But NFP and Hon Prasad have chosen to go on the offence and criticise the parliamentary process and the emoluments committee, as well as giving their opinions as well, so I feel the need to speak up so the public has all the facts to make a proper judgment.
The Emoluments Committee was a committee established by Parliament under Standing Order 129 to be tasked to review the Parliamentary Remunerations Act and the Parliamentary Retirement Allowances Act. This committee was established under the Standing Orders of Parliament which all 55 members of parliament unanimously endorsed in July 2023. It is a parliamentary process that reports to parliament, not to cabinet, not to a political party, not to Government or opposition. The committee decided to engage an Independent consultancy firm or individual as it strongly felt it should not be reviewing its own salaries and allowances. The Committee published an advertisement in the dailies calling for independent consulting firms or individuals to undertake the review and make recommendations to the committee. With no success locally, we reached out to UNDP to assist us to find an independent consulting firm, noting that UNDP would be funding the independent consulting firm, they identified Mr Kevin Deveaux who is based in Canada. After conducting the review over the course of eight months the independent consultant reported back to Emoluments Committee. There were some increases, some reductions and some retained.
The legal process of the Emoluments Committee is that it is part of the parliamentary process and reports to Parliament. It does not report to the government or to cabinet. It is for parliament to reject or approve the recommendations. Should it be approved, then the committee will work with Parliament and the Solicitor General’s office on the proposed amendments to the Acts to give effect to the recommendations, but the proposed laws will go through the normal consultation process of any proposed bills.
The draft report of the independent consultant was ready in March and it was circulated to the three political party leaders in government, because political parties represented in parliament made submissions to the committee which were forwarded to the independent consultant. Members of the Fiji First party in the committee also shared it with their party. The leader of NFP Hon Biman Prasad lied in parliament and to the public in stating that he and his party only got notice of the report 48 hours before I moved the motion in parliament. NFP chose not to be members of the Emoluments Committee. They endorsed the motion for the review to be undertaken when the motion was moved in Parliament last year. They have been part of the process every step of the way. To change their stance last minute and vote against the motion because of a party directive is simply an excuse to stall the parliamentary process when he had the time from March to take the report back to his party. There was nothing rushed about the tabling of the motion for debate last week. It is simply me doing my job as the chair to follow the mandated parliamentary process under the Standing Orders to table the report and to be debated. That is the legal process. The motion approved on Friday stipulates the effective date from 1st August to 31st December 2024. The next step in the process is for Parliament to work with the Solicitor General’s office with the proposed amendments to the Acts. It will go through the process normally laid out for proposed bills. Then it will be brought back to parliament for debate and decision. This will be undertaken in that six month period stipulated in the motion. Members of the public will be consulted on these proposed bills and are free to submit their views during this period.
Now I wish to respond to all the criticisms leveled at members of Parliament who voted for the motion by NFP. Hon Prasad has lied to the public that no independent consultant was engaged. There have been a lot of attacks on the committee members and the praising of NFP for their vote against the motion. However, there is a general lack of understanding of parliamentary processes. This is the process of parliament and it was my duty to table the report and move the motion for debate. I was to do this on Wednesday of parliament week last week but NFP tried to stall it with no good reason to disrupt the processes of parliament. I reconsidered my duty and proceeded to give notice for the motion to be tabled and debated as that is the proper parliament procedure and I could be referred to Privileges Committee by a member under the Standing Orders for a possible breach of the standing orders. When NFP did not get their way after protesting, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First members to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it.
But in my opinion this is not a new pattern of behavior for Hon Prasad. Earlier this year Hon Prasad was instrumental in blocking the 20 per cent outstanding pay owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment. The prison officers felt it was because Frank found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections. Several coalition members lobbied for the minimum wage increase to be implemented with immediate effect last year when the coalition government came into power as promised in our manifestos, but the general feeling amongst the majority of government members is that it has been stalled by NFP who hold the employment portfolio and continue to appease their party backers who are business owners as well as using it as their own political platform. In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament. This is calculated as follows: Fiji First 26 MPs x $15000 = $390000, PAP 21 MPs x $15000 = $315,000, NFP 5 MPs x $15000 = $75000, Sodelpa 3 MPs x $15000 = $45000. Hon Prasad paid his own party an extra $240000 without consultation or Cabinet approval. This is a figure that is more than the total increase in salaries for ministers recommended by the independent consultant $175000, just to put things in perspective. In my own ministry, Hon Prasad unilaterally changed the payment of bus fare subsidies to our elderly and disabled in the current budget from $25 a month to utilisation basis without consultation with me as the line minister or Cabinet approval. Other ministers may have their own experiences which is theirs to tell.
NFP glorifies itself in being principled in their vote but this is not about principles, this is about control. This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his control and I shockingly witnessed the frustration and anger in his demeanor aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235000 to $200000. At no point did they oppose the recommendations, but used the party directive as an excuse to try to control the process. NFP was given ample time to consider the report from 9th of March, and Hon Prasad has lied to the public about only getting notice of it 48 hours before the motion was moved.
The Hon Prime Minister is correct in stating that the increases have not been implemented yet. There is still the process of changing the laws to give it legal effect, which in the normal process of any proposed law, public consultations and views will be received by the Solicitor General’s office before it is brought to Parliament for debate and passing. That is why the motion gives up to 6 months from 1st August for this process to take place.
The public have the right to know the full story of the Emoluments Committee’s duty to follow parliament processes as well as the accusations by NFP being levelled at members of the Emoluments Committee and those that voted for the motion. I would implore members of the public to obtain a copy of the Emoluments Report which is public record, and note the the reductions as well as things that did not change. You will have the opportunity to be heard when the normal process of proposed laws are undertaken, which includes public consultation.
Vinaka
Hon Lynda Tabuya
Chair
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 7:19 PM
To: Rosi Doviverata <[email protected]>
Cc: Sosiveta Korobiau <[email protected]>
Subject: Response to Emoluments issue and NFP accusations
Bula Rosi
Though Fiji Sun has not reached out to obtain a response from me as emoluments chair and minister, I am forwarding this response to Fiji Sun which I have provided to Fiji Times and ABC Pacific Beat.
I am responding to explain the parliamentary process as well as the need for the public to know the truth about the involvement of all MPs, including NFP. If NFP had just let the public make its own judgment based on their vote, then there would have been no need for me to respond. But NFP and Hon Prasad have chosen to go on the offence and criticise the parliamentary process and the emoluments committee, as well as giving their opinions as well, so I feel the need to speak up so the public has all the facts to make a proper judgment.
The Emoluments Committee was a committee established by Parliament under Standing Order 129 to be tasked to review the Parliamentary Remunerations Act and the Parliamentary Retirement Allowances Act. This committee was established under the Standing Orders of Parliament which all 55 members of parliament unanimously endorsed in July 2023. It is a parliamentary process that reports to parliament, not to cabinet, not to a political party, not to Government or opposition. The committee decided to engage an Independent consultancy firm or individual as it strongly felt it should not be reviewing its own salaries and allowances. The Committee published an advertisement in the dailies calling for independent consulting firms or individuals to undertake the review and make recommendations to the committee. With no success locally, we reached out to UNDP to assist us to find an independent consulting firm, noting that UNDP would be funding the independent consulting firm, they identified Mr Kevin Deveaux who is based in Canada. After conducting the review over the course of eight months the independent consultant reported back to Emoluments Committee. There were some increases, some reductions and some retained.
The legal process of the Emoluments Committee is that it is part of the parliamentary process and reports to Parliament. It does not report to the government or to cabinet. It is for parliament to reject or approve the recommendations. Should it be approved, then the committee will work with Parliament and the Solicitor General’s office on the proposed amendments to the Acts to give effect to the recommendations, but the proposed laws will go through the normal consultation process of any proposed bills.
The draft report of the independent consultant was ready in March and it was circulated to the three political party leaders in government, because political parties represented in parliament made submissions to the committee which were forwarded to the independent consultant. Members of the Fiji First party in the committee also shared it with their party. The leader of NFP Hon Biman Prasad lied in parliament and to the public in stating that he and his party only got notice of the report 48 hours before I moved the motion in parliament. NFP chose not to be members of the Emoluments Committee. They endorsed the motion for the review to be undertaken when the motion was moved in Parliament last year. They have been part of the process every step of the way. To change their stance last minute and vote against the motion because of a party directive is simply an excuse to stall the parliamentary process when he had the time from March to take the report back to his party. There was nothing rushed about the tabling of the motion for debate last week. It is simply me doing my job as the chair to follow the mandated parliamentary process under the Standing Orders to table the report and to be debated. That is the legal process. The motion approved on Friday stipulates the effective date from 1st August to 31st December 2024. The next step in the process is for Parliament to work with the Solicitor General’s office with the proposed amendments to the Acts. It will go through the process normally laid out for proposed bills. Then it will be brought back to parliament for debate and decision. This will be undertaken in that six month period stipulated in the motion. Members of the public will be consulted on these proposed bills and are free to submit their views during this period.
Now I wish to respond to all the criticisms leveled at members of Parliament who voted for the motion by NFP. Hon Prasad has lied to the public that no independent consultant was engaged. There have been a lot of attacks on the committee members and the praising of NFP for their vote against the motion. However, there is a general lack of understanding of parliamentary processes. This is the process of parliament and it was my duty to table the report and move the motion for debate. I was to do this on Wednesday of parliament week last week but NFP tried to stall it with no good reason to disrupt the processes of parliament. I reconsidered my duty and proceeded to give notice for the motion to be tabled and debated as that is the proper parliament procedure and I could be referred to Privileges Committee by a member under the Standing Orders for a possible breach of the standing orders. When NFP did not get their way after protesting, I was reliably informed that NFP allegedly approached Fiji First members to open discussions on an NFP/FFP coalition, and Hon Prasad issued a warning to the Hon Prime Minister about the coalition agreement. I will categorically state here that at no time during this entire process did NFP oppose the recommendations or raise any objections from March when they had over two months to consider it.
But in my opinion this is not a new pattern of behavior for Hon Prasad. Earlier this year Hon Prasad was instrumental in blocking the 20 per cent outstanding pay owed to prison officers after the Job Evaluation Exercise in 2018 which the then Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama stopped the payment. The prison officers felt it was because Frank found out that they voted for the opposition in the 2018 general elections. Several coalition members lobbied for the minimum wage increase to be implemented with immediate effect last year when the coalition government came into power as promised in our manifestos, but the general feeling amongst the majority of government members is that it has been stalled by NFP who hold the employment portfolio and continue to appease their party backers who are business owners as well as using it as their own political platform. In the national budget last year, it came as a shock when Hon Prasad unilaterally gave $325,000 to each political party without consultation or cabinet approval even though it is supposed to be $15,000 per Member of Parliament. This is calculated as follows: Fiji First 26 MPs x $15000 = $390000, PAP 21 MPs x $15000 = $315,000, NFP 5 MPs x $15000 = $75000, Sodelpa 3 MPs x $15000 = $45000. Hon Prasad paid his own party an extra $240000 without consultation or Cabinet approval. This is a figure that is more than the total increase in salaries for ministers recommended by the independent consultant $175000, just to put things in perspective. In my own ministry, Hon Prasad unilaterally changed the payment of bus fare subsidies to our elderly and disabled in the current budget from $25 a month to utilisation basis without consultation with me as the line minister or Cabinet approval. Other ministers may have their own experiences which is theirs to tell.
NFP glorifies itself in being principled in their vote but this is not about principles, this is about control. This parliamentary process of emoluments is out of his control and I shockingly witnessed the frustration and anger in his demeanor aside from the fact that he is opposing the reduction of his own salary from $235000 to $200000. At no point did they oppose the recommendations, but used the party directive as an excuse to try to control the process. NFP was given ample time to consider the report from 9th of March, and Hon Prasad has lied to the public about only getting notice of it 48 hours before the motion was moved.
The Hon Prime Minister is correct in stating that the increases have not been implemented yet. There is still the process of changing the laws to give it legal effect, which in the normal process of any proposed law, public consultations and views will be received by the Solicitor General’s office before it is brought to Parliament for debate and passing. That is why the motion gives up to 6 months from 1st August for this process to take place.
The public have the right to know the full story of the Emoluments Committee’s duty to follow parliament processes as well as the accusations by NFP being levelled at members of the Emoluments Committee and those that voted for the motion. I would implore members of the public to obtain a copy of the Emoluments Report which is public record, and note the the reductions as well as things that did not change. You will have the opportunity to be heard when the normal process of proposed laws are undertaken, which includes public consultation.
Vinaka
Hon Lynda Tabuya
Chair
 |  |
