REACHING FOR HIS CHEQUE BOOK. While ordinary Fijians are struggling to put food on the table, NFP's donor and chairman of the Fiscal Review Committee readily splashed $10,000 for Prasad's party.
It seems 'money really grows on the tree' - $10,000 give away to NFP.
 |  |  |
Enough of Naidunomics!
No increase to Water rates
It is surprising that the 2023 Fiscal Review Committee which has submitted a range of taxation measures for the 2024/25 Budget, is silent on one of the most questionable measures of last year’s Budget – the 7-year tax holiday to Fiji Water.
The tax holiday granted to this extremely profitable foreign-owned company was widely questioned, and came as a slap on the face for the rest of our people who were lumped with a 15% VAT on all goods and services except for a few staple food items.
Government has so far not come up with any satisfactory explanation as to why Fiji Water received such exceptionally favourable treatment when our local manufacturers had their corporate tax rate increased from 20% to 25%.
“If the chairman of the 2023 FRC, Richard Naidu, thinks that recommending the increase in water resource tax of 19.5c a litre (current) will mitigate against the unjustified tax holiday to Fiji Water, he is mistaken,” said Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry.
“ By all means increase the water resource tax. After all, the introduction of a water resource tax in 2007 was my policy initiative when I tried to impose a 20c a litre resource tax on water and met with strong reaction against it by Fiji Water.
“ The 7-year tax holiday to Fiji Water is discriminatory and totally unjustified, and must be rescinded in the 24/25 Budget. The local water bottling companies are on record as saying they have no objection to paying the corporate tax,” Mr Chaudhry said.
We note that the FRC has a tendency to make recommendations which tantamount to User Pays concept to which the Labour Party is totally opposed. Fiji is not a developed country. Our general pay rates are abysmally low with close to 50% of our people either living in poverty or on the brink of it.
“We therefore, reject recommendations to tax increases that will impact on the poor and those on low incomes.
The Committee is recommending an increase in water rates to “at least 50c per thousand litres” from the current 15c – an increase of 233% - to enable the Water Authority to provide better services.
“ WAF provides an essential basic service. A general increase in the water rate will impact on the ordinary consumers at a time when they are already burdened with high costs of living,” said Mr Chaudhry.
“ If there is to be an increase, it should be reasonable and limited to commercial use. After all, the tourism industry is the biggest user of water and is able to pay a higher rate for it.
“The use of water by the general consumer must continue to be subsidised by the State as is currently the case. WAF must learn to operate within its current budget which is quite sufficient. It needs to become more competent and efficient,” said Mr Chaudhry.
Likewise, the Airport Departure Tax is already quite high and should remain at the current $140.
No increase to Water rates
It is surprising that the 2023 Fiscal Review Committee which has submitted a range of taxation measures for the 2024/25 Budget, is silent on one of the most questionable measures of last year’s Budget – the 7-year tax holiday to Fiji Water.
The tax holiday granted to this extremely profitable foreign-owned company was widely questioned, and came as a slap on the face for the rest of our people who were lumped with a 15% VAT on all goods and services except for a few staple food items.
Government has so far not come up with any satisfactory explanation as to why Fiji Water received such exceptionally favourable treatment when our local manufacturers had their corporate tax rate increased from 20% to 25%.
“If the chairman of the 2023 FRC, Richard Naidu, thinks that recommending the increase in water resource tax of 19.5c a litre (current) will mitigate against the unjustified tax holiday to Fiji Water, he is mistaken,” said Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry.
“ By all means increase the water resource tax. After all, the introduction of a water resource tax in 2007 was my policy initiative when I tried to impose a 20c a litre resource tax on water and met with strong reaction against it by Fiji Water.
“ The 7-year tax holiday to Fiji Water is discriminatory and totally unjustified, and must be rescinded in the 24/25 Budget. The local water bottling companies are on record as saying they have no objection to paying the corporate tax,” Mr Chaudhry said.
We note that the FRC has a tendency to make recommendations which tantamount to User Pays concept to which the Labour Party is totally opposed. Fiji is not a developed country. Our general pay rates are abysmally low with close to 50% of our people either living in poverty or on the brink of it.
“We therefore, reject recommendations to tax increases that will impact on the poor and those on low incomes.
The Committee is recommending an increase in water rates to “at least 50c per thousand litres” from the current 15c – an increase of 233% - to enable the Water Authority to provide better services.
“ WAF provides an essential basic service. A general increase in the water rate will impact on the ordinary consumers at a time when they are already burdened with high costs of living,” said Mr Chaudhry.
“ If there is to be an increase, it should be reasonable and limited to commercial use. After all, the tourism industry is the biggest user of water and is able to pay a higher rate for it.
“The use of water by the general consumer must continue to be subsidised by the State as is currently the case. WAF must learn to operate within its current budget which is quite sufficient. It needs to become more competent and efficient,” said Mr Chaudhry.
Likewise, the Airport Departure Tax is already quite high and should remain at the current $140.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 23 May 2024
 |  |
About 79,000 cases of Fiji water sold through Amazon have been recalled over elevated levels of a commonly found mineral and bacteria.
In an enforcement report, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said that testing by Fiji Water maker Natural Waters of Viti Limited found "manganese in addition to three bacterial genera" in cases of the water sold between Feb. 1 and March 3.
The FDA classified the recall of the roughly 1.9 million bottles on Thursday as the lowest level of seriousness, in which a product "is not likely to cause adverse health consequences."
"We conducted evaluations of the levels of manganese, a naturally occurring mineral, and any bacteria, and consumers can be fully confident of no health or safety risk," the company said in a statement to USA TODAY.
The recall was initiated on March 4, though the company did not issue a press release when the recall began.
A spokesperson for the company told USA TODAY that they did not do so as to not cause "unnecessary public concern" because the customers who bought the water were identified and contacted.
The spokesperson also said that the testing that led to the recall occurred when a customer reported discoloration.
"The affected products were immediately and voluntarily recalled, with 99% of affected bottles reclaimed from warehouses and the remainder in warehouses to be returned," the company said in the statement.
Affected Fiji Water bottles
The recalled bottles have the following production dates marked on the side of 24-packs and on the back of the bottles:
In an enforcement report, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said that testing by Fiji Water maker Natural Waters of Viti Limited found "manganese in addition to three bacterial genera" in cases of the water sold between Feb. 1 and March 3.
The FDA classified the recall of the roughly 1.9 million bottles on Thursday as the lowest level of seriousness, in which a product "is not likely to cause adverse health consequences."
"We conducted evaluations of the levels of manganese, a naturally occurring mineral, and any bacteria, and consumers can be fully confident of no health or safety risk," the company said in a statement to USA TODAY.
The recall was initiated on March 4, though the company did not issue a press release when the recall began.
A spokesperson for the company told USA TODAY that they did not do so as to not cause "unnecessary public concern" because the customers who bought the water were identified and contacted.
The spokesperson also said that the testing that led to the recall occurred when a customer reported discoloration.
"The affected products were immediately and voluntarily recalled, with 99% of affected bottles reclaimed from warehouses and the remainder in warehouses to be returned," the company said in the statement.
Affected Fiji Water bottles
The recalled bottles have the following production dates marked on the side of 24-packs and on the back of the bottles:
- PRD 11 NOV 2023
- PRD 12 NOV 2023
- PRD 13 NOV 2023
- PRD 24 NOV 2023
- PRD 25 NOV 2023
