Home Blog Page 1667

Abuse in PFMA

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0

BY CAROL-ANNE SULEGA

 

THE Opposition says there has been abuse in some of the provisions of the Public Financial Management Act.

Leader of the Official Opposition Hon Jeremiah Manele made the statement on the floor of Parliament yesterday.

He made the statement in response to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Hon Snyder Rini’s second reading speech on Tuesday.

“Mr. Speaker, in his Second Reading Speech yesterday, the Minister as expected has outlined the legal basis and framework for the Supplementary Appropriation Bill before the House.

“These include section 102(3) of the Constitution and sections 51, 58, and 60 of the Public Financial Management Act.

“Sir, I have no difficulties with these provisions.

“My difficulty is that we have been abusing some of these provisions due to deficiencies in our planning and budgeting capacities, as well as our inability to work and live within our means.

“This is not a predictable world but a few of the expenditures that keep on appearing in our supplementary appropriation bills including the one before us, are not unforeseen but forseen ones, expenditure or commitments that we knew in advance hence should have budgeted for them in the original budget,” the Leader of the Official Opposition said.

He then added that they knew three years ago that RAMSI was going to leave us at the end of June 2017, well before the 2017 budget launch and formulation in 2016.

This was also outlined in various amendments and adjustments to the original 2017 Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2017, that the Minister has outlined in his speech.

“I am sure these changes will be clearer when we go through the various heads and tables during the Committee of Supply.

“Mr. Speaker, the issue of shifting funds or reallocation of funds between budget heads to meet expenditure as raised by the PAC in its report, is a serious one,” Manele added.

He then further stated that this has the potential to undermine the credibility of the projects and programs in the development budget.

“If in deed these are savings then it could mean that the projects or programs in the development budget were either over costed or the Ministry concerned lacks the capacity to implement the project, hence cannot spend the funds,” Hon Jeremiah Manele said.

Donated equipment and medical supplies for the NRH being held up

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
A 20 ft container of much needed medical equipment and supplies for the NRH was shipped by Take My Hands (TMH) charitable trust in New Zealand in late June this year and arrived in Honiara prior to 10 July.
The container has, reportedly, been left at the SIPA wharf awaiting clearance pending the payment of the requisite handling charges requested from the local Ministry of Finance.
It is claimed that other container supplies sent by several charitable donors for the NRH are also being held up at the wharf for the same reason.
My information is that the NRH requested the money to cover the charges for the container from TMH more than 7 weeks ago and it is likely the NRH did the same for the other containers I have mentioned, although I have no information I can give to support such a claim.
While the Ministry of Finance can take credit for its successful JANUS operations in close-cooperation with the RSIPF, it is most unfortunate that the Ministry is being criticized by some prominent citizens for its slowness in meeting the payment needs of other Ministries and the MOHMS/NRH in particular.
Yours sincerely
Frank Short

Reported unrest at Kazukuru Lipa point

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
YESTERDAY Thursday, 31 August, I received news that there was a tense situation at Kazukuru Lipa point in the Western Province where a second attempt was then underway by Gallego Resources, a logging company, to land their equipment on Kazukuru customary land but there was strong resistance from disgruntled landowners.
The report went on to claim the loggers had called on the police from Munda to prevent the resistance and allow the logging equipment to be unloaded.
A follow-up report claimed that police, numbering in the twenties with riot gear, were deployed from Noro, Gizo and Munda and allegedly allowed the loggers to unload their equipment against the wishes of the angry landowners.
I am reliably informed that the situation on the ground remains intense and potentially troublesome as I pen this note.
Policing incidents involving landowners and logging companies needs careful handling and special attention must be taken to ensure the police are impartial and acting within the law for fear of being seen as favouring one side or the other or acting themselves unlawfully.
My informant claims there is an air of suspicion in this reported incident since the police responded to a call from the loggers and not from the landowners who remain angry that logging equipment has been landed on their customary land, allegedly, without lawful permission.
While there is such a suspicion, it might be useful if the police media office could respond to the allegations and also say what action is taken to monitor a likely flare-up situation at Kazukuru.
Yours sincerely
Frank Short

PM speaks out

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
Prime Minister

Promises new version of anti-corrupt bill next Parliament sitting, accuses Opp of inciting anti-gov’t atmosphere

 

PRIME Minister Manasseh Sogavare has rebutted the Opposition, labelling their outcry on the withdrawal of the Anti-Corruption Bill 2016 as ‘shocking’ and ‘completely unnecessary’.

Instead, he counters that the Opposition had cunningly tried to prevent the withdrawal of a bill which they had known fully well to be weak and easy to be manipulated.

He adds that the Opposition had intended to lure public into thinking that both he and his government had gone back on their promise to fight corruption.

However, in a media statement, Sogavare reiterates that the withdrawn bill was weak and had to be completely withdrawn to make way for a newer version which carries improvements from recommendations by the Bills and Legislations Committee (BLC).

The new version he says is fool-proof compared to the withdrawn bill, and contains huge changes that promotes its integrity.

He reassures the nation that the new version of the Anti-Corruption Bill will be tabled in the next sitting of Parliament.

According to PMO statement, “The furore about the withdrawal of the Anti-Corruption Bill 2016 was completely unnecessary and strongly gave the impression that the Prime Minister and the DCC Government is reneging on its promise to fight corruption.

This perception is absolutely misleading and manifestly incorrect.

The Prime Minister would like to reassure the Public that the Democratic Coalition for Change Government is committed to ‘the fight against corruption’ and that the Anti-Corruption Legislation remains the top priority of the DCCG.

It must be noted that the Anti-Corruption Bill (ACB) is part of an Anti-Corruption legislation package which includes the Ombudsman Act 2017 and the Whistleblowers Protection Bill.

Ombudsman Act 2017 has been passed by Parliament and the Whistleblowers Protection Bill is still in Parliament.

Why was it withdrawn?

The Anti-Corruption Bill 2016 that is now before Parliament was initially approved by Cabinet before submitting to Parliament.

“As a matter of process, all bills must be presented for scrutiny by the Bills and Legislation Committee, a Standing Parliamentary Select Committee, before it is presented in Parliament for debate.” The Prime Minister stated.

The Bills and Legislation Committee (BLC) consists of the following persons:

 

(1)            Hon Connelly Sandakabatu- Chairman

(2)            Hon Dr Culwick Togamana

(3)            Hon Rick Houenipwela

(4)            Hon Jeremiah Manele

(5)            Hon Namson Tran

(6)            Hon Matthew Wale

(7)            Hon Steve Abana

(8)            Hon Dr Derek Sikua

(9)            Hon Commins Mewa

(10)         Hon Peter Tom

Having gone through Bills and Legislation Committee (BLC), a Report was produced which contained recommendations on the ACB. The executive summary of the Report stated, inter alia, the following:

“The Bill proposes to establish the Solomon Islands Independent Commission against Corruption (SIICAC). An authority that is tasked to receive, process, investigate and refer for prosecution any corruption complaints referred to it by the public and or whistleblowers.

From the outset, the Committee believes that the Bill was hastily drafted and has not gone through a thorough robust consultation. The Committee is of the firm view that a better and more effective model was not considered in the consultations. As a result, the oversight model proposed in the bill may not be the best to combat corruption in Solomon Islands.

Some of the clauses proposed in the Bill could weaken the integrity of the Commission such as; the membership of the nominating Committee who are politicians or politically appointed and the process for their appointment, the non-inclusion of provisions against unjust enrichment, the vulnerability of the Commission as a result of the necessary budgetary process and resourcing, and the use of custom as a defence.

The Committee makes sixteen (16) recommendations under this Bill and urges the Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (OPMC) as the sponsors of the Bill, to seriously consider the recommendations and make the necessary amendments.”

A full copy of the Report can sourced from the National Parliament or online at www.parliament.gov.sb. It must be clearly stated that the Report did not recommend the Bill for Parliament as stated by the Opposition in Parliament on Monday 28th August 2017.

Not only were recommendations provided by BLC but independent reviews were also conducted which provided recommendations.

As such, a decision was made to withdraw the ACB which has gone through its first reading, simply because of the amount of proposed changes to be made to the 2016 version.

It must also be noted that the proposed changes to several clauses in the ACB contained substantive changes and they are necessary.

These include changes, inter alia, to:

(a)           the qualification of would-be Commissioners and duration of their appointments;

(b)            members of the Select Committee to scrutinise applicants and recommend appointment of Commissioners;

(c)             recognition of the role to be played by the Steering Committee overseeing the National Anti-Corruption Strategy implementation;

(d)            improvements to the way complaints are handled as well as when investigating them;

(e)            procedure to return proceeds of corruption;

(f)              reinstating section 374 of the Penal Code – Corrupt Practices and 375 of the Penal Code – Secret Commissions on Government Contracts which were meant to be repealed in the 2016 version of the Anti-Corruption Bill;

(g)             as well as a number of drafting improvements to the Bill.

These changes have already been made to the ACB and because there are numerous and substantive changes to the 2016 version, the Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet agreed with the opinion of the Attorney General’s Chambers that it will be better to present an entirely new Anti-Corruption Bill.

“Technically, the Government cannot commence the legislative process of this newer version of the Bill while the 2016 version of the Bill is still alive on the agenda of Parliament.” Said the Prime Minister.

Like all other Bills, Cabinet needs to approve the newer version of the Anti-Corruption Bill before it is transmitted to Parliament for enactment. But Cabinet cannot consider a newer version of the Bill unless the 2016 version (already ‘on the floor of the House’) is totally withdrawn.

This session of Parliament presented the opportunity for the Prime Minister to do exactly that.

“With Parliament approval obtained this week, the Cabinet is now ready to consider the newer version of the Bill so it can be ready for the next sitting of Parliament.” The Prime Minister added.

Position of the Opposition

The position taken by the members of the Opposition and Independent group is quite disturbing.

Out of the ten members of the BLC who saw the Bill as weak, recommended that a lot work needed to be done to strengthen the Bill and that the Bill needed necessary amendments, eight (8) voted NO to withdrawing it.

Therefore, having advocated for a more robust legislative regime including making amendments, the Member of the BLC themselves voted to have the Bill kept in Parliament for Parliament to pass.

Therefore as a consequence, by voting no to the withdrawal, the Opposition and Independent Members wanted to keep in parliament a bill that could contain loopholes and a weak bill.

By voting no, the Opposition and Independent Members clearly are advocating for a bill that they can easily exploit. None of the Opposition Members nor Independent Members advocated for an improved bill. That is quite disturbing.

“Is the intention of the Opposition to ensure that a weak bill is passed so they (Opposition Members and Independent Members) can exploit it? Is it the intention of the Opposition and Independent group to ensure that they exploit the loopholes in the Bill?”

“So whose interest are they advocating?” The Prime Minister questioned.

What is next?

The DCC Government wishes therefore to assure the country that the new version of the Anti-Corruption Bill will be brought to Parliament for enactment during the next sitting of Parliament.

“This is a commitment – a crusade – the DCC Government had pledged to pursue and we will deliver on it as we have promised in our manifesto”, Prime Minister Sogavare said.

–OPMC PRESS

Environmental sustainability

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
IT has been reported recently that the community of Barana on Mt Austen, Guadacanal, is determined to re-plant trees and protect the ecosystems in a proposed park.
At a community consultation organised last week by SPREP through the Pacific Ecosystem-based Adaptation to Climate Change (PEBACC) project and the Ministry of Environment, the community indicated great interest to champion appropriate ecosystem-based adaption activities to build their resilience to climate change.
I congratulate all concerned in focusing on tree-planting, protecting the ecosystem and working towards environmental sustainability at a time when climate change poses increasing threats to livelihoods in the Solomon Islands.
Yours sincerely
Frank Short

Serving the charitable needs of the Solomon Islands

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
IN March 2015, I launched my personal website – www.solomonislandsinfocus.com that I painstakingly designed and funded for the sole purpose of aiding good causes in the Solomon Islands with an emphasis on illustrating locally made wooden carvings and artefacts, but with a more serious focus on helping the SI MOHMS and the NRH in particular.
 
In launching the website I had no political motives or affiliations and how could I since I left the Solomons in July 1999.
 
My leaving was premature, as anyone whom has read my book ‘Policing a Clash of Cultures’ will understand, but having sworn an oath of office to serve the Solomon Islands in 1997 I felt, and still do, that I have a moral obligation to fulfil to the people of the Solomons by helping out in whatever way I can, whether by encouragement, tangible support, or simply expressing appreciation and thanks to the many who often go unrecognised for the help they give to others.
 
My early work in pursuing charitable causes brought me into contact with a New Zealand based charitable trust, ‘Take My Hands,’ based in Auckland.
 
I had discovered that this charity was engaged in shipping donated but surplus medical equipment and medical supplies to several regional countries, including Nepal, Pakistan and Fiji.
 
It occurred to me that I might get similar help for the MOHMS in the Solomons and I entered into communication with the organization and its principal director, Ms Janette Searle.
 
Over time, I was instrumental in getting the charity and the MOHMS/NRH to enter into a formal MOU for regular shipments of 20 ft containers of supplies much needed by the NRH in particular.
 
The latest container, one of several in the past, arrived in Honiara just prior to the 10 July this year but it has remained at the SIPA wharf because, as I understand the situation, the Ministry of Finance has not made available the necessary funds for the NRH to uplift the container and put the contents to use, albeit much needed.
 
Prior to negotiating for a formal MOU with the parties I have mentioned, I sought help locally by writing to the media for a donation to help freight a container of needs I had ascertained were required by the SIDT, the HOH charity, the Association for Persons with Disabilities and Women’s’ Refuge Centres.
 
I was contacted by Mr J Sy on behalf of the SFA and who donated in excess of NZ$12,000 directly to TMH in New Zealand to arrange for the shipment of the supplies that had been requested by the NGO’s I have mentioned.
 
That container is still to be freighted but TMH told me today (Wednesday, 30 August 2017) that much of the requested items, including furniture, clothing, beds and mobility equipment are already in TMH’s warehouse and a sailing date is being arranged.
 
TMH’s Director, Ms Searle, explained to me that following the terrible earthquake which occurred in Nepal the donated supplies collected for the Solomon Islands NGOs had to be diverted on humanitarian grounds.
 
I am aware that there has been some local media reports recently concerning alleged politically motivated donations of funds and the supply of goods and materials, including a truck, to the HOH charity based on Malaita, by the SFA but I challenge anyone to claim that the help I received to provide much needed help for the local NGO’s, or the NRH was in any way motivated by politics.
 
Sometimes it is best that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones, especially if ignorant of all the facts about which they allege things.
 
Yours sincerely
 
Frank Short

Micah ruled out of first leg in Auckland

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
Micah Lea’alafa will miss the first leg of the clash between Solomon Islands and the New Zealand All Whites in Auckland tomorrow evening

By Romulus Huta

NATIONAL soccer coach Felipe Vega-Arango Alonso has confirmed that key attacker Micah Lea’alafa will not play in the first leg of the Stage 3 Finals of the Oceania World Cup against the New Zealand All Whites tomorrow in Auckland.

This follows the delay of the midfielder’s visa to enter New Zealand where he was not able to travel with the team when they left Honiara on Sunday.

However, the Spaniard said he had already worked out a replacement and at the moment he is not counting on Micah given the visa delay problem.

Micah is one of the key players in Alonso’s line-up and also a regular starter.

“Micah is not going to be here. I don’t think so. I’m not counting on him and I will have to switch one position to cater for his absence,” he said.

Alonso stressed that everything happens for a reason and Micah’s absence will make room for others to come out and show to the world that they can go on to the next level.

“I don’t think that the players see that as an opportunity because life is strange and everything happens for a reason.

“Maybe that opens up for someone to show to the world he can go to the next level. I think it’s going to be good for us,” he said.

The match this Friday will kick off 6.30pm (Solomon Islands Time) at the QBE Stadium and Alonso already knew what’s at stake going into the match and also what’s in front of them.

“The players have been training hard. I think they are concentrating a lot on the opportunity they have in front of them.

“They understand the game they are going to play.

“They understand they are going to play against a professional team.

“They understand it’s going to be tough.

“They understand that it’s a good opportunity for them to show themselves to all the coaches, to all the clubs and it’s also an opportunity to showcase their level of football because they are coming from an amateur setting. They want to progress and be better at football so it’s a great opportunity,” he explained.

Alonso added that New Zealand hasn’t lost a game in the region for quite a while and indicated zero comfort level for Solomon Islands but all they need to do is just step up and be positive.

The Spaniard had ruled out cold weather as an important factor to worry about ahead of the game but it’s the difference of the players in the two teams which really matters.

“Practice this week has been good because the most important thing was to adjust to the weather and to the field conditions and luckily it’s not been that cold and at this moment I don’t think the weather will be a too much of a factor. I think the important factor is the difference of the level of players in both teams. The weather, I don’t think it’s going to be too much,” Alonso stated.

The second leg of the Oceania finals will be played in Honiara Tuesday next week.

Goodbye old Honiara

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
Honiara City Councilor, Reginald Ngati said a review of the Honiara City Act will not change the image of the Capital.. Photo Benz Newman

HCC orders closure of large portion of Pt Cruz CBD buildings

 

A good number of old familiar buildings in Point Cruz have been ordered to be shut down by the Honiara City Council (HCC).

Starting from the Honiara Hot Bread building to the Honiara Casino, they have been passed off as unfit and unsafe for humans to live in and use.

The landlords and 14 tenants of these buildings were given their orders by the Chief Health Inspector of the HCC on August 8, with a three-month timeframe to close up shops and businesses.

Chief Health Inspector George Titiulu said yesterday that the closure is purposely to have the old buildings renovated, adding that the possibility of demolition depends on whether the landlords adhere to HCC’s closing order.

He said HCC and some of the landlords are currently in talks over other alternatives.

Titiulu highlights the Council’s policy which demands that all buildings within the city’s CBD are up to standard.

The Order states; “This is as a feedback from the examinations of the mentioned premises, way back in 2015, as provided for under the Environmental Health CAP 99, Part Section 62, and Section 63.

“Thus, this letter is purposely requesting, Honiara City Council as the Local authority to issue a closing order, declaring that the foresaid buildings as listed are not fit for human habitation or occupation.

“And to direct that such dwelling or building or part thereof shall not after the time lapse of Three (3) months from the date of this letter, (8th August 2017) be inhabited or cease occupying by any person.”

It is understood that the same order was issued to the owner of the old building adjacent to the main market, to which a new one was built – now called the Central Plaza.

Public rally against anti-corruption bill withdrawal

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0

By Alfred Sasako

 

AS the impact of the decision by the DCC Government to withdraw the Anti-Corruption Bill sinks in, concerned citizens are rallying to show their displeasure.

A meeting of like-minded citizens is due to be held at the YWCA Hall in Honiara today.

The citizens comprising NGOs and others say they are concerned because withdrawing the Anti-Corruption Bill by the DCC Government has implications on the outcome of the 2019 National General Elections.

Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare ‘sacrificed’ the Anti-Corruption Bill on Monday in a move seen by many as the last attempt to keep the members of the DCC Government together.

That decision however has drawn the ire of the Opposition as well as members of the public. The Opposition for example, accused Prime Minister Sogavare of “lying” to the nation.

Mr Sogavare on Monday used the floor of Parliament to withdraw the much-talked about Bill, which had divided his government for the last 12 months. While some Government MPs were prepared to go through with the Bill, others were not so keen, threatening a mass walkout should the Prime Minister proceed with tabling it in the House.

Thirty-one MPs including Mr Sogavare voted to withdraw the Bill. According to the Hansard transcript, they are:

 

Hon Peter Shanel Agovaka

Hon Ishmael Avui

Hon Jackson Fiulaua

Hon John Fugui

Hon Moses Garu

Hon Samuel Iduri

Hon Dr Tautai

Hon Dudley Kopu

Hon Augustine Auga

Hon John Maneniaru

Hon Andrew Maneporaa

Hon Samuel Manetoali

Hon Marau

Hon Mewa

Hon Doromuala

Hon David Day Pacha

Hon Dickson Mua

Hon Bartholomew Parapolo

Hon Danny Philip

Hon Snyder Rini

Hon Stanley Sofu

Hon Manasseh Sogavare

Hon Jimson Tana

Hon Silas Vangara

Hon Bradley Tovusia

Hon Milner Tozaka

Hon Freda Tuki

Hon Sam Maneka

To prevent the internal division spilling into the public arena, Mr Sogavare delivered what the anti-corruption crusade in his government had always fought for. By withdrawing the Bill, he has delivered victory to MPs including Ministers opposed to the Bill.

The withdrawal of the Bill also sank Mr Sogavare’s own passion about tackling corruption in Solomon Islands. In so doing, he has embraced the status quo.

Mr Sogavare told Parliament that the Bill was withdrawn so that Cabinet would have another look at it.

In a somewhat rowdy debate preceding the vote, it appeared the government had lost support for withdrawing the Bill when it was put to the vote on voices. The DCC Government won the vote in a subsequent division.

When the numbers were tallied, 31 MPs including Prime Minister Sogavare himself voted in support of withdrawing the Bill, Nine (9) were against and 10 were absent.

The success of Mr Sogavare’s calculated scheme – described by some as saving grace for his wounded government – is subject to conjecture. One thing is certain, the fight has barely begun.

Lusibaea fined

Written by
Milton Ragaruma
-
0
Hon. Jimmy Lusibaea

Leadership Code Commission penalises former MID Minister $12k for misconducts in office

 

THE Leadership Code Commission (LCC) has penalised Hon Jimmy Lusibaea with a fine of $12,000 for three counts of misconduct in office.

In two counts, Lusibaea had placed himself as a Minister in situations of ‘conflict of interest’, and in the third, he gave false or misleading statements to the LCC. Each penalty costs $4,000, which is the Commission’s highest.

First, for being the owner of the Lion Heart Company (LHC) which was awarded a government contract during Lusibaea’s time as Minister of Infrastructure Development (MID), the Ministry which administered the contract.

Second, also during his time as MID Minister, the LHC entered a profit sharing arrangement with the Solomon Islands Ports Authority (SIPA) regarding side-lifting service. SIPA is also a SOE under the MID.

Third, Lusibaea gave false information to the Commission in 2015, declaring that ‘he had no shares in any company’.

He was given 14 working-days from August 28, 2017 to pay up, and also has the right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days.

In a media statement, the LCC explained; “The Leadership Code Commission finds the three counts of misconduct against Hon. Jimmy Lusibaea (the leader) substantiated and therefore penalizes him with a total fine of $12,000.

“On count 1, the Commission finds that the leader failed his duty under section 94 of the Constitution in that he conducted himself in a way that places him in a conflict of interest, demeans his office or position and allows his integrity to be called into question.

“At the relevant time the leader is the owner of Lion Heart Company (LHC) and the Minister responsible for the Ministry of Infrastructure and Development (MID). In March 2016, LHC was awarded a government contract by the Central Tender Board for the maintenance of the Silolo to Fouia road in North Malaita. This contract was administered by the MID for which the leader was then the Minister responsible.

“On count 2, the Commission also finds that the leader failed his duty under section 94 of the Constitution. In January 2016, LHC entered into a contract with SIPA for the former to provide side lift services for the later on profit sharing arrangement using a side lifter truck that LHC sold to SIPA. The Commission finds that this placed him in a conflict of interest.”

The LCC adds that Lusibaea had admitted to these two allegations in his written response.

“On count 3, the Commission finds that the leader provided information in his declaration Form furnished to the Commission in 2015 as false or misleading in that he declared he had no shares in any company. Providing information to the Commission which is false or misleading on a material particular is misconduct in office. The leader breached section 10 (c) of the Leadership Code (Further Provisions) Act 1999.”

Lusibaea, according to the LCC, had not denied this allegation in his written response.

Meanwhile, LCC thanks Lusibaea for cooperating and accepts his apology and explanation in that he had misunderstood the LCC’s requirements, thinking he had not breached any.

1...1,6661,6671,668...1,675Page 1,667 of 1,675