Use Senate funds to fix water problems: Draunidalo

Money for the proposed establishment of a Senate should instead be used to address water shortages at the Colonial War Memorial (CWM) Hospital and communities in the Western Division, says One Nation Party president Roko Tupou Draunidalo.

Speaking at the Fijian Media Association town hall discussion on the Constitution (Amendment) Bill last night, Ms Draunidalo questioned the need for another parliamentary chamber, arguing that public funds should be directed towards essential services.

“We believe there's no need for a Senate.

“It's going to be a waste of money.

“Please just use that money to cart water to CWM Hospital. I think they need it. And also in the West, they're without water in the productive parts where workers of the tourism industry.”

Ms Draunidalo said reports of water and electricity problems in the Western Division highlighted the need to prioritise basic services.

“I'm tired of reading the updates. There's no water there, no power. You could use the money there instead of putting chiefs in another body.

“They already have a very powerful body, the Bose Levu Vakaturaga.”

Questions role of chiefs

Ms Draunidalo also questioned the contribution of the Bose Levu Vakaturaga (BLV), or Great Council of Chiefs, to addressing Fiji's social challenges.

“In the last three years, I haven't heard one useful thing that they've proposed.”

While expressing support for the chiefly system, she argued that the BLV was not essential to Fiji's governance.

“I support that the chiefly system, they will be with us until we die, the next generation, until they die.

“But the Bose Levu Vakaturaga is a colonial British construct. It is. And so we can do without them.

“We've done without them for 16 years. We can do without them.”

She said chiefs should focus on serving their communities and addressing issues affecting ordinary Fijians.

“The chiefs need to serve their people on the ground. Have they done anything in the BLV to address drugs, HIV, and poverty stats?

“I haven't had one useful proposal from them.”

Backs referendum

Ms Draunidalo also defended the referendum provisions of the 2013 Constitution, arguing that constitutional changes should be decided by the people.

She welcomed calls for a referendum and questioned what she described as the absence of such a requirement in the proposed constitutional changes.

“And the issue of democratic deficit that keeps going on about the 2013 constitution. I'm happy to hear that Deputy Prime Minister keeps saying, go to the referendum, go to the referendum, go to the referendum. Amen.

“Only the 2013 constitution, the only constitution that has given a referendum and direct say to the people. And in their own draft, guess what? There's no referendum.

“Where's the democratic deficit in that? I would like to see when we challenge it in the Supreme Court, what the Supreme Court is going to say about the democratic deficit there.”

She also pointed to Australia and the United States as examples of countries where constitutional amendments were deliberately difficult to achieve.

“And Vijay, again, back to being serious about constitutions. In Australia, they've had one constitution since 1901. They have referendums. And it's very hard to change the constitution there.

“This is not unique to the 2013 constitution. They've had 45 proposals. Only eight has passed since 1901. In the United States, 1789, they've had their constitution, only one constitution.

“11,000 proposals have been introduced into the US Congress. Only 33 amendments have won. There's a reason why they make it difficult at common law to change the constitution, because it's supposed to be static, not changing.

“We're supposed to give the appearance of being stable to investors so that money can come and we can grow economically.”