By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

Qorvis Communications and Vatis — the two controversial public relation companies employed by the FijiFirst government to manage its public relations work — have been terminated.

This was confirmed by Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka outside Suvavou House yesterday during an interview with journalists.

Rabuka said the two companies would be investigated without disclosing more details.

• READ MORE: Graham Davis exposes Qorvis and Bainimarama
• Lawyer Draunidalo replaces Aiyaz as COC appointee in Fiji controversy
• FijiFirst seems to be ‘confused’ over role of Aiyaz, says Naidu
• Aiyaz ousted as Fiji MP over taking public office, rules Speaker
• Fiji’s PM Rabuka hits back: ‘We’ve every right to appoint and disappoint’
• Fiji’s draconian media law to be repealed for ‘free society’, says Gavoka
• 2022 Pacific political upheavals eclipse Tongan volcano
• Other Fiji reports

FBC News reports that Rabuka said: “I gave instructions earlier for their termination, the cessation of any appointment with them, and investigations on how the funds have been used and how much.”

He said the Ministry of Information would carry out work for the government.

Corvis has been highly controversial over its handling of Fiji public relations.

Heated debate over Qorvis budget
In 2017, there was heated debate over a motion to decrease the budget allocation for Qorvis Communications was moved by the opposition, now the government.

A budget of $1 million had been allocated for services from Qorvis Communications which was described as an “international public relations, advertising, media relations and crisis communications firm”.

National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad, then in opposition but now co-Deputy Prime Minister said the government did not need Qorvis Communications.

However, the then Economy Minister Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum interjected and told the NFP leader to “stick to the motion” and not “make speculation”.

Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Stung by successive Grubsheet articles revealing how the military wants changes to the Fiji government and also revealing the name of his designated successor, Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has made an astonishing personal attack on me on the front page of the government-controlled Fiji Sun newspaper today and in the government-controlled Fiji Broadcasting Corporation news.

While conspicuously failing to deny the substance of anything I have reported, the PM accuses me of “trading in gossip” and makes a number of snide personal references that are gratuitous and totally beside the point.

Once again, the PM has evidently been used by his Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, to engage in an ill-considered public relations blunder that elevates me personally and the substance of what I have written and drives even more Fijian readers to my website.

• READ MORE: The Fiji military’s blueprint for change

Whether it was on the advice of my former colleagues at Qorvis Communications is an open question.

One of them has already commented that: ”Someone should tell him [the PM] to keep a cool head. He’s doing his own negative PR by being so aggressively defensive”.

If Fiji is going to pay Qorvis $800,000 this year in highly straightened circumstances on top of the many millions it has expended over the years, the Prime Minister and his de facto number two could at least heed their advice.

Bainimarama’s statement
Here’s the text of what the Prime Minister said to the Fiji Sun:

“It’s funny, people outside of Fiji often have the most to say and the least to offer the country. Graham is no different. I know him, and he did some work with Qorvis, but that ended sometime back.

“I think I remember the stress was sometimes too much for him. I don’t know why he’s dealing in gossip these days, but I also remember even in the best of times he always seemed to find drama. And if he couldn’t find it, he’d make it up.

“I have no idea what he wants now. Maybe attention, maybe a job. I really don’t know. I don’t care and we don’t want to give him either. But he needs to understand that an attack on Fijian democracy, our Constitution, any of our independent institutions, or any of my ministers is an attack on me.

“If you’ve read our Constitution, you know Fiji is a democracy. We are not a dynasty and I do not handpick my successor. The only ones who choose the Prime Minister of Fiji are Fijian voters.

“I know, because they have picked my government twice. As the leader of FijiFirst, I am appointed under our party’s constitution, like all our office bearers. And I will once again work hard to earn the votes of the Fijian people when I lead FijiFirst into the next election.

“Until then, we have to recover our economy and get industries running again, get jobs back and get help to those who need it most. I am working on these issues every day. We don’t have time to waste on gossip blogs. But for old time’s sake, I wish Graham all the best in his retirement in Australia.”

The Davis response
And here is the text of the statement that I have released to the Fiji media in response and that it is obliged to publish under Fiji’s media laws guaranteeing the right of reply to criticism of this nature.

“I thank the Prime Minister for drawing public attention to my blogsite – grubsheet.com.au – in that many more Fijians will know that far from me criticising him or eroding his position, I am in fact trying to strengthen it by calling for the government to re-invent itself so that it can win the next election.

“I take it as confirmation that what I have said is fact that in his statement, the Prime Minister does not deny anything at all that I have reported over the past month or for that matter, dispute any opinion that I have expressed.

“In relation to his comments about the Constitution, the Prime Minister knows that a political party such as FijiFirst decides its candidate as leader before the people get to vote on that selection. So his preference as party leader is critical and as I reported, he has told the Military Council that his designated successor is Inia Seruiratu.

“While I thank him for his best wishes, I am far from being retired – being of the same age as the Prime Minister – and am working for his re-election to prevent him from going into enforced retirement himself. He remains a person for whom I have a great deal of respect and affection.”

The Davis column drew some lively online debate today, including from Rajend Naidu who writes:

“People from outside Fiji comment on Fiji’s situation on behalf of people inside Fiji who have been silenced by a repressive state and are fearful of reprisal should they have the audacity to speak out against the corruption, nepotism, favouritism, debasement of institutions of state through politisation and patronage, and a sword of Damocles hanging over the free press in the country.”

• Grubsheet Feejee is the blogsite of Graham Davis, an award-winning journalist turned communications consultant who was the Fiji government’s principal communications adviser for six years from 2012 to 2018 and continued to work on Fiji’s global climate and oceans campaign up until the end of the decade.

Fijians are counting down for their general election on Wednesday after early voting that started on November 5.

Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s ruling FijiFirst party is expected to win but with a reduced majority after a vigorous social media campaign to accumulate more votes before the media blackout which starts at midnight tonight.

Bainimarama has made “effective use of social media” to gain more supporters, says Pacific Media Centre journalist Sri Krishnamurthi, who returned to Fiji today to cover the election after doing a series of “preview” articles in September.

READ MORE: Krishnamurthi’s background briefing on the Fiji election

“Social media in Fiji has 85.1 percent use of Facebook and no other platform comes anywhere near close to that,” he said.

“FijiFirst is using Facebook very effectively as a tool. There is no control of the social media, whereas the Media Industry Development Decree curbs the media itself and that’s really strange.”

FijiFirst also uses Qorvis, a New York-based global corporate relations company that lobbies internationally for the Bainimarama government.

“I think FijiFirst will win having won more than 60 percent of the vote in 2014, but they also need a robust opposition, and that isn’t going to happen with [original coup leader in 1987] Sitiveni Rabuka back in court,” said Krishnamurthi.

Hampered by courts
“FijiFirst will have a majority but how much is debatable, as people once again get used to voting and exercising their democratic rights,” he said.

Another advantage for FijiFirst was that opposition leader Sitiveni Rabuka had been hampered in his election campaign by court action against him in an attempt to strip him of his eligibility to stand for Parliament.

People in Fiji were tired or frequent coups and an uncertain future.

“The people want stability, after 30 years of coups and uncertainty,” said Krishnamurthi.

Fiji-born Krishnamurthi will be in the country for the next five days to cover the 2018 Fiji election.

A former NZ Press Association news agency journalist, he is currently a digital media postgraduate student at Auckland University of Technology and will be reporting for the University of the South Pacific journalism programme newspaper Wansolwara and the PMC’s Asia Pacific Report.

Postgraduate student coverage
As well as the Fiji general election, postgraduate student journalists are also covering the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders summit in Papua New Guinea next weekend with a team including Pauline Mago-King and Rahul Bhattarai.

Centre director Professor David Robie has just returned from New Caledonia where he covered last weekend’s historic independence referendum.

“This is quite unique in New Zealand journalism schools for coverage of this kind of major events happening in the Pacific,” said Dr Robie.

He praised the USP regional journalism programme and media organisations such as RNZ Pacific and SBS that enabled PMC partnerships in the region.

• More Fiji election stories

Fiji’s presidency of the United Nations climate talks was an unprecedented opportunity for the Pacific island state to make its mark internationally.

But the sudden removal of chief climate negotiator Nazhat Shameem Khan last month, despite praise for her leadership, revealed a rift between the Geneva-based diplomat and capital Suva.

At the centre of the fight is a group of Australian and European consultants brought in to assist the Fiji government to deliver its biggest diplomatic challenge. Shameem Khan had increasingly objected to the prominent role these outsiders had within Fiji’s presidency.

In exclusive interviews with Climate Home News, insiders said this eventually led to her ousting, with Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama taking the consultants’ side. They raised concerns that Fiji ceding control to unaccountable professionals jeopardised a critical year of climate talks.

“In the world of [UN climate negotiations], to see a small island state in the presidency being closely managed and controlled by consultants from developed countries is not good for trust and goodwill,” a source from the Fiji delegation told Climate Home News.

“But [the consultants] refused to take a back seat and we had difficulties in relation to this.”

Another member of the national staff, contacting CHN independently, said: “Most of their advice and interference was harmful rather than helpful… They undermined us and didn’t understand the local dimensions.”

Both sources spoke on condition of anonymity.

Fijian PM Statement 070318 by Megan Darby on Scribd

No response at first
CHN asked Bainimarama’s office about the circumstances surrounding Shameem Khan’s removal, specifically about her objections regarding consultants. But no response was made to this point.

Writing to Climate Home News prior to publication, Bainimarama said any suggestion the country had been unduly influenced was “false and mischievous”. After this article was published, he issued a further statement, embedded above.

In a speech to the Fijian Parliament on Monday, Bainimarama alluded to the deterioration in the relationship. After thanking Shameem Khan for her work, he said the country needed “a rejuvenated team unquestionably willing to work with all members of the COP23 [climate talks] presidency”.

Her replacement Luke Daunivalu, Fiji’s permanent representative to the UN in New York, was “a team player”, said Bainimarama, with the “personal qualities and experience to shape the consensus for more ambition the world needs to reach”.

Sources said Shameem Khan raised the concerns in this article with Bainimarama and his attorney general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum over the past six months, as well as directly asking the consultants to keep a low profile.

Lead diplomat: Bonn climate talks must ‘restate vision of Paris’

Fiji’s presidency of the climate talks centred on the UN Conference of Parties (COP) in Bonn in November 2017 and will continue throughout 2018 to COP24.

To help with the huge undertaking, the Fijian government hired consultants, including law firm Baker McKenzie, climate experts Systemiq and public relations specialists Qorvis. An Australian, John Connor, was appointed as executive director. It is not unusual for national delegations, particularly small or poor countries with limited capacity, to take external advice.

They were paid through funds donated by other countries, with the bulk coming from the developed world.

Fiji wins chalked up
The consultants chalked up wins for Fiji, brokering a $50 million green bond for the island nation and coordinating “America’s Pledge” with California governor Jerry Brown and business leader Mike Bloomberg.

Initially, Shameem Khan and her team relied on consultants, UN officials and former presidents of the climate talks to bring them up to speed on the issues and processes. As they became more knowledgeable, though, they quickly came to question the consultants’ advice and level of influence over the strategy.

“The balance of power was wrong from day one,” said the first Fijian delegation source. “They were telling us how to run the COP at a visionary level.”

Report: Fiji announces $50m ‘climate bond’ ahead of COP23 presidency

Ahead of the Bonn summit, China and other emerging economies raised concerns that consultants paid for by countries such as Australia were drafting statements for a Pacific island that were seen to favour developed world narratives. A non-Fijian source familiar with the matter told Climate Home News these tensions fuelled a spat over pre-2020 action that came to dominate the conference.

Closer to home, Pacific campaigners were outraged to discover Fiji was not planning to make “loss and damage”, UN jargon for support for the victims of climate disaster, a key theme of its presidency. They saw it as a top priority for the vulnerable region.

A briefing note circulated by Baker McKenzie’s Martijn Wilders in March 2017 explicitly ruled out loss and damage as a theme. “This will be considered in April but we need to take care for now as to what we promote,” he wrote in an accompanying email seen by Climate Home News.

“[The consultants] are so closely aligned to developed country policies,” said the first Fijian source. “They were trying to protect us from doing something very controversial, but unfortunately, they forgot the developing country views.”

‘Extensive consultation’
A spokesperson for the presidency in Suva said the position on loss and damage was the result of “extensive consultation with a range of Fijian and international experts”. These included a past president of the climate talks, officials from the UN climate body and Shameem Khan.

“It was a position that was conscious of the role of COP president and mandate to operationalise the Paris Agreement” and “supported by all in the Fijian delegation”.

Report: No finance plan for climate change victims in draft UN decision

While these wider political fights played out, relations within the presidency became increasingly strained.

Shameem Khan’s allies say consultants frequently went over her head to Bainimarama’s number two, Sayed-Khaiyum, a government minister. A spokesperson for the presidency said Sayed-Khaiyum had never overruled Shameem Khan on negotiation issues.

At the Bonn summit itself, the rift hampered communications. Bainimarama’s speeches were co-written by Graham Davis of PR firm Qorvis and UK-based consultant James Cameron, a longtime adviser of island states in climate negotiations.

Cameron was attending the delegation’s morning meetings but had been largely relegated from the negotiating rooms.

According to the first Fijian source, Shameem Khan was not consulted on the speeches and they did not reflect the state of play of negotiations.

‘Real embarrassment’
“It was a real embarrassment. When I look back, it is a miracle COP23 had any successes at all,” said the source.

Davis said Shameem Khan had “ample opportunity” to raise concerns about the content of the speeches with him and had not done so. Cameron declined to comment.

“As the prime minister’s principal speechwriter for the past five years, I have consistently conveyed the Fijian government’s advocacy of the need for more ambitious climate action,” Davis told Climate Home News by email.

It is not the first time Qorvis’ influence on Fiji’s government has been questioned. In November, a former public servant told Australia’s ABC he had lost his job after refusing to become a “lackey” for the PR firm.

Report: Poland to put ‘common sense’ over climate ambition as host of critical UN talks

Fiji passes the baton this year to Poland, which is hosting the next climate summit in December. Bainimarama told Parliament Fiji would continue to preside over a mass outreach programme, known as the “talanoa dialogue”, in partnership with Poland after its formal term ended.

“Because the Talanoa concept was Fiji’s idea, we will continue to lead and shape that dialogue,” he said, “in a way that no Pacific nation has ever had the opportunity to do before.”

Sources on both sides of the internal dispute raised fears that without Fiji’s partnership, Poland would take a less progressive approach, in light of its domestic attachment to coal.

Pacific campaigners expressed concerns at the impact of Shameem Khan’s removal. “Her voice will be missed,” said the Pacific Island Climate Action Network in a press release last Friday, urging Daunivalu to keep the design of the talanoa dialogue “fully with Fijians”.

Citing the most ambitious warming limit in the Paris Agreement, policy officer Genevieve Jiva said: “It is crucial that the talanoa dialogue is focused on ambition and aimed at keeping global temperature rise to 1.5C. For Pacific islanders, nothing less is acceptable because we are fighting for our survival.”

This article was first published in Climate Home News and has been republished by Asia Pacific Report under a Creative Commons licence.

Interview with Ambassador Nazhat Shameem Khan, chief negotiator for the Fijian COP 23 Presidency from POLITICO.eu on Vimeo.

The Fiji government has called for expressions of interest from public relations firms since the contract for the US-based Qorvis Communications, which handles the state’s public relations, is nearing expiry.

Economy Minister and Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum told Parliament this following a motion by National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad to remove the F$1 million allocation in the 2016-2017 National Budget for the public relations firm.

Professor Prasad told Parliament this week that the nature of the firm itself was questionable.

“They [Qorvis Communications] have worked with countries, with regimes, which have tried very hard to hide information which have used propaganda,” he said.

“I think some of the things which we see in this country today and some coming from the government, is actually a reflection of the kind of work, the kind of advice that this PR firm is giving to the government,” he said.

Dr Prasad said while the $1 million allocation would appear to be a small amount, it was an unnecessary expenditure since the government had only allocated $300,000 for kidney dialysis.

“I call upon the government to do away with this PR firm.

“They have the whole Communication Ministry, they have an Information Department, government has all the resources to take its activities — its PR — whatever they do more than they should be doing and so I don’t understand why they need this firm anymore.”

Telling government stories
Sayed-Khaiyum said a PR firm was needed to tell government’s stories not only in the local media, but internationally as well.

“We need our stories to be told in The New York Times, Huffington Post, The Guardian and that obviously requires people who operate in that space.

“We need our stories picked up by not just only the Australian and New Zealand media.

“We need our stories told in other parts of the world where they help us to be able to spread our public relations in all aspects of government and investment opportunities.”

He said in this light it was a very small price to pay.

“A lot of companies have applied, including Qorvis itself. The contract is expiring and we will then be able to either renew the contract or select someone else, or maybe select a panel of people.”

Nasik Swami is a Fiji Times reporter

The exuberant mood among the Fiji people after the 2014 election is fast fading. The realities of the high cost of living, low wages and deteriorating health and education services have not gone away.

This is because of a dysfunctional political system born of a deeply flawed and imposed Constitution, and economic policies designed to boost the government’s image, not Fiji’s long-term economic future.

The FijiFirst government has been big on announcements, but poor on implementation. Many of their publicity stunts are carefully crafted by government-hired and publicly-funded public relations firms like Qorvis, with the help of pliant media bodies like the Fiji Sun, a grateful beneficiary of exclusive government advertising contracts.

But what good is this for the rest of us?

Dysfunctional political environment
Serious questions continue to be raised about the independence of Parliament, state institutions and the civil service.

The highest bipartisan political institutions are parliamentary standing committees. In these, the people’s representatives — from the government and the Opposition — listen to the views of everybody on important legislation. Then they issue their reports making their recommendations.

In most “true democracies”, the government listens and responds meaningfully to these findings. Not in Fiji.

One such instance is the Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights. Last year this committee discussed the amendments to the Employment Relations Promulgations (ERP) Bill. We agreed unanimously — government and Opposition members together — to recommend changes which complied with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions.

But before these changes could be presented to Parliament, the Bill was changed overnight, without the knowledge of the Opposition members. The committee process, therefore, was just about window-dressing. A bipartisan committee had carefully considered how to achieve the best laws; the government just went ahead and did what it wanted.

In a similar way, the Standing Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs considered and issued a report that Fiji should unconditionally implement the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT).

The government did not go back to the committee. Instead it moved a motion in Parliament to reject the Standing Committee’s report. So the government members of the committee were forced to vote in Parliament against their own report!

Recently, the Attorney-General interfered in the work of the Standing Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs by asking the government-appointed chair of the committee to stop deliberating on allegations of torture made by lawyer Aman Ravindra-Singh. The Attorney-General said in his view this was not the work of the committee.

But his view should not guide the work of a bipartisan committee. He has an obvious interest in these allegations not being heard because they do not reflect well on his government. But Parliament — an independent institution — has no budget for independent lawyers to advise it.

Draconian Media Decree
The draconian Media Decree remains in force. State radio and television media organisations and the pro-government newspaper (which is rewarded by exclusive government advertising contracts), continue to deny the opposition any voice. They openly parrot government propaganda.

Media organisations operate under the threat of their editors being hauled before the Media Tribunal and subjected to huge fines and other punishments. The lack of access to a free and independent media has been the single most frustrating obstacle for the opposition parties when they try to make the government publicly accountable on various national issues.

The only positive thing in all this is that, as I travel around the country, I realise that the people have begun to clearly see through this facade, and the real news has begun to seep through the firewalls.

The government continues to interfere in how parliamentary funding is allocated. The original allocation of funds by the secretary-general — who is supposed to be independent of the government was abruptly changed in December 2014. Under the new formula the NFP, with three MPs, gets only $45,000 per annum to run its parliamentary office and conduct its parliamentary activities.

The FijiFirst party, despite the fact that half of its MPs are ministers with their own taxpayer-funded civil servants, gets the same amount per MP as the Opposition parties.

In most “true democracies”, the Opposition receives a minimum amount of funding to operate on — to pay for researchers, support staff and travel. This is because “true democracy” recognises the importance of a well-resourced and informed Opposition to hold the government accountable.

Unbelievably, Opposition political parties are required to apply for permits for meetings with party members and others. This makes a mockery of democracy. Why do the people’s representatives need permits to meet the people?

The government, on the other hand, continues to use state resources to do roadshows, meetings and consultations. The Prime Minister seems to be on a permanent taxpayer-funded political campaign tour.

This sort of political dysfunction in Fiji has a direct negative impact on the accountability and transparency of government activities. Because the government does whatever it wants and does not listen to anyone else, many of its policies and programs are poorly thought out and implemented. If they listened more to other views, the people would get better policies and services.

Inconsistent economic policies
In 2013, no doubt with the 2014 election in mind, the Bainimarama government started spending on everything — tuition free education, bus fare subsidies and other social welfare programs. These would be good things if we could afford them and they were delivered well.

But they are certainly not delivered well.

School textbooks might be free, but they are useless if they don’t reach students on time. Unbelievably, the government has messed up textbook delivery for the second year running.

Now it has called in the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) to “investigate” its own inefficiency.

Health services continue to stagnate and deteriorate with appalling standards of service in hospitals and health centres. The free medicine scheme, another worthwhile idea run badly, is turning into a disaster. Now FICAC has been called in to “investigate” drug shortages in hospitals.

All of this FICAC investigating might help the ministers pass on the blame to someone else, but it is doing nothing much for the people.

The Tertiary Scholarship and Loans Scheme (TELS) program continues to disenfranchise poor students and their parents by imposing debts on them which they will struggle to pay in the future. A better designed TELS and scholarship program based on means-testing would have brought about better distribution of the benefits and the burden of debt on individual households.

The government of course is spending big on roads. That is a good thing, if this spending is run efficiently. Only a few days ago, the Prime Minister himself was reported demanding that the Fiji Roads Authority deliver results. If the Prime Minister is complaining, how confident can we be that these hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent well?

After all, these funds don’t belong to the FijiFirst party. They belong to the taxpayers. We are the ones who will be repaying the loans taken out to build these roads, for many years to come.

Based on 2013 figures, each woman, man and child in Fiji had a debt burden of about $4440.

A child born today automatically inherits a debt of $4440 upon birth — before they’ve even opened their eyes, grown their first tooth or taken their first steps. This debt figure burden rises with every passing year.

Government debt levels
Government debt stands at about $4.4 billion which is close to 50 per cent of GDP. This means that, like any household that borrows money to spend, we are becoming too deep in debt to be able to borrow any more.

The debt table below shows information government’s Budget Estimates and financial data is sourced from the website of the Ministry of Finance.

These are devastating figures. Remember that government’s actual revenue figures for 2014 and 2015 will only be known next year. So the percentage of debt to actual revenue will undoubtedly increase if government’s income projections are not met (like previous years, when they have not been met).

The government is very proud of its economic growth figures for 2013, 2014 and 2015 years. It is worth noting that this economic growth is much lower than in many Asian countries.

But the real test of our economy will be how it grows when the government stops borrowing and spending. The government’s own projections for economic growth has been revised downwards to 3.5 per cent in 2016 and about 3 per cent in 2017 and 2018.

Growing debt repayment requirements mean government has to find new sources of income to pay interest and principal every year. In the end, this can only be paid for if taxes increase or Government spending decreases. Either way, it is the people who will bear the consequences. It is the poorest people who will bear the biggest burden if Government services decline.

In the 2016 budget, the FijiFirst government was forced to break its election promises. In the election they promised they would keep the policy of zero VAT on basic food items. In the 2016 budget they broke that promise. Most people see little change in their household bills and the poor people only see their costs rising.

People think that the Opposition just opposes government policies and offer no alternative.

But the NFP, in its manifesto, had carefully proposed a reduction in VAT to 10 percent, leaving VAT on basic food items at zero. We had a credible plan to reduce wasteful expenditure that would not have created much pain for our lowest-income households.

The government recently claims that poverty has been reduced. Even if that is true, for the amount of public money it has spent, the reduction is very small. Unfortunately, the government has kept its statistics secret for so long that it is getting harder to trust their objectivity.

It seems that the government will only release the statistics that show good things. But, as Professor Wadan Narsey recently pointed out in an article in The Fiji Times, all the information should be available, for everybody to see, as soon as it is ready. In that way, all of us — the government, the Opposition, NGOs and the public — can work together to achieve the best solutions.

Of course these claimed reductions in poverty are before the 2016 Budget. Now the cost of basic food items has gone up, wages are not increasing and a huge number of people remain unemployed. So it is the next set of figures that will be the real test. Will the government delay releasing them if they aren’t good?

Economic management in Fiji has become dictatorial, confused and inconsistent, mostly reflecting a complete lack of understanding of how business and markets work.

Tax and tariff policies seem to veer in different directions in every budget, depending on which favoured businesses the government is listening to at the time. Meanwhile some businesses are being forced by the government to do business they do not want to do.

For example, government is forcing private pharmacies to participate in government’s free medicine scheme, even though these pharmacies cannot even recover their costs in doing so. If the government wants services from private business it should, like the rest of us, be required to pay those businesses properly and fairly.

The culture of servility and sycophancy has become so deeply ingrained under the FijiFirst government that some business people behave like obsequious fools. Few are prepared to criticise government policies.

Big businesses who are benefitting from bad government policies will pay the price in the long term. Their sycophancy and servility will to perpetuate a culture of bad governance, favouritism and ill-will. If the next government does not favour them, they will be the first to be demanding good governance — but it will be too late.

Deception
The economic and political deception of the FijiFirst government is likely to cost the country and our people dearly.

First, there is the political deception that has been created that Fiji has a “true democracy” under the 2013 Constitution. The government is forever talking about its “true democracy” — in its speeches, statements, even its advertisements. If this is “true democracy”, I wonder why it has to remind us so often? Is it because perhaps people aren’t convinced?

Many of Fiji’s international partners, including the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), have called for a review of the 2013 Constitution. They know it does not promote genuine democracy. The separation of powers, the derogations in the Bill of Rights, the ouster clauses, and the existence of draconian decrees all render the Constitution undemocratic. More importantly, they make it unsustainable in the future.

The dubious claim that this Constitution ensures “equal citizenry” (another favourite mantra of the government) is another deception. Just because we are now calling everyone a “Fijian” does not ensure the protection of minorities and other ethnic groups.

The reality on the ground is a stark reminder to many that there is no such thing as equal citizenry. Appointments in the civil service, government boards, and other government-controlled organisations, and selective awarding of government contracts continue to be based on patronage.

Recently the Fiji Sun has reported that the government is investigating staff members of Fijian Holdings Ltd (a private company) for “political agendas”. Apparently their crime is not to support the FijiFirst political agenda!

In the Ministry of Education, some staff have been promoted 5-7 ranks upwards in a single sweep, bypassing many qualified and experienced people. Similar cases have been highlighted in the Health Ministry.

This is a result of the lost independence of state institutions responsible for these appointments. The provision in the Constitution that all appointments below permanent secretary level will be done by the respective permanent secretaries, in consultation with the minister responsible, is a recipe for disaster. Ministers will demand senior positions for their cronies and yes-men.

Already we see ministers deciding which people are recruited, promoted and sacked at their whim. The current reform of the civil service by creating a Ministry of Civil Service and removing the Public Service Commission as an independent institution responsible for the civil service, is going to spell further disaster in the future and will be difficult to reverse.

Flawed economic policies, aimed mostly at looking good for politics, will cause much economic pain in the future. Fiji’s economy has grown modestly in the past few years on the back of remittances, tourism, borrowing and tax cuts. But borrowing and tax cuts are one-time tricks. After the so-called asset sales to fund spending in 2016, what will be the next rabbit that government will pull from its hat? That is when the economic pain will deepen, which will take a long time to reverse.

Can we get out of this rut? It is time to change course
The time for dictatorship and arrogance is over. It is now time for dialogue, it is time for bipartisanship in Parliament, it is time to free the media, and it is time to engage meaningfully with our development partners. It is time for the people to demand better. Moreover, it is time to change course.

The NFP has always advocated dialogue as a means of resolving national issues and our political record shines proudly untarnished from this approach.

I once again call upon the Prime Minister to shed his government’s patronising and dictatorial attitude and initiate a process of sincere dialogue on key national issues such as the review of the Constitution, a process to address the grievances of the indigenous Fijian people, the repealing of draconian decrees, and a process to address the deep concerns within the sugar industry.

Telling Opposition leaders to “jump in a deep pool”, telling gay people to shift to Iceland and shackling the nation with debilitating debt is not much of a political legacy.

True nationhood, common and equal citizenry can only be achieved if we work together. Reciprocity, humanity and national interest should be our guiding values if we are to succeed at bipartisanship, and not arrogance and condescension.

We continue to offer our hands for bipartisanship. It is now up to the government to reciprocate with sincerity and respect, in the national interest.

Dr Biman Prasad is an economist and former university professor. This article was first published in The Fiji Times on Saturday, 30 January 2016 and has been supplied to Asia Pacific Report. Two days after publication in the Times, the National Federation Party was suspended from Parliament.

Fiji’s National Federation Party suspended