Fiji Elections: Two Men, Two Parties, Two Visions

PARLIAMENT UPDATE.  At  its first sitting, Dr Jiko Luweni was re-elected Speaker, Veena Bhatnagar Deputy, and  Sikiveni Rabuka Leader of the Opposition. He rejected the Standing Orders which decides parliamentary procedures, saying they removed the bipartisan approach, the right of the public to petition, and the right of the Opposition to chair the Public Accounts Committee.The orders were passed. FijiFirst has 27 seats and SODELPA-NFP 24. There are ten women MP's, the highest ever.

pn182

In many Western democracies the major political parties that once represented a left and right wing have moved towards the centre. Not so in Fiji, on the country's most critical political issue, race, the centre is empty, although the emergence of two of the minor parties, Unity Fiji and HOPE, appear to have been steps in a centre direction. Unsurprisingly, despite their moderate policies and well known leaders, they failed to attract more than a handful of votes, and will probably not contest the next election.

Fiji is a deeply divided country whose leaders have two very different visions. Sixty years after Independence some colonial legacies remain and do not mix well with notions of "true" democracy.

Sitiveni Rabuka's SODELPA wants a return to ethnic Fijian (Taukei) supremacy and the resurrection of institutions created or enlarged by the British. ("Indirect rule" which protected and extended indigenous chiefly institutions was cheaper than direct colonial government.) There is a place for Indo-Fijians, as there was with the British, but not where or when they could threaten Taukei supremacy. 

Three of the country's four coups (two led by Sitiveni Rabuka) are sharp reminders of the limits to which Indo-Fijians can go. I think it was Stuart Firth who said, "Democracy works only as long as Fijians win."

Voqere Bainimarama's vision is very different. He probably grew up thinking like Rabuka. The families of the two men are close and their career paths are similar, but somewhere along the road Bainimarama began to unroll  and shape his vision of a very different Fiji, one where Taukei land, language and culture are protected, but where all citizens are treated equally, and by this he means treated the same.

It is, of course, impossible to know whether either man is sincere in his stated beliefs. Some doubt Rabuka's "rebirth" as a committed Christian. But he is no longer a philanderer and has apologized to the nation for the distress caused by his 1987 coups.

Some say that Bainimarama is dominated by his Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, that FijiFirst's policies are not really his, and that he is still seeking to cover his real reasons for the 2006 coup. They say the coup was far less about rescuing the nation, and far more about protecting his own back.  I do not think so.

My impression is that both men are genuine and know exactly what they are doing. Their means differ but their end visions are similar. Both want to make peace and stability a permanent Fiji reality.

Both men also have very different public styles. Rabuka is calm and presentable, every inch a gentleman— and therefore most persuasive to the undecided. Unfortunately, others in SODELPA are far less gentlemanly, though new party whip  —and possible future party leader— Lydia Tabuya, is cut from the same cloth as Rabuka.

Bainimarama has two styles. Unchallenged, he is one of the boys, full of fun and laughter; challenged, he shows he has not adjusted well from military life and comes across as a unsmiling, impatient and sometimes aggressive sergeant-major (or its naval equivalent). This style may win arguments but is unlikely to win friends or the undecided.

These contrasting visions and styles were evident the VitiFM StraightTalk debate  chaired by Vijay Narayan held just before the Elections. 

The debate lasted nearly two hours and covered many policies and issues. It is well worth listening to when you have time. My summary touches on background and general policy issues but focuses mainly on policies that show their different visions.

Both men spent time accusing the other of events in the past. Rabuka excused his 1987 coup by saying Fiji was not ready for an Indian prime minister, and ducked around Bainimarama's question about whether he would accept one now. Rabuka said, after the coup, he had brought the races together. 

Bainimarama said he had to "clean up the mess" of the subsequent Taukei-led governments, noting in particular the corruption and the Agriculture Scam, and incompetence and corruption in the collapse of the National Bank of Fiji. He said he had done more for Taukei, and more to bring the races together.

They differed on the three constitutions Fiji has had since Independence. Rabuka said the 1990 and 1997 constitutions protected Taukei institutions and land, and had been arrived at by consultation. He claimed the 1997 constitution had not been legally abrogated by the 2013 constitution which Bainimarama had imposed without consultation, removing the communal voting system, the Senate, the Great Council of Chiefs and other Taukei institutions. Bainimarama said there had been consultation —but not with the GCC.

Rabuka seemed to h0ld Bainimarama at least partly responsible for the 2000 Speight-led coup, because part of the Army supported Speight. Bainimarama said Rabuka appeared at the camp with his uniform in his car. He wanted to take over the Army and was lucky he was not arrested. Rabuka said he merely wanted to negotiate. 

The differed also on Qarase's 2006 Reconciliation Bill that would have exonerated Speight. Bainimarama saw him off to life imprisonment for treason, and deposed the Qarase government.

On infrastructure and the economy, Rabuka acknowledged there had been improvement but said capital expenditure was too high, and Fiji was living beyond its means. Bainimarama said only $5 billion had been spent on infrastructure in the 26 years between 1980-2006, compared with $7 billion in the 12 years since 2006.  Rabuka said he would reduce the size of government to free up capital works and privatise loss-making Radio Fiji and TV.

Asked how would they increase wealth over the next four years, Rabuka pointed to the sad state of the sugar industry, and said he would encourage agro-based industries. Bainimarama claimed he had already increased wealth and welfare, pointing to the increase in teacher and doctor numbers, the increase of the tax threshold to $30,000, and the $1,000 grants to landholders to build businesses on their own land.

Vijay Narayan said some people thought Taukei land was under threat. Bainimarama said section 28 of the 2013 Constitution stated the land could not be sold. Rabuka said that was not enough. The 1997 Constitution had entrenched provisions that could only be changed with the consent of the GCC, Native Lands Trust Board and the Fijian Affairs Board. All was "in Taukei hands." Bainimarama had changed that by removing or neutering these Taukei institutions.

Rabuka said he had also, again without consultation, made Fijian the common name for all citizens. Bainimarama replied there had been consultation, but not with the GCC, and this was done to make all citizens equal.  

Rabuka would restore the GCC "immediately". Bainimarama said they had done without the institution for eight years, and it was "not needed."

Rabuka rounded up by saying Bainimarama's policies were anti-Taukei. Bainimarama had "taken away our institutions" and was trying to dictate to Taukei.

Vijay Narayan asked whether race discrimination had increased since 1980, and what would the two leaders do going forward. Rabuka said that was because of the anti-Taukei legislation. "It had never been that bad before."

Among other things, he wanted to return to race-based scholarships. They were catch-up, positive discrimination. Bainimarama pointed to the increased number of scholarships, saying all discrimination is discrimination, positive or not. We're treating people equally.

Taukei land lease money was previously paid out hierarchical. The NLTB took some, chiefs took more, and little was left for the ordinary landowner. FijiFirst scrapped that. All money is now paid equally to landowners. Bainimarama said the "people wanted a share."

Rabuka said the chiefs took more but most went back to the people. The money was for communal not personal use. His government would probably return to the old system of payments.

Housing was another issue discussed. Bainimarama said they had given many squatters leases, and $10-15,000 grants were available to first home buyers. Rabuka said nothing on squatters and grants but said Government and Councils would help meet land development costs to assist buyers.

On women and children, Rabuka wanted more moral education in schools and parents taking on more responsibility for their children. He would consider bringing back corporal punishment. Bainimarama said they would continue to promote changes in cultural attitudes.

On civil service employment, Bainimarama would stay with the lower 55 year retirement age, saying it made spaces for younger people. Rabuka wanted 60 to be the retirement age, saying older people wanted to work longer.

Rabuka disputed Bainimarama's claim that unemployment is at a ten year low, saying FijiFirst was using different measures.

Vijay Narayan said there was concern about the Opposition proposal to bring in a $5 an hour minimum wage because it could lead to job dismissals. Rabuka said "the textile businesses can afford it."

On national security, Rabuka said they were telling people to stay within the law. SODELPA was helping "all races to hold hands ... When Fiji had Taukei leadership, everyone was secure  (and) race is a fact of life to be accommodated, not eliminated."  Bainimarama said SODELPA's focus on race created instability. "They should be talking about development, not race."

Asked how many seat they expected to win and who they could work with, both said 51. Rabuka could work with anyone if SODELPA had a majority. Bainimarama would work with no one with different policies, and certainly not with SODELPA.

Rabuka asked Bainimarama if he would conduct another coup if FijiFirst loses. Bainimarama replied that the Army and Police guarded the law.

Asked why people should vote for their party, Rabuka said because it exercises good leadership. It is not dictatorial. It seeks involvement in policy-making. SODELPA would govern with compassion, and embrace all religions.  It would "listen to the people." 

I wondered which people.

Bainimarama said people should vote for their future, and the future of their children and grandchildren. They should think of the nation, stability and certainty, before concluding "Look at what we've done."

In the next posting on the elections, we will ask what Government, the Opposition, the losing parties, the media and the public should do to make Fiji a better place over the next four years — and ensure there is not another coup.

-- ACW