Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698081851026.pdf (Solomon Islands)
FRIDAY 08TH AUGUST 2008 The Speaker, Rt Hon.

Sir Peter Kenilorea took the chair at 9.36 am.

Prayers.

ATTENDANCE At prayers, all were present with the exception of the Member for Central Honiara.

STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS Hon SIKUA: Mr Speaker, I had initially planned to make a statement today of my government’s business for next week.
We do have a full legislative program ahead of us, one that involves a number of bills, including the Supplementary Appropriation Bill and also a number of motions.

However, as Members and the public are aware, the Opposition believed that it is in the best interest of Solomon Islands that confidence in this government be tested on the floor of parliament and that important motion has been set down for today.
Conscious of this, and also the importance of upholding the dignity of this parliament, I propose to delay the statement of my government’s proposed legislative program and allow parliament to first determine the matter of confidence raised by the Opposition.

On that basis, Mr Speaker, I will not make any statement of government business today, but advise the House that I will look forward to making that statement as Prime Minister at the earliest opportunity next week.
Mr Speaker: Thank you Prime Minister for making that explanation.

In keeping with my previous ruling and the views of the Parliamentary House Committee, I ask the Clerk to call the next item of business.

MOTIONS Motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister Mr TOSIKA: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the opportunity and I would like to thank the House Committee for allowing me to table this motion today.
I Isaac Enoch Tosika, Member of Parliament for West Honiara Constituency, do now rise on behalf of the people of Solomon Islands, the grassroots, the oppressed and the overlooked, the street man, women and children in the urban centers and the rural marginalized on this 8th day of August 2008, with the help of God Almighty, the Deliverer and the Sustainer, and in whom our future’s prosperity lies, do now move that this Parliament resolves it has no confidence in the Prime Minister of Solomon Islands, Honorable Dr. Derek Sikua for the following reasons: Before I begin to elaborate on the reasons, Mr Speaker, I would like to inform the Prime Minister and this Parliament that I have no personal hatred towards him nor his Ministers.
In fact I can assure the Prime Minister that I will be speaking as though it were from one brother to another and one leader to another, who both have a common responsibility of preserving national interest.

What will be heard during the debate, Mr. Speaker, is not about character assassination.
The vote that will happen today if the Prime Minister does not resign gracefully here on the floor of Parliament, is a conscience vote acknowledging what we know and believe to be the truth without compromising our principles that we have been mandated to represent.

This is with integrity as an example to the people of Solomon Islands on how we can overcome differences, face the truth and accept the consequences with virtual respect for one another humanity and understanding towards our common destiny.
This is also to make public the fact that the Opposition is not hungry for power.

I repeat, also to make public the fact that the Opposition is not hungry for power.

We are not pressing to topple or take over the Government.
We are only requesting that if you are committed to servicing the needs of this country, simply replace your leadership from within the Government without fear or favour, shame or embarrassment for a decision that must be made in the national interest to protect the dignity of the Office of the Prime Minister and preserve the integrity of the Prime Minister’s post on behalf of the nation it represents.
We are not too proud to say that we have accepted and taken note of the legitimate concerns raised by our Parliamentary Colleagues relating to the urgency of what needs to happen if our nation is to progress, in view of the ongoing political turmoil, therefore realize the importance of political unity and stability for the purpose of enhancing and furthering Solomon Islands development interests.
We stand for the majority of ordinary Solomon Islanders, as part of a democratic process, to ensure that the Prime Minister and his Government delivers on its promises to improve the welfare and livelihood of the people as rightfully stipulated in CNURA’s policy statement, and also premised on the fact that the Opposition is the alternative government with every right to perform its checks and balances on the performance of the present Government.
2 At this juncture Mr Speaker, I would now like to elaborate on the substance and reasons for this motion against the leadership of the Prime Minister.

The wrong quality of leadership is the primary reason for this motion, Mr Speaker, based on the conduct, decisions and false promises of the Prime Minister that has direct bearing on the coordination of the Cabinet Ministers and handling of the nation’s affairs, as with any team it can only be as good as the leadership that it is guided by.
First and foremost Mr. Speaker, the conduct of the Prime Minister as leader of the executive Government during the last sitting of Parliament demonstrated in full view of the public, that he is an irresponsible leader whilst attending Parliament while being incapable of presenting himself in a dignified manner and falling asleep during the Motion of Sine Die then having to be escorted from Parliament by his Close Protection Personnel without ever offering any explanation or a public apology as if to indicate that such behavior is excusable.
Without any other justification and for this reason alone the Prime Minister should humbly and gracefully tender his resignation for bringing national disgrace upon the Office of the Prime Minister and disrepute to the nation as head of the Executive Government, totally demeaning his status as a leader and disrespecting the people he has been elected to represent.
Further, Mr. Speaker to add insult to injury, the Prime Minister is facing serious traffic charges that although were committed prior to becoming a Member of Parliament, are still unresolved.

As a Prime Minister representing a sovereign state, he is obliged as a matter of duty to see the matter settled in the shortest possible time.
Instead the Prime Minister has chosen not to attend his Court Hearings thereby causing the Magistrate to order that a bench warrant would be executed on the Prime Minister should he again fail to present himself at the next hearing.

Such miserable conduct demonstrates poor leadership qualities and is an embarrassment to the nation for the simple reason that as leaders we should lead by example, and the example being set by the Prime Minister is one that cannot be followed.
Therefore, if he is to stand by his own words in last year’s motion when he stated that: “This country definitely needs good leadership”, then the Prime Minister needs to explain to the people of Solomon Islands what is good about his leadership and how does his behaviour reflect the kind of leadership that the country needs when he conducts himself in such a disrespectful manner.
Mr Speaker, even some of the Prime Minister’s most senior Cabinet and Caucus Members have complained behind his back about the ineffectiveness of his leadership and inability to make decisions even referring to the Member of North East Guadalcanal as a compromise Prime Minister.

How can the Prime 3 Minister advance the nation’s interests when he cannot co-ordinate his own Cabinet?
Recently the Prime Minister sacked one of his backbenchers for no justifiable reason, only later offer to re-instate him for political expediency.

Such indecisiveness, M. Speaker, is a risk to the well being of this nation.

Take for example the recent Telekom strike.

Why did the Prime Minister hesitate for so long before taking decisive action?

People, businesses the country as a whole had to suffer while the Prime Minister took his time before deciding to act.
Is this the style of leadership we support as leaders to further the national interest and protect the welfare of our people?

Is this style what we were defining last December?

I think not, Mr. Speaker!

Enough is enough!
The Prime Minister should not hide behind his Deputy Prime Minister and other Cabinet Members, he is the President of Cabinet, an Executive Leader of the Government whose task it is to take charge of the situation and provide answers to the many questions now in the minds of the public, otherwise step aside and allow your outspoken Deputy who can never give a straight answer, a chance to deliver on your promises as you have clearly demonstrated that your quality of leadership is well below the standard required to move this country forward.
Mr Speaker, at this juncture, I would like to substantiate why the Prime Minister has lost the confidence of this House and also the respect of the public majority as a result of the poor quality of leadership he has provided during the past eight months which cannot be allowed to continue for the following reasons: 1. including The Prime Minister represents corruption and contradicts the principles of good governance, transparency and accountability based on the fact that the former Finance Minister in the GCC Government was sacked after having misappropriated public funds towards unbudgeted fisheries and agriculture projects by depleting the Government’s cash reserves through over excessive use of contingency warrants to support unbudgeted and questionable projects contracts which were awarded suspiciously outside of normal Government procedures.
Such conduct has re-manifested itself within the CNURA Government as evidence of consistent mismanagement of public funds with a further amount of approximately $40.0 million worth of Government cash reserves having once again been exhausted without implementation of any budgetary provisions soon after the budget sitting of Parliament earlier this year.
As a result, the Prime Minister supported a retaliatory defection that was nothing more than a cover up for the damage done to Government finances by the former Finance Minister.

However, the negative effects 4 2.

3. produced as a consequence of this action, is now being reaped by the Prime Minister and his CNURA Government with insufficient funds to implement their policies which in turn has directly affected the livelihood of individuals and our economic productivity as a nation.
Mr Speaker, the leadership of this Prime Minister totally defeats the purpose of upholding the principles of Good Governance, Transparency and Accountability due to the fact that the formation of the CNURA Government was based on corruption and lies and therefore will not be able to prosper.

Mr. Speaker, $70,000 Imprest for the Prime Minister’s Constituency Tour that exceeds all Parliamentary allowances for constituency tours and amounts to an abuse of public funds.
As per the Parliamentary Entitlements Regulations (PER) Section 9(2) and Appendix A.7 of the PER clearly outlines the annual provisions for constituency allowances, which in the case of the Member for North East Guadalcanal is a total yearly provision of $15,400.00.

How then can the Prime Minister justify the expenditure of $70,000.00 Imprest for a constituency visit that was applied for by his Private Secretary who is also the Prime Minister’s cousin and a political appointee?
Again such conduct by the Prime Minister further serves to expose contradictions between what he has been saying and what he is actually doing in the name of good governance, transparency and accountability.

What hope do the rural and less fortunate people of this country have to advance their interests when they have a Prime Minister who does not respect established regulations and irresponsibly spends public funds?
Mr. Speaker, $4.9 million Secondary School Computers Project which still has not been delivered, but was procured by the Prime Minister himself as the Minister for Education in the former GCC Government and yet still the Prime Minister has not offered an explanation as to why this important project has not been delivered and further why weren’t proper Government procedures adhered to.
There was never a public tender for this project, simply a direct awarding of $5.9 million contract to a local supplier that has, according to the Leadership Code Commission, been implicated in a similar scandal with the Central Bank of Solomon Islands and is currently under investigation by the Commission.

Taiwan reduced the funding assistance to $5.0 million and yet the contract was still awarded based on the three original quotations that all exceeded the funding provided by the Republic of China.
This project, Sir, was established in line with the GCC Government policy vision to support the 5 4.

5. development of our children as the next generation of human resources, and cater for the improvement of our education facilities.
The fact that the Ministry of Education was unable to provide the Opposition with any substantive information and the Prime Minister has chosen to ignore this issue of significant public interest without offering any explanation as to why this project has been delayed until now, is no different to a father neglecting his own children.
Such behavior does not represent the qualities of a leader but rather an individual who is indecisive and hard pressed to stand up for the principles he so often likes to quote to the public that now stand to make him a hypocrite of his own doing.
Mr Speaker, a $3.5 million grant to Isabel Province without Cabinet approval and in the absence of any corresponding budget allocation, is a slap in the face of good governance and a negative reflection upon the Prime Minister’s ability to communicate and co-ordinate with his Cabinet on matters that require dialogue and consultation to ensure effective implementation of government policies.
Without quality leadership, no organization let alone an institution such as Government that represents the public interest can function effectively for the benefit of the people it serves.

The $1.0 million Hotel Bill that your Government has still not sufficiently explained to answer why Members of Parliament were accommodated at the Honiara Hotel and receiving non entitled allowances that are not included in the Parliamentary Entitlements Regulations.
I say this because it is a tradition that people lived in hotels and under the Parliamentary Regulation you are not qualified for drinks or food.

You have to meet it from your own pockets.

And it is only required, may be I am right or not but that two weeks before parliament sits was their requirement but they have over-stayed in the Honiara Hotel before the parliament when parliament sits and I thought that this $1.0 which comes from the taxpayers’ money need to be explained to the people.
This side of the House still submits that this expense was incurred prior to the election of the Prime Minister and if the government says otherwise then they have to substantiate with documentary evidence to account for this expenditure and verify its claims for the simple reason that the Opposition and the general can longer believe the words of the Prime Minister.

6.

$5.0 million Surplus on RCDF allocations.


When I look at the Supplementary Budget I found out that there is an extra $5.0 million on 6 RCDF.

The RCDF of $20 million has been exhausted.

The Government thinks so fit to add on that Code or that Head asking for an extra $5.0 million and that amount of money, which equaled $100,000 for each parliamentarian, has already been paid this week.
It has been paid into the accounts of Members and I do not know the intention but it is clearly an abuse and misuse of public funds.

I thought that the $5.0 million should be used to subsidise the price of rice or increase the code in agriculture for rice production.

Why do we leaders think fit to serve ourself than this nation of Solomon Islands?

This $100,000 for my constituency will be returned to the government.
I will return it to the government because I am not comfortable as you are expending more on that Head.

If we expend less than what is required then we can ask for top-up.

But in this case we are asking for an extra $5.0 million which is unbelievable.

RCDF, unbelievable!

This is the first time in history to increase the amount of money when parliament sits and there is a motion of no confidence being debated now.
This exceeds expenditure of RCDF Head under which this provision is made and has been paid into Members’ accounts this week without the approval of parliament.

In which direction is the Prime Minister leading the country for allowing such mismanagement of government funds and in whose interests is he acting upon?

CW (contingency warrant does not happen in this case.

It can only be utilised in urgency matters.

This matter is not an urgent matter to be paid into our accounts?
If there is any tsunami crisis then you can pay that to tsunami.

That is an urgent matter that you can resolve.

As I have said I am reluctant to have that money because it has been paid into my account without justifications.

7.
7.

The Increase in the price of fuel and rice is being completely ignored by the Prime Minister and his Government, which in essence is a national disgrace because it demonstrates total disregard for the welfare of the people by using such lame excuses as “it is a Global Phenomena” and therefore “we cannot do anything”.
For every problem there is a solution and for those who are interested to look, the Prime Minister is setting a bad precedence in stating that we are unable to comprehensively address national issues that affect the well being of our people.

Comparing ourselves to developed countries and stating that “if they are having difficulties then how can a third world nation be expected to cope”, is 7 8. simply a sign of weak leadership that uses lame excuses to justify a failure to act.
Before one can overcome any obstacle the first step is to maintain a positive attitude supported by a well thought out strategy to reach the intended objective, otherwise one is defeated even before he begins.

The Prime Minister has defeated himself and his Government on the issue of the soaring costs of food and fuel that are becoming further inflated as a result of our devaluing dollar, increasing level of imports and mismanagement of the economy.
A Prime Minister who does not have the necessary qualities to address such an urgent priority as the livelihood and welfare of those who are dependant on his leadership to champion their cause, should also admit defeat on the floor of this house.

That would at least provide him with the dignity of being known as an honest leader rather than a hypocritical one who continually misleads himself and the CNURA Government as being people-centred while behaving to the contrary as the country spirals into poverty.
The other point, Mr Speaker, is the Peace and Reconciliation Process, which has been used as nothing more than a political tool by the Prime Minister and his Deputy.

A double edged tool of convenience for the purpose of placating those who have been affected and a political weapon to attack and speculate the involvement of the Opposition Leader in so- called shady deals without any consideration for those who are being used as scapegoats in their insensitive political game of cat and mouse.
According to the CNURA policy statement reconciliation is “the number one priority” of the Government with a proposed measure of “reconciliation amongst individuals, families, tribes, communities and constituencies/wards” first within individual Provinces of Guadalcanal and Malaita, then between both of these Provinces before reconciling Guadalcanal and Malaita Provinces with the remaining Provinces, Honiara City Council and the National Government.
This policy intention is aligned to our cultural and traditional practices which would certainly be a positive step towards national healing and reconciliation.
Instead the Prime Minister endorsed a move to circumvent the process outlined in his Government’s policy statement and hosted the National Reaffirmation Ceremony that by virtue of its definition, is an admission from the Government of failing to meet its own policy objective and therefore was obliged to reaffirm to the nation its commitment the towards implementation of this promised initiative would be delayed for an unspecified period.
reconciliation process admitting indirectly the the 8 Mr Speaker, yes while we acknowledge and support the intent of the Reaffirmation and Healing Ceremony held at Lawson Tama on the second of last month, the question still remains over how the victims of this crisis perceive what the Government expects to achieve as a result of this ceremony and what framework does it support to promote the healing process.
As a stand alone event, it will have only served to appease the public as a surface indication that the Government is doing something, when in fact underneath it is hollow and without substance.

What good is there in leadership that promotes national healing and then allows the Deputy Prime Minister to publicly raise negative speculation against former combatants based on unfounded accusations openly contradicting and further frustrating the entire process again without an explanation or apology?
I say this because it is a part of the rehabilitation policy of the government to pay compensation package to the ex-combatants.

It is specifically mentioned in your policy.

Such behavior only proves the absence of effective leadership and defeats the purpose of what reconciliation and healing is all about while placing in jeopardy social reform and general stability, by politicizing sensitive issues and making a mockery of the country’s peace process.

9.

10.

Mr. Speaker, Tsunami Rehabilitation.


What has the Prime Minister done to ensure the rehabilitation of tsunami affected areas following his Governments promise to fund the reconstruction and rehabilitation of damaged infrastructure, particularly in Gizo township where during his visit earlier this year the Prime Minister made various pledges which he now cannot meet as a result of mismanaging the national budget and lack of specific budgetary provisions?
Our people are still suffering in limbo and it is a slap in the face of human dignity to give false hope.

Such blatant disregard for the welfare of these victims is another example of blatant neglect by the Prime Minister, who seems to be incapable of keeping track of his commitments and continuously fails to make consistent decisions.
Let me now go on to the point on Free Education that has been earmarked for introduction in next year’s budget after being secured at great cost by the GCC Government, but has not received the attention it deserves as a priority for nation building and the development of our future generation.

What provisions have been put into place to prepare for the introduction of this important policy objective focusing on the Prime Minister’s very own field of expertise?
No progress has been made on this initiative since it was raised at the beginning of the year as a policy 9 objective.

There is no legislative provision and no consultation with the various stakeholders.
If the Prime Minister’s conduct and lack of leadership in the handling of other educational sector issues such as last year’s teachers’ strike and the prolonged supply of secondary school computers is anything to go by, then one of this country’s most important development priorities will be left by the wayside as another good idea which the current leadership has failed miserably to act upon.

Mr Speaker, what confidence can the public have in a Prime Minister who confuses his priorities?
Mr. Speaker, this motion is dedicated to the truth; the truth about what is happening within the Government at this point in time as a result of the failure by the Prime Minister to act in accordance with the principles and ethics that he has undertaken to responsibly uphold as such should be expected of him as a national leader.
Unlike those who choose to personalize issues then speculate over lies and unfounded allegations in a desperate attempt to score political points without consideration for the consequence of their actions, this motion is the voice of the people who have no voice, the cry of those who cry in vain, and the conscience of our people who question whether having a conscience really makes any difference at all.
These are the people whom we represent in this Parliament, and the decisions we make, whether good or bad, right or wrong invariably affects the lives of these people, our people which is a great responsibility for us as leaders that should never be ignored.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the current Prime Minister has lost sight of his priorities as a leader which places at risk the future peace and prosperity of our beloved nation.
This is not because the Prime Minister is a bad person or because he has intentionally chosen to lead this country astray as a result of his neglect, no, Mr. Speaker.
It is because the leadership qualities of this Prime Minister are unsuited to the situation that we now find ourselves in and although there will be varying opinions over this statement, one only has to look back over the past eight months, even beyond that of the last 30 years to confirm that this is the wrong leadership in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It is a well known fact among the general public that this Prime Minister was a compromised candidate in the lead up to his election as Prime Minister.

That is the fundamental problem with this leadership and which is why it cannot succeed.

As a compromise Prime Minister, the Honourable Member for North East Guadalcanal will find it extremely difficult to command the respect and support of his Cabinet for the purpose of coordinating the implementation and delivery of government programs.
That is the simple truth about this Prime 10 Minister and his Government.

While this can be denied at varying degrees by Members on the government side of the House, they will only be denying what they have already admitted, both to themselves and to those of us who they have shared their personal views with.
Whether or not the members of the CNURA Government have already realized it, the facts speak for themselves, with a compromise Prime Minister you have become a compromise Cabinet Minister and a compromise Backbencher.

What you need to ask yourselves is what have you compromised in order to fulfil your objectives?
The truth will always prevail, and if a compromise was reached in the best interests of the country, then surely you all have nothing to be concerned about for you will surely reap the benefits of what you have sown.
If, on the other hand you have compromised yourselves for any other interest or reason, then regardless of your numerical strength or how hard you try and how clever you think you might be, you will surely fail and eventually, whether it be sooner or later, the Prime Minister will be replaced as a consequence of his weak, ineffective and hollow leadership.
The Opposition side of the House, Mr. Speaker, together with the public at large, have monitored and observed every word and action of the CNURA Government under the leadership of the Member for North East Guadalcanal, and it is our firm belief based on the facts at hand, that no meaningful progress will be achieved under the leadership of the current Prime Minister, as it is a Government that represents a village which is full of chiefs but without any villagers.
Further, Mr Speaker, in order for these leaders to maintain their solidarity, too many compromises have been made that is of no benefit to the nation and the people they represent, meaning that regardless of how successful the Prime Minister and his Government will try to make things appear to project that all is well, the precedence has already been set over the past eight months and will be difficult to alter as a result of the many compromises that have been made in order for the Prime Minister to get this far while allowing the country to spiral into poverty, Mr Speaker Sir.
Mr Speaker, motion after motion in this House claims to represent the cries of the people, yet successive governments since independence have failed to comprehensively address the development aspirations of the people whom they were chosen to represent until it all collapsed in the year 2000.

Now it is the year 2008 and as leaders we need to ask ourselves, have we learned?

Are we ready to make the sacrifices that are required of us as leaders to move our nation forward?
Or do we still depend on the handouts that are offered to us as compromise for our allegiance and support towards anything other than our people and our country?

11 In the absence of firm, honest and cohesive leadership that is void of a handout mentality, this country will again be on the verge of suffering from the internal collapse of our fragile unity that we have been striving to regain and preserve as a symbol of our traditional heritage and culturally diverse identity.
This motion, Mr Speaker, belongs to the people of Solomon Island who believe in the Solomon Islands and what the leadership of this country should represent.
We are a unique people and therefore cannot be made to be anything but who we are as a nation that is united in striving to develop our resources, recover and learn from our mistakes and with the assistance of our development partners enter modern society without compromising the belief in ourselves that together we can set aside our differences and move forward.

A selfish and proud attitude will only serve to prevent us from realizing our true potential.
Mr Speaker, as leaders we are required to understand humility and what it means to be humble.

This is the message that the Opposition would like to convey to the Government and people of the Solomon Islands in moving this motion.
We are not concerned about winning or losing as we have already won, may be not in numerical strength but on the principle that our conscience is clear and our hearts are open, which is why we will expect all Members of Parliament who participate in the debate of this motion to express yourself honestly for nothing less other than the sake of our nation and the future of her people, so that the truth can be heard for the benefit of all that is honest and all that is just, and all that have faith.
Therefore Mr. Speaker, I hereby humbly beg to move.

Mr Speaker: Honorable Members, before I allow debate I wish to remind all Members to adhere to the rules of debate when making your contributions.

I realize that this type of motion is always sensitive and so I would endeavor to give as much leeway to Members as possible in terms of the contents of the speeches.
However, I will not allow any comment or inference that, in my view, is in direct to the Standing Orders, particularly Standing Order 36, which I am sure all Members are aware of.

Having said that, I trust leaders of our beloved nation representing our people, most of whom may well be following these proceedings today, will debate in a responsible and professional manger, and avoid diminishing the integrity and reputation of this honorable house.
12 (The motion is open for debate) Mr WAIPORA: Mr Speaker, I will be very brief so that others can have time to speak on this very important motion as well.

Sir, I thank you for allowing me to speak on this very important motion.

I must also thank the Honorable Member of Parliament for West Honiara for bringing this motion before Parliament for its deliberations today.
At the outset, I must make it precisely clear to all the Honorable Members and the people of this nation that this motion does not belong to the Parliamentary Official Opposition.

But it belongs to the 99% of the population of Solomon Islands.

Hon Huniehu: Mr Speaker, point of order.

This is an honorable parliament and so we must not unleash statements that are not proven.

The Member who has just sat down is claiming that 99% of the population of Solomon Islands supports this motion.
No way in the world.

Where did you find that information?

Can you please explain that to Parliament?

Mr Waipora: Mr Speaker, I cannot withdraw what I have said.

(laughter) We, on this side of the House, are just their mouth-piece to pass on to this Parliament the message that our people who voted the present 48 MPs into this Honorable House are demanding the Prime Minister the removal of If it was a motion belonging to the Office of the Official immediately.
Opposition, Mr Speaker, it would have been a motion to dissolve this Parliament to allow our people to go back to elections to elect a new and fresh Parliament.

Mr Speaker, in December last year more than half of whom are now in the government side had deserted us and got Prime Minister Sogavare and his government out of office to have a new Prime Minister.
That has happened but it was believed that it was a wrong move and so we nominated the MP for Temotu Nende to contest the election of Prime Minister in an attempt to have the GCCG continue in office but we lost to the CNURA candidate who is the present Prime Minister.

We also nominated the MP for West Makira to contest the election of Deputy Speaker but we were again defeated.

So about eight months 13 ago this side of the House had suffered three defeats, and that is why we were left with 10 and now 8.
Mr Speaker, I am trying to recall and remind us of these events, Sir, because all along we on this side of the House were unsuccessful in all our attempts to regain leadership.

So we have a good track record of defeats.

Therefore, anyone with a good state of mind would agree that it is nonsense for the Opposition to move this motion of no-confidence especially when only eight of us are on this side of the House, and also of our recent good track of defeats.
However, Mr Speaker, while the Prime Minister and his Government are enjoying their times, the Opposition Group was having hard times with pressure from people who are demanding the removal of the Prime Minister immediately, hence this motion.

To be frank with the Honorable Prime Minister, the reason for the people demanding us to remove him from his office is that he is not capable of leading this nation any longer.

In fact, Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister is not leading.
He is being led by certain members of his high powered group, which the Prime Minister himself boasted of at the first meeting of his election as Prime Minister eight months ago.

Furthermore, Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister is giving his listening ears to foreigners much more than listening to the voices of Solomon Islanders; and needless to mention the Prime Minister had lost control over his Ministers.

(hear, hear) This is a fact that no one would be able to deny, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker, to say the least, the country is hitting bottom rock now, and so we are in great trouble and this trouble lies squarely and entirely on leadership, and therefore we cannot afford to allow the present leadership to continue in power to rule.

They will damage our country and people.

To say that eight months is not long time enough for the government to implement its policies is a very vague and lame excuse for such a high powered group of leaders to make, Mr Speaker.

It is a total fallacy.


Since the 2008 Budget was passed seven months ago, there were no signs or progress of the implementation of the programs of the government’s policies, Mr Speaker.

As such the people are frustrated to the extent that they even burn the CNURA Policy document.

Mr Speaker, the motion of no-confidence that was moved against the former Prime Minister last year was a personal and character assassination one.
It contained nothing but personal hatred against the former Prime Minister, the former attorney general and some members of this group.

But this one is much 14 more concerned on the non-delivery of services to the people today.

The blame for this can only be put to the leader, the Prime Minister.

He is the head of the Government and so the Prime Minister himself is the government and that is why he must be blamed for what is happening at present.

Mr Speaker, leadership is like a fish.


If you buy a fish from an eskie at the market but the head of the fish is bad the whole fish is bad.

In the very same token, if the head of the government is no good the whole organization is no good.

This is what is happening with our government now, Mr Speaker.
I have no doubts in my mind that my honorable colleagues as national leaders should not only understand but also agree that what I am trying to raise here are true and deserve the ousting of the Prime Minister.

Mr Speaker, because this motion belongs to the people, right now they are listening to us eagerly to hear the result of the motion.

In fact they are listening out and longing to hear their Members of Parliament supporting this motion because their expectation is that this motion must be passed.
So it is all up to you now, Mr Speaker.

Will you listen to the call of your people through this motion?

For us the new comers to this Parliament, may I sound out this warning to us that if we harden our hearts and turn a deaf ear to the call of this motion we will be having a hard time with our voters in 2010.

Mark my words, Mr Speaker!


Mr Speaker, because the leadership that you are clinging on to now is failing miserably to deliver services to our people who are unhappy today, for what good reason then are you going to vote against the wishes of your voters?

Remember if you are going to go against your conscience and vote against this motion, you will be the UNHAPPIEST PERSON in the world.

(laughter) With those few remarks, Mr Speaker, I support the motion.

Thank you.
Thank you.

Hon HUNIEHU: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute to this very important motion.

I also would like to thank the mover of the motion who has seen the wisdom of moving this motion and also the Member who has just sat down.

The object of moving motions of no confidence in any parliament in the world is to convince the other side of the House so that you can attract their support to unseat the sitting Prime Minister.
Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, I must admit that I was not convinced one bit of any of the statements and remarks made by those two speakers.

I thought Mr Speaker, that this motion was moved against the Leader of the Opposition himself, because most of the issues that were mentioned by the mover of the motion were issues that emanated when the 15 Leader of Opposition was Prime Minister.

So why should we waste our time talking about issues of that government.

That is the first point I would like to make.


The second point I would like to raise here is that in my humble opinion, the Opposition is a total political risk for Solomon Islands.

I would not support any motions to support the Opposition taking over the leadership of this country.
The very reason why there is a new government now in formation led by the present Prime Minister was because the people of Solomon Islands totally rejected the previous government’s policies and actions and its leadership style.

It was not acceptable or comfortable with the people of Solomon Islands.
During the last two years, Mr Speaker, if I may say, if you look at the print media, overseas and the local media, as well as the websites, all academics and people of Solomon Islands were hoping that the last government should be kicked out of office as soon as practically possible.

And it happened.
And it happened.

I was the one who was supposed to move that motion, and at that time I did not have 8 Members of Parliament supporting the motion, but I have a lot of people in Solomon Islands who were sympathetic to that motion and I have more than 20 Members of Parliament supporting that motion.

But I humbly and with humility withdraw the motion.

The mover of the motion this morning is asking us to be humble.
What sort of humility is he talking about when he only has 8 Members supporting this motion and now feeling very confident that it will be successful?

The object of moving any motions of no confidence in any parliament in the world is ensuring you have the number to unseat a sitting government.

If you are not sure by signatories and by commitment that you do not have the number to unseat a sitting government this motion is a total waste of Parliament’s time.
You do not have the number and you will never have the number because the substance of the motion of no confidence was inadequate, and could not even convince a standard six kid in the village.

Mr Speaker, what this country needs at the moment is all of us Members of Parliament working together as a united front to resolve the problems, the crisis that we are facing, and not continue to divide Solomon Islands with votes of no confidence.
I want to tell this Parliament that one of the issues dividing this nation so much is moving votes of no confidence in this Parliament.

Because every time we talk about ourselves, we talk about issues and talk about regional issues is dividing our people further and further.

This Parliament is supposed to be about uniting the people of Solomon Islands.

We are one people, one constitution, one country, and therefore we must be focused on the leadership that people of Solomon Islands desire.
16 The mover of the motion talked about dignity and honorability, Mr Speaker.

The one now speaking has worked with five Prime Ministers.

I served under five Prime Ministers, Mr Speaker, and I understand what you are talking about - dignity, honorability.

I could not find any reasons why we should believe that the present Prime Minister is a man without dignity.

I had already tested that.

That is not true, and we must not mislead the people of Solomon Islands on these things.
As I have said, Mr Speaker, I think this is a credible government that the people of Solomon Islands should have more confidence on this government than the opposition.

That is why I stand here to once again repeat and to tell the people of Solomon Islands that the opposition in Solomon Islands is a great political risk and we should never, never allow them to lead this country again.
That is the simple truth and message that is proven, not like the MP for West Makira who said that 99½% of the people of Solomon Islands support this motion.

I think it must be the dead people.

No, not at all.

I can tell you that even 1% of people of Solomon Islands may not support this motion.

The investors, the aid donors, the people of Solomon Islands are saying enough is enough.

What kind of Parliament is Solomon Islands to move votes of no confidence every six months?
Is this why this provision was put in the constitution to move votes of no confidence every six months?

No, Mr Speaker.

The reason for moving a vote of no confidence on the Prime Minister must be premised on only one part, and that is because he lost the number game, may be through the resignation of his Ministers or by physically seeing that he has no support.

But just look at those of us sitting in here, our number is more than your number.
I want to tell people of Solomon Islands, Mr Speaker, that the reason this government came into power was to rebuild the confidence that was lost by the last government.

Mr Speaker, this government is to create trust once again that was lost by the last government.

It is to positively re-engage with RAMSI, an aspect that was lost by the previous government.

It is to create conduciveness to advance rural development in this country.
That is why the Prime Minister spends time visiting all the Pacific Island countries mending relationships.

That is a process of reconciliation, building confidence and trust with our partners in the region.

The previous leadership, Mr Speaker, did not want to attend the Forum Meeting in Tonga Mr Speaker.

Is this creating confidence?

Is this creating trust among our neighbors?

No, Mr Speaker, and this is not how we should be leading the people of Solomon Islands.
There is no objectivity in that kind of leadership and that kind of practice.

It is not us in the last opposition that overthrew the former Prime Minister.

Is it true?

17 Your own boys, your own Ministers decided to defect because they could no longer bear with your unworkable policies.

There is too much talking and nothing happening.

Mr Speaker, the leadership style can move mountains and it can cause political change.

Leadership can cause development landscape in the constituencies.
But when leadership runs counter to the interest of the people of any nation, Mr Speaker, chaos will happen.

That is my warning to us in this House at this time.

Sir, I am not going to dwell on personal issues, which the Prime Minister himself will explain to the people of this nation or whatever it is.

The mover talked about corruption, Mr Speaker, but report that to the Police.

Do not report corruption to this Parliament House because who is the judge in here?

My goodness!

It is the Leadership Code.


Who is the presiding judge here to judge corruption cases?

Is it just because of political reasons just to score points?

If you talk about corruption in this Parliament, the Standing Order provides that you come up with facts and nothing but the truth so that we can understand it.

We talk about accountability and transparency.

But who did not do it, Mr Speaker?

Who did not do it?
Who did not do it?

I thought it was you guys on the other side of the House that failed to provide evidence of proper accountability and proper transparency when you were in government.

So why should we revert to that kind of messy administration?

Why should you demand the people of Solomon Islands to revert to the old system?

The old system breeds corruption.

The old system breeds nepotism.


The old system was not accountable, and so why should this Parliament waste its time talking about an opposition group that is definitely going to promote those?

One of the reasons why the people of Solomon Islands did not trust the previous government is because it employed somebody with questionable legal issues.

The former Attorney General was sitting next to the Prime Minister in here.
Mr Speaker, this is an honorable house, a house of dignity and we should not allow that to happen.

In spite of public criticisms from the legal people, from the law association, from almost a majority of people of Solomon Islands that an Attorney General employed by Solomon Islands must be someone with credibility, the last government did the opposite.

I cannot understand why we as leaders did the opposite of what the public wanted us not to do.

Is this leadership, Mr Speaker?


The leadership displayed by the present Prime Minister is one of consultation, one of dialogue, is one of listening to the people, and is one of solving issues on the basis of informed information.

That is the kind of leadership we want in this nation.

18 Sir, I come now to my Ministry.

I was amused, Mr Speaker, of criticisms by the opposition and may be members of the public saying ‘it is Sikua’s Government that came into power and that is why fuel price is increasing’.
Goodness sake!

Why do we have to say such things to the public?

Most people in the rural areas do not understand things like that, and so when you say things like that to them they will tend to believe it.

Mr Speaker, the role of the opposition is not to misinform the public of the country otherwise they will be very disrespectful and so dishonorable, and not fit to be Opposition Members.

Sir, our people know very well why the price of oil has gone up.
The only reason why the price of oil has escalated during the time the CNURA Government took power was because there is an increase in fuel consumption in the industrialized countries in the world.

We know there are many countries in Eastern Europe that used to be under the Soviet Union have now joined up with the EEC becoming more industrialized and so the demand for oil increases.
China needs more oil than ever before because of the industrialization policy, and so as India - the two most populated countries in the world.

They have become very populated and so they need fuel than ever before, and therefore raises the demand for oil for the whole world.

Sir, and not only that but the problems in the Gulf, the war in Iraq, the potential war with Iran and may be Israel, who knows, in the Middle East, are factors affecting the price of crude oil in the world market.
It is not because the CNURA Government came into power.

This must be made absolutely clear to all Solomon Islanders.

It is a global trend and nobody had any powers to control it.

When it happens it will happen, and what we need to do here is to have prudent policies to try addressing it and containing it as much as we can do.

But we cannot solve everything, Mr Speaker, as it is beyond our capability.

That is an explanation I would like to make.


Mr Speaker, as well as that, I would like to add that Solomon Islands is not a producer of oil.

Solomon Islands is not a producer of most of the things we have in the shops but they are imported from overseas.

Mr Speaker, oil is also imported overseas, and we are what they called price takers.

Like it or not we have no choice.

That is simple economics which the Opposition Group could not understand.
Some of them are qualified accountants, some of them have been foreign ministers for a long time, and so they should know this.

That is the reason for the increasing price of oil.

Mr Speaker, if I might say this, this government has plans to systematically address the fuel crisis in this country.

We have to reduce our 19 consumption of oil fossil fuel and we have to depend more on renewable energy so that it reduces our reliance on oil, so that we become more energy efficient.
Sir, when I started preaching about renewable energy in this Parliament some 16, 17, 18 years ago, everyone in here was saying what is this person talking about on this renewable energy and hydro.

My colleagues called me ‘Mr Hydro’.

They did not call me Justice Edward Huniehu.

Whenever parties were held outside there, my colleagues would say ‘Yes Mr Hydro’.

That is my name and I would like to be called ‘Mr Hydro’.

All of you are calling me ‘Mr Hydro’ this time.


I did not know that one day I will become the Minister for Mines and Energy when we are in crisis.

I did not know that but it happens and I am there now.

All I need is the support of the Opposition that if you have some good advices please come and give it to us up there.

Mr Speaker, in trying to address this issue, we have to look at the main users of oil in this country.
That is why with the concurrence of my colleague, the Honorable Prime Minister we took a paper to Cabinet to strengthen the SIEA to address this problem in the future.

The Government had written off $196million worth of loans not paid for some time sitting in the SIEA’s books and this will allow SIEA a clean balance sheet so that it can start moving ahead.
When the World Bank comes in the not- too-distant future, I believe that its focus would be to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel and start looking at developing hydro projects in Ngalimbiu and other parts of Solomon Islands.

We want to make SIEA more efficient and so we have engaged in a memorandum of understanding that will take effect as immediately as possible.

As a result, the World Bank will be providing assistance of more than $25million to Solomon Islands.
We made it absolutely clear to them that we hope in future they should look at price subsidization for the oil issue in Solomon Islands.

This country is made up of 900 islands, Mr Speaker, and the biggest cost we have is nothing but oil, which is traveling costs.

We made it absolutely clear to them that we hope that when the Minister of Finance requests them to provide fuel subsidy funds for Solomon Islands, they should positively look at.
Mr Speaker, we have plans to develop bio-mass together with hydro, bio- fuel by looking at processing our coconut fruits.

Bio-fuel, geothermal, wind-mill – we are experimenting on these in some provinces now, and we are looking at how best we can provide more solar powers to people in the provinces.
Mr Speaker, towards the end of this year, if the Italian funds come and if $10million from ROC comes into the system, we should in a position to install more than 100 projects in community schools throughout the country.

Mr Speaker, is CNURA not doing any work on energy as claimed by the Opposition?

We are doing our job.

For the last 30 years, if you look at the 20 records, no government has ever, ever, ever, ever provided any development assistance to develop these sectors during in the Ministry.
Only now we have a budget allocation of almost $20million.

Turkey, for the first time will be assisting some schools in Solomon Islands to develop solar power and we hope my good Minister for Foreign Affairs will negotiate for more funding from these people.

These are totally new players coming in to Solomon Islands to assist.

Do you know why, Mr Speaker, these countries are coming?
It is because we have started the process of rebuilding confidence and trust with our development partners and therefore positive things will be coming for our people in Solomon Islands.

But every time we argue with our development partners it does us no good.

They are only human beings and so how can they help us, how can they give us more money if we ask them.
I have never seen and heard any foreign policy like that in the rest of my life, Mr Speaker, a policy that is destructive, disputing and not working together with development partners whose money we depend on.

The MP for West Makira said that those on the other side depend on foreign advisors.

Do you think Solomon Islands is a country in the sky?

Can you answer that question?

Do you think Solomon Islands is a country in the sky?
Mr Speaker, Solomon Islands is part of a global network and you cannot just afford to disassociate yourself from interacting with every country in the whole world.

We may have advisors from overseas for good reasons.

Some of these advisors came with advices and promote our projects in their own countries to provide more funding to Solomon Islands.

Mr Speaker, that is on energy and I hope we will achieve our targeted goal.
I made a pledge in Washington that by year 2020 we should at least achieve a 20% reduction for dependence on fossil fuel.

I made this request asking development partners everywhere throughout the world to help Solomon Islands achieve its goal.

I believe if we all work together we could achieve 30, 40 percent of energy reduction.

On mines and minerals, Mr Speaker we are not sitting down doing nothing.
We are doing all our best to attract more investors that are interested in doing prospecting in our country.

As I have said earlier, we have more than 70 prospecting companies doing prospecting throughout the countries for gold, nickel, you name it.

This country is rich in mineral resources, Mr Speaker, and we could be the richest country in the world.

Who knows, Mr Speaker, and we could be depending mineralization as the mainstay of our economy for the next 100 years.
That is why we need many more geologists in the Ministry because all our geologists have joined the private sector for more pay.

21 We are working at institutionalization this Ministry and we are looking at reviewing the Act so that it could be more conducive for those applying for prospecting and eventually mining.

I hope in the next 4 to 10 years we should be opening up another three or four more mines in this country.
When that happens, Mr Speaker, I believe that our trade deficit, our government revenue, our budgetary shortfalls, our liquidity imbalance can be easily resolved.

Sir, we are doing our job and this accusation that this Ministry is not moving forward is totally false and does not have any grounds.

That is the news I would like to tell people of Solomon Islands.

Finally, Mr Speaker, the Parliament of Solomon Islands is a special parliament.
We get hot in here but when we go outside we behave as if nothing ever happens in here.

That is a good spirit, and the kind of spirit we want to maintain.

That is a good spirit and a healthy practice.

In Australia, the opposition is always the opposition and the government is always the government.

They argue inside the chamber and they argue outside too.

We have seen in Taiwan that sometimes they argue in parliament and if that is not enough, they start hitting and shooting at each other.
I saw this in the television.

But in here that is not the case.

This only shows to me that there is no need for a vote of no confidence because we all love each other as brothers and sister.

With those remarks Mr Speaker, I oppose the motion.

Thank you.

Hon SOFU: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this very important motion.

Mr Speaker, I also wish to thank my colleague Member for West Honiara for seeing fit in his wisdom in moving this motion.
Mr Speaker, I feel do not feel like debating this motion but since statements made by the two speakers on the other side needs clarification, I wish to rise and make clarification.

Mr Speaker, those of you sitting on the other side can recognize this side of the House that 39 Members of Parliament or 39 constituencies are supporting the CNURA government.

This means, Mr Speaker, that 39 constituencies are supporting the policies of the CNURA Government.
Mr Speaker, I was very surprised to hear my two colleague members on the other side saying that this motion belongs to the people of Solomon Islands.

My question is, which people?

Who, Mr Speaker?

The one who is speaking now is speaking on behalf of East Kwaio; the Member of Parliament for East Kwaio and Minister for Infrastructure Development.

This is his people’s voice.

He is their voice.


Mr Speaker, I want to inform this Parliament that the Judiciary is functioning; the Public Service is working, and social services going down to the 22 rural areas.

What is wrong Mr Speaker?

What is wrong?

But, I thank the honorable Member for doing his job.

I thank him very much.


Mr Speaker, regarding the hotel bills, as the Minister for Infrastructure Development who is responsible of furnishing and repairing houses, and so forth, the hotel bills were incurred because of the delay by former Ministers in vacating government houses.

It is because of the delay.

Mr Speaker, who caused the delay?

Who, Mr Speaker?

Had they moved out immediately after the new government took over, I do not think the hotel bills would have been that high?
Mr Speaker, in regards to the implementation of the 2008 Estimates, no one in this House can deny that when the Bill is passed it will take time for it to be implemented.

Take for instance, the Ministry of Infrastructure Development which deals mainly with outside work.

You cannot tell Parliament that engineering work has been completed.

No sir.

It will take time.


The engineers go out, they conduct survey, return to the office, and continue the work for another two or three months before fully completing a high quality work.

Sir, if you understand that, you should not be denying us so much.

The ministries are working efficiently.

They are working.

If you go to the industrial site at Ranadi now, the roads there have been maintained and vehicles no longer have any problems traveling on that road.
The Leader of Independent Group is well aware of this.

Mr Speaker, this is an indication that the Ministries are working, and I wish to congratulate them.

Mr Speaker, when presenting the motion the mover also said that the Prime Minister has made false promises.

I laughed when I heard this.

Any organization or any government for that matter when it comes into power will have to outline its policies and plans.

It cannot come up and run the government without any plan.
The same is with the leader of this present government.

In fact, he is telling the people of this nation of his visions for them: “I will do that, I will do this”.

But, Mr Speaker, that those things will happen but they will take some time, slow, and could take a long time to be done, but they can be achieved.

So, sir, for my good Member for West Honiara to say that the Prime Minister is making false promises is wrong, Mr Speaker.

My final point, Mr Speaker, is that enough is enough.
Today our rural people, and I am saying this because I am from the rural areas, are listening to us now.

They have no interest in our political divisions.

Enough is enough.

All they care about and expect of us is to work and provide service to their areas of habitation.

That is their aim.

Our people are not interested at all in what we are saying on this motion, and pointing figures at each other.
Mr Speaker, I appeal to the Opposition that if you have good plans, good ideas to help the government to implement its plans, please, go to the Prime Minister, go to the Ministries to see the Ministers to discuss with them about 23 your ideas so that you can help him to work.

You are a government and an elected Member of Parliament and it is our duty to help manage the country.

With these few remarks, I oppose the motion.

Thank you.
Thank you.

Hon KEMAKEZA: Mr Speaker, I too wish to contribute very briefly to this motion moved by my colleague Member of Parliament for West Honiara, whom I have great respect.

He is a young leader who finds himself on the floor of Parliament, and he still has a long future ahead of him as a young leader of this nation.

He has all the respects from the Member of Parliament for Savo/Russells.
In saying this, Mr Speaker, I am warning him not to be used, because I can tell from his speech that it was written by someone.

Please, as much as possible, the mover, you are a great young leader who is starting your career as a politician, well educated, a successful businessman, and so he has all the respect of his people.

But the problem is that he must not be used to abuse democracy, Mr Speaker.

That is what I can get from him when I listened to his speech when moving the motion.
If he had moved a motion that I expected him to move, he would have the support of the Member of Parliament from Savo/Russells.

And that is none other than a motion for the dissolution of Parliament.

We dissolve Parliament because this is the Eighth Parliament because three Prime Ministers were borne out of this House, who are the MPs for Marovo, East Choiseul and now the MP for North-East Guadalcanal.

There were four motions, a riot, and the list goes on.
If there is motion to dissolve this Parliament then it is fair so that we all go back to our constituencies and try our luck once again.

If we are elected we are lucky to come back but if not then goodbye.

That is the motion I expected to be tabled and not this one.

Mr Speaker, as you know, you are architecture of this country.
This country is one of the nicest countries in the South Pacific full of untouched natural resources, beautiful lagoons and atolls, best waterfalls and mountains with a very small population.

But here we are, talking about how we are going to run this beautiful country with only a small population but yet we continue to fight over it.

Why is that?

We have a good composition of people at the hierarchy now and I must congratulate the Prime Minister, the present one, and not the Leader of Opposition.
If you look at the high ranking of our country, it represents the four districts which the colonial masters put in the past.

And you are one of them, Sir.

There is the Head of State, the Governor General who is from the Eastern District.

We have you, Mr Speaker, from Malaita District and we have the Chief Justice from the Western District.

So what is wrong with having a Prime Minister from the Central District?

This is a good combination and fits in well.


24 These are the three arms of the Constitution and the custodian of the Constitution, more especially to have a Prime Minister from Guadalcanal, the birth place of this House for kindly giving us this place for the capital to be situated on.

It is fitting because he is a Prime Minister that comes from an area, which has the biggest palm oil plantations in this country.
The first gold mine of this country, Mr Speaker, is also from none other than the place of our present Prime Minister, and also the biggest commercial rice, which the Minister of Agriculture is now talking about.

So why not give him a chance as a man from Guadalcanal, a second Prime Minister from Guadalcanal to lead.

How greedy and selfish we are and having unchristian principles!

Do we have any courtesy, Mr Speaker; and a little respect to the courtesy others have accorded to us?
We are now fairly represented, which is a symbol of the unity for our country.

We have a Chief Justice from the Western Province, the Honorable Speaker from Malaita Province, the Prime Minister from Guadalcanal and the Governor General from the East.

If at all there are wise men from the East.

This fits in very well.


But here we are, Mr Speaker, because of selfish reasons, greedy perspectives, factors that are not researched, and petty issues, we want to unseat a man, a leader and a Prime Minister who comes from the Guadalcanal Province.

We have to be very mindful of what we want to do.

If we are to keep the unity of this country, Mr Speaker, let us all respect one another for the good of our people and country.
That is why I said that we have a beautiful country, a country of diversity, Mr Speaker, a country of many islands, which you yourself have brought together into a single nation.

Mr Speaker, if we are not mindful of the votes that is going on then that is destruction for the future of this country.

I want to warn this nation and the leaders of this House.

Mr Speaker, human beings are human beings with failures and successes; we all have our goods and bads.

Who is a perfect MP in here?


Anyone can raise his hand if he is so.

We have all run short of the glory of God, if you still go to church.

So, Mr Speaker, who are you to pinpoint your brother?

The Bible says that you have to remove the speck from your own eyes first before you blame others.

I am telling you this, Mr Speaker, in case the Leader of the Opposition is not aware, to first of all take out the speck from his own eyes, all the wrongs you have committed before you start blaming others.
Earlier on today he said that I should be in prison.

You should be imprisoned first before me.

You should be the first to go to prison, Mr Speaker.

In saying that, this leads me to the second point I want to make, Mr Speaker, and I will be very brief.

As you are aware the Leader of Opposition has been Prime Minister twice.

That is enough, enough!

You are already 25 representing Choiseul Province, and that is enough.

It will come to me and it would be enough for me as well, Mr Speaker.
The Western Province has had two Prime Ministers already - the MP for Ranongga/Simbo and the MP for Marovo.

That is enough.

Just wait awhile and allow others their chance.

Malaita Province also has two Prime Ministers already.

Yourself, Sir, and you have been Prime Minister a few times and the late MP for Aoke/Langa Langa.

That is enough for Malaita as well.

Makira Province also has a Prime Minister a few times.

As for Guadalcanal, it is only their second and yet we are trying to remove him.
What for?

We should give him a chance.

Just like how we have given chances to the others.

Then, of course, from a tiny little in Central Solomons, from the Island of Savo, has one Prime Minister too.

But he will be vying for the position a second time, Mr Speaker, because he is the only one who has been able to complete his four year term.

Mr Speaker.

I withdraw that statement, it is part of humour, but that is the record and history as well.
In case of many of us is not aware of that, and so I am telling you.

So the second Prime Minister borne out of Guadalcanal has been told to go out just after being in office as Prime Minister for eight months.

Give him two years like the MP for East Choiseul.

Let them both have two years, and what is wrong with that?

It is the fairest arrangement as we can still keep the unity as we are brothers and we should not be fighting amongst ourselves as we are representatives of our people.

That is my point.
That is my point.

What is the hurry here to remove him as PM?

Why so quick.

If my well respected, MP for West Honiara wants to be a candidate for PM in the 2010 election, surely you will get the support of the MP for Savo/Russells because certainly I am coming back for my sixth term, in case you do not know,.

My point, Mr Speaker, is that it depends on people.

Mr Speaker, to be Prime Minister you have to convince more than 26 Members of Parliament.
It is not an easy thing to become PM, and that is why since Independence up until today the country only has nine (9) Prime Ministers.

It is a very difficult responsibility to cope with.

A lot of us want to become Prime Minister.

I heard the mover of the motion repeatedly saying “compromise, compromise”, and compromise is the problem but even the Leader of Opposition is a compromised leader, the worst compromised Prime Minister this country has ever had.
That word ‘compromise’ best describes the Leader of the Opposition.

This is because during the Prime Minister’s election he switched sides a few times having supported Hon.

Rini on one occasion and switching sides the other day to eventually becoming the Prime Minister.

My goodness that is real hunger for power!

26 Can’t you be the Opposition Leader for awhile and when the right time comes you can become the PM.

In that way, ‘compromise’ will be removed.

That is true!
That is true!

Indeed all that he has stated are written, but written through experience.

He is not talking about what he is not aware of or has not done; he is talking about something he is good at.

That speaks for himself.

That is why the word ‘compromise’ bests describe him.

Next time do not allow the Leader of Opposition to draft your speech.

That is why I said that someone else is putting words into that motion, Mr Speaker.

The present Prime Minister is not that of ‘compromise’ but ‘consensus’.
About six party leaders grouped together and agreed to have him as their candidate.

There was no plan to find or lobby for candidates.

There were a lot of potential candidates in any organization.

The problem in many cases is the word ‘Me’.

We, however, all decided to have him as our candidacy as Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister is only a single member of Cabinet and Cabinet decisions, as you know, Mr Speaker, as you have run several government, is a collective decision.
If it is not collective then it is dictatorial, and that was the situation in the previous government– it was a dictatorial government.

Why did I say this, Mr Speaker?

My younger brother whose the MP for Ngella, the fifth born in the family after me, and also wants to be the head every time, was no longer free to visit me at my house because he was afraid he might be sacked if seen by government watchers who were watching him if he came to my house, even for a family gathering.

What are you afraid of?


He said that if he is seen with me then he would definitely be sacked.

So I said: “this is wrong.” That is what is called dictatorial leadership.

It is better to put elections aside and opt for marshal law where it is a one man decision; yes or no?

If the answer is no then a firing squad and the next person is called in.

Is that what we want, Mr Speaker?

No, we cannot allow this.


That is why I must congratulate you, Mr Speaker, for bringing these island nations together, a diverse society to be united and that is what we have been enjoying up until now.

Young leaders of today and leaders of tomorrow who are yet to come, do not allow this sort of attitude and idea of greed and selfishness not erode this good foundation made by our great leaders in the past.
Let us continue with this today for our future generation and for the good of our people and country.

I listened to the meat of this motion.

Because motion is motion but it is its meat that I want to hear.

What kind of meat is it?

Is it a sour or sweet meat?

When I was listening to the motion I asked the question “what is cooking in here, chicken or fish or meat?” Because there is nothing in it, only water - just for drinking but there is no meat in it so that I could eat and be filled.

Why?
Why?

Because the meat of this motion is just routine matters – is the meat of this motion.

They are just petty issues, which need not to be talked about here.

The 27 Prime Minister had been answering all the questions asked by the Leader of Opposition, the Deputy Leader; 66 questions, another 6 and we have the questions of the former Attorney General.
They are just petty issues like what has been done to the projects submitted by the Choiseul Provincial Government, which has been answered by the Prime Minister.

When you include that issue as a meat for this motion, it is not supported by me.

I will go along with the Member of Parliament for East Are Are that there is nothing to convince the Member for Savo/Russell to support this motion, although I have that respect.
If you say corruption, the worst corrupt person who has been talked about in the country since I came into Parliament 20 years ago is the Member of Savo/Russell, but I am still here.

Put it to the courts.

The mover, Mr Speaker, is a former Minister of Police and is well versed with the issue of policing in the country, and that is the best place for corruption to be reported.

Mr. Speaker, what I am saying here is that there are two things on how to run a government, which you know, as I have said.
One is that you are running the system, and the second is that you are running the country.

So which one are you talking about?

Is it the system, Mr. Speaker?

Te meat of the motion is just a complaint of the system.

And when I said system, it is the organ that operates the engine room of the public service – that is the system.

Any government must ensure that this engine is working well to give the goods and services to our people and country.
Another one is how to run the country, and that is the policy of the government.

And this side of the House has a policy and a work program.

These things have already been planned.

Everything is there.

When you talk about the budget, there must be a budget for this program.

And when does this budget comes?

It only came three months ago.

That is why I said there is no meat for eight months.

We have just seen the meat for the past three months.

But do you know what happened, Mr Speaker?


Within three months $50million plus has gone to none other than Members of parliament.

Sir, $50million was given to Members of Parliament.

Members of Parliament what have you done with that money because it should have been given to your constituencies?

Where is that money?

But here you are jumping up and down saying there no services going down to the people.

Where is the $1million for each of the constituencies?

What have we done with it?


This is thrown back to us.

Therefore, do not use the people.

Do not mislead the people to get their support for whatever we want.

Where is the $50million gone just within three months?

Perhaps that is the reason why other services are delayed.

So who are we going to blame?

I say blame yourselves.

Let us put the records right so that we do not confuse the public, so that we do not tell them how we should run the 28 country or the Member of Savo/Russells is a bluff.
You will never convince me if you do that.

As the Minister of Infrastructure rightly said, the three organs of the government are still operating well.

The Legislature- is it not meeting?

Are you not receiving allowances?

Are you not paid?

Each of you just received $100,000 last week.

Is that not services that goes through you to your people?

So why do we come here jumping up and down saying nothing is going down?

You voters should be listening in now.

MPs, you will get your answer in 2010.


Yes, because we are denying our people by coming on this floor of Parliament saying things that are not true.

This is the Legislature, which is one organ.

The Judiciary is operating well, and it is exactly one that is well and sound.

What is wrong?

Do you want to confuse the public?

No Mr. Speaker, I do not think so and for that reason it brings me to the last point, and that is forestry which I am responsible for.
Mr Speaker, I am going to issue the report of my Ministry – the Ministry of Forests to all Members, for now there are only 48.

Many of you, my brothers on the other side are also in my list to collect some goods and services for your constituencies.

The first one on the list is the Leader of Opposition.

I am not politicizing it, because he did not receive any Lucas Mill for his constituency.

I can assure him that he will get one.


I am honest here because this is not for the people of this side of the House.

People of East Choiseul are part and parcel of our beloved and beautiful country, and so why politicize it like he did before that if you are a member of the government you will receive one.

That is why for the last two years, Savo/Russells did not get any fisheries project.
My name was put down for agriculture project but I will explain because that was part of the lobbying and I did not see any money from that.

I have already informed my CDO to explain it to the media, and the list goes on, but I am not concerned, I am okay because I can still look after my people with cassava in the bush, banana, cabbage, fish, and beautiful water to drink which comes from the rock.

Nobody is hungry in Solomon Islands.


What we are saying here is let us give our people a chance in a little way so that it improves their standard of living.

They did not need much.

It will take a long time for this country to realize the developments you are seeing in Gold Coast or in Honolulu, Hawaii.

We are men of patience and tolerance, Mr. Speaker.

Solomon Islanders are very good people who work hard, are good Christians and that is why the country is still peaceful.
I have seen that when I led the peace process – a task given to me by none other than the Leader of Opposition and I have worked 29 with them and they are very good people.

We are the ones who can confuse and mislead them by using their ignorance for our own purpose.

Mr. Speaker, the only conclusion I can make of this motion is that I respectfully ask the mover to withdraw this motion.
But if he decides to put it to the vote that it would be the greatest defeat in his political career Just a last point, Mr. Speaker, before I take my seat.

The general election is just around the corner, in about 12 months time.

The people who came second to us or who will stand against us in the next elections are watching us on what sort of stability we are giving to our country, on what did we do on this floor of Parliament, and what did we say in here on their behalf.
Mr Speaker, I would like to warn every one of us including myself that this is the weapon the people who will contest against us will throw at us in 2010.

Prepare to stand against it.

So let us build the stability of this country.

Let us give confidence to our development partners and our investors.

Let us give a better environment for our people to enjoy.
Let us give them a sense of security and uphold the principles of our Constitution and allow this administration to provide the goods and services that our people greatly need.

By doing that we will be responsible for the half a million people in the country and those who come and live with us.

Let us make a conducive environment for our investors so that they can have confidence to invest in Solomon Islands so that we give employment to our unemployed people bringing in foreign cash to Solomon Islands.
By doing that we are working towards prosperity for the future of our country.

This is what our country needs, and not this motion.

The Truth and Reconciliation Bill should be coming in today.

The amendment to the Trade Investment Bill and the 2004 Forestry Bill should have come and other bills that pave the way for development in our country.

We need the support of the Opposition on these bills.
The bill that stops us from cutting across is also a good one that should have come, and should have the support of all of us.

So that when my party wins 16 or 15 candidate, I can become a Prime Minister.

That is what we should be talking about rather than this motion.

But anyway because it is our privilege making us to abuse democracy, and with that, Mr Speaker I oppose the motion.
Mr BOSETO: Thank you, Speaker, for the opportunity so that I may be able to speak, and my contribution to the debate will be very brief.

Mr Speaker, I also thank the mover of this motion for his bravery and his courage, knowing already that this side of the honorable house does not have the number to pass the motion.
However, I believe our God of Heaven and Earth does not look at our number but looks at our faithfulness and obedience to His high calling as His earthen vessel for His blessing to our beloved nation, 30 Solomon Islands.

For example, He found faithful Abraham for God’s blessing to all families of the earth.

He found faithful Moses for the deliverance for God’s people who were political oppressed, economically poor and racially alienated in Egypt.
He found faithful Elijah who maintained the true and pure worship of the Living God in the midst of idolatry worshippers.

He found Jesus of Nazareth for the cross of forgiving and reconciling love for the whole world.

Mr Speaker, faithfulness to God’s calling for God’s kingdom come; His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven that this Parliament expects in daily prayers to come among us, demands our faithfulness to the end of this temporary world.
Jesus himself said, “Whoever holds out to the end shall be saved”.

Mr Speaker, what I have said so far does not mean to justify our minority number.

No, far from it.

What I have been trying to share here is that God looks beyond our numbers into our hearts, our attitudes, our motives, our faith in Him, our trust on Him and our obedience to His will for His blessings from shore to shore of our beloved nation Solomon Islands.

Mr Speaker, let me briefly explain my position why I remain here.
I have certain principles with my conviction that if these principles are recognized and accommodated into government policies and acts of Parliament, this will help and empower our people to know and feel with hard labor that the government is truly the government of the people, by the people and for the people of this country.
Therefore, I believe that some of the policies of the former Grand Coalition for Change Government will empower and turn our people into human asset to become viable for the holistic development of our beloved nation and less and less dependence on donor partners’ handouts from outside of our country.
Mr Speaker, some of the principles which the former Grand Coalition for Change Government has recognized and identified as priorities are people- centred, which is the same as CNURA too I believe; the bottom-up approach, which is different because you say rural advancement and we say bottom-up; indigenization of democracy, this is to recognize leadership, God’s given design, chiefs and elders, landowners and the democratization of the economy, that is sharing more the resources of this earth; and long term peace with justice; national sovereignty; national unity in diversity and the federal system of government, and all of us believe in a God-fearing country.
These principles, Mr. Speaker, I am sure those who left the former Grand Coalition for Change Government last December including the Honorable Dr. Sikua, our Prime Minister have played major roles of translating into written documents for incarnating them into our tribes, clans, families, villages, constituencies, provinces and our nation as a whole.
31 Mr Speaker, I could not work out yet what were the main reasons that caused the departure of our friends last December to resign and joined the proper Opposition camp then.

Mr Speaker, if the only reason was the style of leadership of the former Prime Minister, the Hon.

Manasseh Sogavare, why couldn’t they bring up with him in the Cabinet and at Caucus Meetings.

Mr Speaker: Point of order Honorable member.

Would you refrain from using names please?


Maybe you could use the constituencies like North West Choiseul or North East Guadalcanal.

Thank you Mr Boseto: Yes, the former Prime Minister, but we must all learn how to be openly critical and challenge each other with love, inside Cabinet and inside Government Caucus in order to grow into maturity and maintain political stability.

God says: “I will punish those whom I love”.

Again, Revelation says: “I rebuke and punish those whom I love.
Be earnest then and turn from your sins”.

When we are critical and judging each other’s leadership, let us be mindful of what St. Paul’s word in Roman says: “All of us have sinned and come short of the glory of God”.

Mr Speaker, before I end my short contribution let me say that while this motion is only targeting our Prime Minister, it is his Cabinet policy that I see must be critically considered because I believe this motion is more on his government, the key of decision making is the Cabinet.
Therefore, let me simply and plainly conclude by saying that the CNURA government’s policy is top down rural advancement in favor of perpetuating political and economic domination of neo-liberalism for economic globalization which is increasingly ruled by transnational cooperation.
Mr Speaker, in my perception, transnational cooperation does not recognize and encourage multinational interdependence hence it is not sensitive to the reality of the diversity of our cultures, languages and the multinational sovereignty.
Therefore, Mr Speaker, the CNURA Government’s emphasis on our belonging to one global village, which in my opinion those of us inside do not share equally the silver and gold of the earth, the lands and resources but continue to widen the gap between the extreme poor and the extreme rich in terms of economic development.

We must have proper look before we jump into its classified compartment.
But I believe, Mr Speaker, that we must remain faithful and stand firm together in solidarity with those who elected us to be here and most of them are in our rural areas where we will be able to maintain our root into the genealogy of communalism.
32 Mr Speaker, I will vote for this motion not because we have the number but because I will continue to commit myself to implement the Grand Coalition for Change Government’s policies so that our people can participate fully in the responsibility of caring for our people and our environment, our future.

I believe we can learn from the bottom up and top down for the sake of our human relationship, not that for our institutionalized partnership.
With those few remarks, Mr Speaker, I beg to support the motion.

Thank you.

Mr SOGAVARE: Thank you, Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of Culture and Tourism and the Minister for Public Service for allowing me to first take the floor.

Sir, I rise to contribute in support of the motion that the National Parliament resolves it has no confidence in the Prime Minster.

Sir, those who have spoken before me, I think, have missed the point that this side of the House is trying to present before Parliament.
We have treated this motion as if, we the Opposition side is fighting against the government, thus all the defensive manner in which those who have spoken when contributing to this motion used to address parliament or make their contributions.
But before I go on, Mr Speaker, I would like to thank, of course, the Chairman and members of the House Committee for approving the tabling of this motion, Mr Speaker, to allow Members of Parliament debate the questions and issues that are being tendered and of course elaborated on by this side of the House on the suitability of the Prime Minister to continue in Office.

Unfortunately, those people who have spoken have spoken out of context.
We are not here to discuss the leadership style of the former Prime Minister; that has been dealt with.

We debated that in December.

The Prime Minister, then, was personally attacked, Mr Speaker, not on policy issues but just basically on his personality.

We have discussed that and so I do not see any reason why we should come back here now and raise the same old issues merely to win debate in the House.
Those who have spoken on the motion from the other side of the House, Mr Speaker, all missed the entire points that were tendered on the floor of this Parliament by the Honorable Mover of this motion.

And I need to elaborate on what has been said by my colleague, the MP for West Makira.

He was trying to explain how this motion is structured and why it has been brought before this House.
Sir, our reasons for the temporary withdrawal of this motion when it was first approved to be tabled on the 25th July was due mainly to recognition of this motion, Mr Speaker.

Of course, it is not about the Opposition against the 33 Government, no, Mr Speaker.

Rather, the direct call by the people of this country.
I have listened very clearly to the people who have spoken so far that have questioned this call of the people and have questioned whose call is this, because they claim that their constituents are not here in Honiara.

Well, Mr Speaker, we have representations from people in the constituencies whose Members are with the government.

They come to us and when we ask them from which constituency they are from they told us that they are from constituencies that have their members in the government.
So we do have an obligation, in fact, Mr Speaker.

If this motion is about us, this side of the house, it is for us to to try and win those on the other side of the house.

Of course, Mr Speaker, we will fight to death to have the numbers.

Before we even bring this motion before the House, Mr Speaker, we have to make sure that we have the numbers.

But this is not about us.

It is about the concerns that were raised by our people; those that have visited us at the Opposition Office.
included many people from Many of those who have approached us constituencies whose Members of Parliament are with the government Mr Speaker.

I just want to make an explanation that really it is 48 Members of Parliament, Mr Speaker.

Put our political differences aside, Mr Speaker, and seriously consider the issues that are handed on behalf of the people.

In their discussions with us they have emphasized that they are convinced that these issues warrant the removal of the Prime Minister.
So we are bringing these issues on behalf of the people; the 48 Members of Parliament looking at issues brought on behalf of the people on this floor of Parliament.

This is what this motion is all about.

Let us put it in this context, Mr Speaker, that whilst people from the other side stand up and say that we do not have the numbers- only seven or eight, they should know that we understand that as we are not stupid for bringing this motion.
I am saying this so that people do not misunderstand this as our own attempt to try and win the government.

Sir, if we are not aware of the people who have approached us; these are the people who picked empty cans and sell them for survival.

These are the people whom we are talking about.

The people who are reduced to selling betel nuts, Mr Speaker, and other little things on the roadside in order to cope with the rising cost of living in Honiara and other urban centres.
I am not saying that this thing has just begun happening recently.

These are people who have been doing this all along, Mr Speaker and they have come to us - simple fisherman who brave the rough seas day in and out harvesting our marine resources for survival and to keep the rural economy going; the people who keep the subsistence sector 34 going and are still waiting for the government to deliver on its election promises.
They are people who have experienced the rising cost of living in the country and are totally disappointed, Mr Speaker, at the government’s indecisiveness.

We come to Parliament - well it is very interesting to hear the Minister of Mines talking about policies that are to be implemented, but people do not hear when these issues were raised.

The women are struggling to put food on the plate for their children, and they watch the Members of Parliament enjoying luxury of being taken care of by the State.
Therefore, we can afford to be careless because we can afford to cope with the rising costs of living in Honiara.

We can afford two or three bags of rice, Mr Speaker and these are the people who cannot afford even one packet of rice.
These are the people we are talking about, Mr Speaker, and I would like to make it very clear from the very beginning that this side of the House fully understands the seriousness of this motion together with public perceptions that may have been created since we announced our intention to move this motion.
Sir, rightly the concerns of these people are in order because you see in addition to making the government accountable for its actions on the floor of Parliament, the motion also has the effect and ultimate objective of removing the Prime Minister should Parliament give it an affirmative vote, and so it is quite a serious motion.

Therefore, in debating this motion, we have to regard it very seriously.
Before I go on, Mr Speaker, I would like to clarify some issues that have been raised by critics of this motion.

There are people who would like to argue that the motion is out of timing, in that the government is just about eight months old and they should be given more time to prove themselves, Mr Speaker.

They further argue that the motion will disturb the government’s implementation of its programs.
Well, so I have this to say to these people: Tell that to the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.

The Grand Coalition Government only barely had four months or five months in office when it faced its first motion of no confidence, Mr Speaker, and here we are saying that we do not need any motion no of confidence on this House.

Not by none other than the Deputy Prime Minister and after that, Mr Speaker, a notice of a motion of no confidence was made every sitting of Parliament; every sitting.
Sir, nine months or eight months, Mr Speaker, is more than enough for the Prime Minister and his Deputy who talk so much in the media and Parliament that they are an action-oriented government to deliver on their election promises.

All we are doing by this motion is a follow-up of these commitments, Mr Speaker as people who are mandated under the constitution to make sure that the ruling 35 party as the custodian of government system fulfills its promises to people of this country.
The issue here, Mr Speaker, is that if they have not been able to deliver effectively for the last seven months, despite everything that people have been saying and the Ministers have tried to claim, what guarantee is there that they will deliver all that?

Mr Speaker this motion is moved because the government does not seem to be moving forward to deliver its 2008 Budget, and of course its careless attitude about other national issues.
I would like to make this small comment that the Prime Minister must appreciate that he has only himself and his deputy to blame for the fact that the CNURA Government has only two years to implement its policy- this is the position.

They consented, Mr Speaker, and so it will be hypocritical for us and for them to even suggest that they were unfairly placed in that situation and for any one to sympathize with them.

The Prime Minister cannot pretend that it is a concern to him, no.
In fact it is a pleasant experience for his Ministers and his Deputy.

But, of course, Mr Speaker, at the disappointment of ordinary people of Solomon Islands who were looking forward to fully participate in the Grand Coalition for Change Government’s bottom-up strategy in 2008.

Mr Speaker, if we go out and carry out a census now, you will definitely hear the concerns of the people in Solomon Islands very loud and clear.
We hide ourselves inside this Parliament in the protection of this Parliament enjoying our fat salaries and other luxurious things that are given to us so we do not find out what is happening out there.

In other words, Mr Speaker, by taking over the government they were saying to the nation that they were better than the Grand Coalition for Change Government in terms of action-orientation.
Sir, they have created great expectations in the process what we are hearing from people visiting our office is totally a different story from what the Ministers are boasting about in this Parliament.

It is a totally different story.

This includes people coming right from the villages.

That is what I am telling you, Mr Speaker.


It would therefore Mr Speaker, be outright insulting to the people of this country and hypocrisy on the part of the government if they turnaround now and start making excuses about limited time - we have no time to do those things.

They were fully aware of that before they irresponsibly took over the government.

People of this country are expecting them to deliver but unfortunately we do not see the delivery happening to the expectations of the people.
Sir, all they managed to do was to frustrate the Bottom up Development Program of the Grand Coalition, which was clearly motioned in 2007 and was 36 going to pick up momentum in 2008.

But the real victims, while we are playing politics in this House, are the people of Solomon Islands that we claim to represent and talk on their behalf in this Parliament.
While on this point too, Mr Speaker, I must refute the claim by the Deputy Prime Minister and his supporters and some people that have raised concerns outside of Parliament that the Grand Coalition Government had two years but did nothing.

Sir, I need to say it clearly here that in 2006 the GCCG came in and tried to fit in with the budget of the government that was outgoing at that time, the former Coalition government.
That budget was designed to deliver that particular government’s priority, and not the Grand Coalition for Change Government’s priorities.

The whole of 2006 we were struggling to redirect and reprioritize and try to look at how we can steer that budget, which was structured to advance a particular line of thinking.

This is because we were advancing the bottom-up strategy while that particular budget and program was trying to advance the top-down and driven from the top, Mr Speaker.
That means that the GCCG effectively only had about 10 months to deliver on its election promises in 2007 because that year’s budget belongs to the GCCG.

And I am pleased to inform Parliament that we did deliver: government finance was healthy; revenue and debt servicing reserves have healthy balances; Solomon Islands Government funded projects were delivered, of course despite certain minor hiccups because they were delivered through constituency setups.
I thought I need to clear that from the beginning to remove any misunderstanding and confusion on what was alleged on this point.

I shall now touch on some of the issues that the mover has raised on the floor of Parliament, Mr Speaker.

That the present CNURA Government under the leadership of the Prime Minister is totally incompetent and careless in the way it handles the country’s peace process.

In fact they may have mishandled that issue and I will dwell a little bit on that.
The point here, Mr Speaker is after I have made that submission, allow them to continue sow seeds of disunity by applying foreign concepts of peace- making, would be really, really, irresponsible on our part.

I am obliged to explain this matter and other issues in some details in the course of this intervention to demonstrate that the Prime Minister did not provide the leadership required in the government and probably is totally confused on this matter.
I think, part of the reasons for the Prime Minister’s carelessness is due to this government’s over dependence on aid.

There seem to be the belief, which is really absurd, Mr Speaker, that because they have pleased aid donors by pulling 37 down a government that is not wanted by a particular aid donor, aid money would be flooding into the country like milk and honey.

Absurd still, Mr Speaker, is the nurtured idea that aid donors will deliver all the big critical statements that the government has made.
Of course, the Prime Minister can afford to be careless.

We cannot help it but come up with that kind of conclusion because the Prime Minister just simply did not coordinate and has lost total control of his Ministers.

There is no harmony in government and certain policies advanced by key ministries are counter productive to the overall objectives of the government.

That demonstrates lack of coordination and boils down to the leadership quality of the Prime Minister.
Sir, the Opposition is also aware that many Cabinet meetings lacked the needed quorum to legitimate executive decisions.

Talking about dictatorship, Mr Speaker, do not look very far.

Hon Sikua: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

I want the Leader of Opposition to provide necessary information on that allegation that Cabinet has been meeting without quorum.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

Mr Sogavare: Thank you.


The Prime Minister will have his time when he will respond to all the issues that we have raised here, he will.

Mr Speaker, the walls, bricks and timbers at the Cabinet and government offices can talk.

Sir, going back to this point that the Prime Minister and his Deputy see aid dependency as the solution to our economic vote, I think this is a wishful thinking and is very, very irresponsible.
I think we have expressed our views several times on this, and I must repeat that it would be misleading to say that aid donors will now be pouring money into Solomon Islands because there is a change in government.

I have stated several times that this is nonsense and it is not right thinking.
I made this point on the floor of Parliament that what Solomon Islanders need to appreciate is that donor countries have fixed operations and agendas for Solomon Islands regardless of who is running the Solomon Islands government.

As long as they are allowed to pursue their thinking and if we do not disturb them they will continue to implement their aid programs in the Solomon Islands and only try to barely fit them in with the priorities of the Government.
It is a fact that never in the history of this country that the priorities of aid donors and ruling government ever see eye to eye.

Never!

The Government also must appreciate, Mr Speaker, that aid money is their tax payers’ money and are granted under the respective rules for their Parliament.

Therefore, there is very little that we can do to redirect their priorities set by their own Parliaments and Congress to advance their national 38 and strategic interests.
That is what is guiding how they give money to aid receiving countries.

So we can only comply with the conditions if we are to benefit.

Sir, this side of the House is hearing mix reactions by aid donors during the aid talks.
The message that comes out clearly is that the government is yet to be clear about where it is leading the country because the “shopping list approach” to the aid talks did very, very little to set any direction in the country, because the shopping list approach to the aid talks did very, very little to set any directions, Mr Speaker.

That is not appreciated, Mr Speaker.


It would appear, Mr Speaker, that the Prime Minister and his Deputy were excited about taking over the government that they simply forgot to comply with the basic principles of how to run it.

So the argument that the motion is out of time ,Mr Speaker, must go out the window.

We are addressing current issues that need to be addressed.

Hungry for power, Mr Speaker!


There are others who argue that the motion does not represent the wish of the majority of people in this country, Mr Speaker.

They also alleged that the Opposition Group is hungry for power and all that comes with being in government as Ministers and Backbenchers.

I thought I have brained myself up trying to explain that.
These people are obviously deaf and did not hear the cries of all ordinary Solomon Islanders who suffer so much since the CNURA Government had taken over government.

This is vague.

Is it not that Ministers and the Government do not know what to do about it, they do not know what area to address, they simply just don’t do anything about it.
Contrary to the assertion made by the government, and probably its very few supporters in the media, the decision to table this motion, as I have already mentioned is not an unilateral decision by the Opposition nor is it about this side of the House being hungry for power.
Talking about hungry for power, and the un-timeliness of the motion Mr Speaker, it is this present CNURA Government under the leadership of the present Member for Central Kwara’ae and North East Guadalcanal and anyone else who holds the same view that must come to terms with this allegation, not the Opposition group.

I stated earlier that the GCCG faced a motion of confidence just four or five months after we took office.
And since then there was one motion tabled against it at every sitting of Parliament.

Of course, Mr Speaker, based on nonsense issues and reasons which have been proven to be totally lies on the floor of this very Parliament, and furthermore have nothing to do with the ability of the Prime Minister then to lead and implement government stated priorities.

These are the issues that require our attention.

39 So who is hungry for power, Mr Speaker?

And who is more concerned for the people of this country?
Sir, by moving one motion of no confidence every sitting of Parliament and the Member who speaks so loud and most of the time is the former Prime Minister and Member for Savo/Russells and his Deputy.

Mr Speaker, by moving one motion of no confidence every sitting of Parliament, the Prime Minister and his Deputy will go down in the history of this country as the most power hungry couple.
In fact, Mr Speaker, in making that allegation against this motion, the Prime Minister and his Deputy demonstrated glaring hypocrisy.

We come into this parliament complaining about the frequency of motions of no confidence that we should not move votes of no confidence all the time- tell yourself!

Whoever says it does it, Mr Speaker.

This is what this thing is all about.


I agree that we did make a commitment on the floor of Parliament during the last sitting that this side of the House is prepared to work with the present CNURA Government to deliver on its political statements and the projects approved under the 2008 budget.

I made that statement here and a number of colleagues of this side of the House also mentioned that.
But that was conditional on them demonstrating that they are committed to anything they say that was conditional on that.

Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, the present CNURA Government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy is not committed to anything since they took office, almost nine months ago.

This is contrary to the claim that they are action-orientated government.

No!
No!

Even with the formulation and the adoption of the Medium Term Development Strategy that the Prime Minister and his Deputy are so boastful about.

Sir, even with that the CNURA Government has lost any sense of direction and is as confused about the priority of the nation as his narrow politically, motivated, grossly, insensitive priorities, which are now putting a lot of pressure on the government and the country.

I will have to elaborate on that.


Say if the Prime Minister and his Deputy care to understand, a Medium Term Development Strategy is nothing more than a shopping list of stand-alone series of uncoordinated projects that are driven more by politics rather than the genuine development needs of the country.

That is what it is!

It serves and ends with the political government of the day; it ends, and I will explain to you.
The NERRDP that they talked about so much about 2003 – 2006, Mr Speaker, is no different.

You have adopted that as reported in the media.

The reason is simple - MTDS- medium term development strategy is put together by a political government, and carries the narrow political interests of the political government.

Therefore, sir, it cannot be a credible national guiding road for development.

It cannot be, sir.
It cannot be, sir.

40 In fact, it is not different from the program of action approach to development sought by successive Solomon Islands government after the expiry of the last seven years development plan in 1989.

Sir, shopping list it is because that is what was referred to by the aid donors during the recent aid talks.

When will we ever learn, Mr Speaker to come out of a “shopping list strategy” to planning?

When?

We are making a total fool of ourselves, Mr Speaker, in front of the aid donors.
To make it worse, the Prime Minister himself was not interested in the aid talks because he failed to show up to open and close the talks.

I do not know what he was so busy about but the defacto Prime Minister who is the Deputy Prime Minister now, he was there in the talks.

You will have your time to speak, Mr Speaker.

So let the Member for East Choiseul have his turn to talk.
It is very interesting to hear this thing starting to have a poking effect on the seats of Members to start to poke them to rebut.

It is not straight.

Sir, if that is not enough, we are hearing from aid donors that the government did not make any funding requests for key government priorities.

This has been announced by them and they have spoken out on that in their public speeches.

An example is the reconciliation issue.


Mr Speaker, this is simply irresponsible of a government that relies very heavily on aid donors to fund its so called Rural Advancement Program.

This is not right.

It is really bad!

Sir, what this country needs now, right now, is to come up with a long term development plan (we are advising you to take note) that will set a long term direction for the country.

That is what you need to do, clearly outlining the role of all the players in the economy.
The connectivity between development programs and projects and the participation of all Solomon Islanders, Aid Donors, Private Sectors, NGOs, Churches and all other Stakeholders.

Only then, can any medium term development strategy make any sense.
In fact, that is exactly what the Grand Coalition was going to come up with, Mr Speaker, in addition to a medium term development strategy only to be disturbed by the Prime Minister and his Deputy, and now they are criticizing the Grand Coalition for Change Government for being late with the medium term development strategy.

We are not debating SOCRED Party here, Mr Speaker.

We are not debating that.

You see this thing is driving nails into these seats and it hurts.
It is good that I am making points, so take note.

You see the problem with the Prime Minister and his Deputy is that they suffer from ‘quick fix’ syndrome Mr Speaker.

They tend to believe that there is magic and a set of document that outlines stand alone priorities, Mr Speaker.

41 This is where they are wrong.

You do not need the medium term development strategy to deliver the 2008 Budget.

You do not need that.

In fact, the budget itself is a document of priorities.

All it needs is to be delivered.


Where, Mr Speaker?

That is what the people of this country are asking, and that is why this motion came before the House.

Sir, this boils down to the leadership ability of the Prime Minister.

I spotted the Minister of Mines has talked and I know how itchy he is now.
It boils down to the leadership ability of the Prime Minister himself as the coordinating Minister of government program who has lost any form of effective control of the government and his Ministers and I am obliged to elaborate on this assertion in the cause of this intervention.

I want to touch briefly on one or two of the points that are highlighted on the issues tendered on the floor of this Parliament by the mover, and in fact to refute the claim made by the Member for Savo/Russells as well.
It is not the Leader of Opposition that writes the speech.

You do not think that the Member for West Honiara can do that himself, sir?

Who do you think you are to say somebody else wrote the speech?

May be that is how you work.

Somebody else writes your speeches.

So let us go to the issues now.


Unlike the series of motions of no confidence, Mr Speaker, that were noticed and moved against the GCCG which were driven by other agendas and probably hunger for power as mentioned already by the Deputy Prime Minister when he was Leader of the Opposition, the motion before us carries the unanimous agreement of the ordinary people.

You go out now, I challenge you, you go out now on the streets and in the markets and you ask them, Mr Speaker.
You have spent all your time in your air conditioned offices enjoying your air conditioned cars, enjoying your fat salaries and that is why you do not know what happens to the people in the market.

Those are the people who have came to us.

They have felt the pain, Mr Speaker.

This motion before us carries the unanimous agreement of the ordinary people of Solomon Islands who have witnessed the incompetence of the present leadership, to lead.
Solomon innocent victims of Islanders who have become the government’s empty promises for a better life for all, but have become bitterly disappointed at the non-delivery of these empty promises.

I am waiting for my sawmill, Mr Speaker, so after this meeting it is going to be delivered.

I am waiting.
I am waiting.

These are Solomon Islanders who have watched, we, Members of Parliament who have become so self-serving and only concerned about our little world, Mr Speaker that we become oblivion to everything that is happening and the hardships that our people have to go through.

As I have stated earlier on, it could be because we have the comfort of our air conditioned rooms in our offices and we jump from an air conditioned office 42 into an air conditioned car.
Some even jumped into the air conditioned hotel rooms, and so we are oblivion to what is happening outside, the hardships that our people are going through, Mr Speaker.

Sir, this is very exciting, take it easy, take it easy, colleagues- this is Parliament and you will have your time and will allow you to talk.
These are Solomon Islanders, Mr Speaker, who watch Members of Parliament, enjoying financial benefits that comes with the responsibility as people’s representatives and because we are taken care of by the government we can cope with the rising costs of basic essential items and become basically insensitive to the cries of our people who cannot afford to buy a packet of rice and other essential food items from the shops.
I would like to add here, Mr Speaker, that the rationale behind the state looking after the welfare of Members of Parliament, especially Ministers and the Chairmen of 33 Boards, Parliamentary Standing Committees, Leader of the Official Opposition, Leader of the Independent Group- is because there is a logical assumption that these people are devoting their full time in giving unreserved commitment to carrying out the business of the State.
That is the reason why people- this man on the street who cannot buy a packet of rice.

I am concerned because when he goes to buy taiyo he buys tax- that little man, that man that cannot afford the high prices, Mr Speaker.

Whenever he buys rice, he also pays for the goods tax which in turn provides for our salaries.

We are paid comfortable salaries, we are given vehicles, we are paid fuel allowance, and our electricity and water bills are paid by the government.
We, including other Members of Parliament, Mr Speaker, are paid school fee allowances; we are all paid $10,000.

Everyone receives $10,000.

I am raising a point, Mr Speaker, and think.

We are paid school fee allowances for our children.

We travel business class on government business.

We are entitled to constituency touring allowances when we visit our constituencies, Mr Speaker, but some of us have taken imprests exceeding the allocation.
We enjoy the benefits of administering constituency development funds and an additional amount of $100,000 has been added to this particular allocation.

What a very interesting time to receive $100,000, Mr Speaker.

Is it because there is a motion of no confidence so that we quickly put an additional $100,000 into the funds to retain the support of people?

That is an abuse of state money.

It is not right!

Think, think Mr Speaker, and so it is very interesting.
Mr Speaker, do not get me wrong and these people are starting to get very irritated.

I just want to put things into perspective that there is nothing wrong; nothing really wrong about the State looking after Members of Parliament.

There is nothing wrong with that, but the point is this; in return for these 43 remunerations we are expected by our people to deliver our promises.

That is why we are being paid.

Now I do not know what you are doing but people that have come to us have not felt it.
These are people right in the village and it is because of them that this motion is now before us.

I have tried to explain it already, Mr Speaker.

It is not ours, it belongs to the people who have approached us and asked us to take those issues into consideration, Mr Speaker.

I have been trying to explain this but may be some of you were not present when I did that.

This motion is not about the Opposition versus the Government, so relax, Mr Speaker.
It is about the people trying to talk sense to the 48 Members of Parliament so that we can take their concerns more closely.

Sir, this concern is aimed at the government, of course as the custodian of government system.

Unfortunately the government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy has failed miserably.

This side of the House is equally concerned.


This is because when the government failed its responsibility towards the people of this country, Mr Speaker, we are automatically dragged into this carelessness.

That is why we ought to be concerned, because it is not us that run the system.

For example, Sir, the National Budget belongs to the country.

It is not the private property of the ruling government.

It does not belong to you.


And when the government fail to deliver on it Mr Speaker, it affects the welfare of the people we are representing too on this side of the House.

The effect of the government’s carelessness in failing to address national issues has affected the entire nation, including the people that we are representing on this side of this House.

This makes this motion very serious, Mr Speaker.


It is concerned with what the people see, what the people feel and what the people have experienced.

In other words, Mr Speaker, it concerns the little canteen they own, the vehicles they own, taxes and buses, outboard motors they own and operate on the streets of Honiara and in the rural areas.

It concerns the question surrounding the long term security and stability of Solomon Islands.
It concerns the unfulfilled expectation created by the government for a better life for all.

Mr Speaker, we are entitled, we are entitled to be concerned with the people of this country and accordingly, fully support the people when they raise the following issues and concerns.

I might just touch on two or three issues and I’ll take my seat, Mr Speaker.
The present Sikua Government, the present CNURA Government, Mr Speaker, is placing its long term security and stability at risk by politicizing sensitive issues and mishandling the country’s peace process.

44 I need to explain this so that we appreciate the argument that we tendered here.

This is a serious concern because it strains directly at the heart of peace, happy coexistence and stability of our country.
The CNURA Government made a serious mistake of moving away from the comprehensive approach to addressing the country’s peace process adopted by the Grand Coalition for Change Government to a piecemeal selective strategy, which is now placing the government and the country under the threat of greater instability.

Sir, this is very irresponsible of the present leadership.

The move was clearly influenced by politics or more specifically maybe desire for power.
Mr Speaker, that fact alone has placed the suitability of the present leadership in the person of the Prime Minister and his Deputy under serious concern.

These are the real issues we are trying to address in this motion.

Their carelessness and ambition for power has placed the country under the mercy of unsatisfied Solomon Islanders who have been tricked into supporting them during the time of lobby.

You just ask them, Mr Speaker.


That is totally irresponsible of the government to think that by isolating a couple of sensitive issues from the comprehensive package for political purposes, they will expect Solomon Islanders to respect the peace process.

This is nonsense.

Mr Speaker, it only demonstrates how immature we are in politics, and the fact that we allow our emotions to rule our brains, worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister and his Deputy are unable to deliver what they have promised.
This is frustrating the people affected.

We are hearing stories, we are interviewing people Mr Speaker and people are telling us, and so stop hiding behind the excuses.

The Deputy Prime Minister with the full knowledge of the Prime Minister cannot deny the fact that he mishandled the rehabilitation of former combatants, right from the very beginning, Mr Speaker, right from the very beginning.

The boys, were led to believe that they would be rehabilitated through cash payments.
Otherwise they would not insist on it.

Do not lie to this Parliament.

This is common sense, and the Deputy Prime Minister may want to deny it all he wants, Mr Speaker, but he will not convince anybody in his right mind that he has caused a huge political blunder with the full approval and knowledge of the Prime Minister.

These issues are potentially dangerous to the peace and stability of this country.
This is carelessness, carelessness in its blatant form, and questions the suitability of these two people to continue at the helm of Her Majesty’s government.

We said so, Mr Speaker, because may be this is an opportune time to change the two of them and all of you and put somebody up from amongst yourself to go head and lead.
This is because we are raising serious concerns 45 here, Mr Speaker and it warrants the removal of the Prime Minister and his Deputy from leadership so that those issues are addressed,.

Sir, I am not contesting the Prime Minstership, Mr Speaker.

We have explained our position on this side of this side of House that we are not hungry for power; we do not wish to take over the government.
We are just telling you something serious is happening, and as long as we have these two people on the helm of the government, we will wreck this country.

And you are expecting some people who have come through the system and we have experienced some of these already.

So we are trying to advise you, and listen!

Mr Speaker, can you tell the very respected Deputy Prime Minister to pull out the because it is getting sticky.

It is very interesting and this thing is getting exciting.
Sir, I am saying this because I am beginning to see and the fact the Deputy Prime Minister is getting so upset, and when you are upset something is really wrong.

So how’s the school, the school… Hon Fono: Point of Order Mr Speaker.

If the Leader of Opposition has no evidence to prove that the DPM has promised the former militants $150,000 cash payments then he should not raise it in this House.

That is pure speculation and under Standing Orders he cannot express an opinion that he has no proof of it.
So I ask him to withdraw the statement.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Sogavare: Mr Speaker, I will not withdraw that statement because we have heard this from the person who has approached us and that is why we are raising this issue, Mr Speaker.

Sir, why am I raising these issues of concern Mr Speaker?

It is because I am beginning to see a repeat of the carelessness of the political leadership leading to the 2000 coup.
The government’s actions, Mr Speaker and decisions with due respect were inundated with carelessness.

It came to a point where our people cannot take it any more and move on the government.

It is like that.

So we are reading signs.

The government would be totally irresponsible to comfort itself with the presence of RAMSI in Solomon Islands and be careless about how to deal with the feelings of people who were affected.
Such attitude is a recipe for disaster and the government must be warned now, Mr Speaker.

What is really unfair, Mr Speaker, for some of us is that, and maybe the MP for Savo/Russells who has just went outside, is that when Solomon Islanders decide to take the law into their own hands because they can no longer trust the Solomon Islands Government, we are blamed for inciting the civil unrest to gain political score.

46 I am humbling myself, Mr Speaker, listening to the allegations.
You see the MP for East Choiseul was even falsely accused for leading the raid at the Rove Armory, Mr Speaker, and involving in the 2000 coup.

That was the very issue that the MP for North East Guadalcanal and now the Prime Minister has stood up in this House and raised as an allegation to remove me as Prime Minister.
Sir, these people are so blinded by their own insensible desire for political power that whenever power is slipping away from their grips because of their own stupidity, they will try to find reasons to throw the blame on other people.

I am personally insulted, Mr Speaker, by this attitude and I am expressing this concern because it took some of us Mr Speaker, to put our reputation and character on the line to save the situation for them.
So much so, Mr Speaker, that some of us were falsely accused as coup leaders.

I have actually sighted false affidavits obviously obtained under dubious circumstances purporting to describe how I was involved in the raid of the Rove armory, Mr Speaker.

It was just lucky for these people that the affidavits were not trusted in court, because they would have been taken up for forgery by deliberately lying under oath.
I also just recently received a copy of a letter purportedly written by those who led the coup requesting payment for carrying out my directives, Mr Speaker.

How can people be so sick in their minds, Mr Speaker?

Why is that, Sir?

This is how far people can go when their own stupidity, Mr Speaker - I am trying to make a point here- catches up on them.
In fact, Mr Speaker, the latest victims of these deluded people are the Prime Minister, his Deputy and the Minister of Environment Conservation and Meteorology who continue to advance this allegation only to be slapped on their face by the explanation of the people who were actually involved in what they alleged.

Sir, the scenario is peaking itself up again, in the way the present government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy are handling the country’s peace process.
Instead of healing wounds, Mr Speaker, we are opening new wounds and hurting our people in the process.

We are talking about forgiveness but we continue to send people to jail for tension related cases.

How can you call that a peace process, Mr Speaker?

How?
How?

The Truth and Reconciliation Act for the Commission, that is coming before this Parliament, Mr Speaker, is a perfect example of the thinking of the government under the leadership of the current Prime Minister that failed miserably to appreciate the difficulties we are trying and currently experiencing to bring peace and stability to this country.

That is no longer there, Mr Speaker.

In fact Mr Speaker it is the most unchristian thing that comes before this House; 47 the most unchristian thing.
How do you expect, the people to come forward to express their concerns and confess what they did when there is no guarantee that they will be protected from prosecution, Mr Speaker?

No, this is not right, Mr Speaker.

I am not afraid of anything, Mr Speaker.

I am here, ever since RAMSI arrived in 2003 and I am still here, Mr Speaker.

Some people have been arrested and convicted.

I am still here, Mr Speaker, and I am open to investigation.
Sir, the ultimate objective of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is supposed to be encouragement of ethnic tolerance, restitution, reconciliation, forgiveness and total pardon of people who have committed atrocities and come forward to confess their wrongs and are willing to make it right with the victims.

That is how we should see this, Mr Speaker.

Only then can we as a nation truly claim our position as a Christian country.
Only then, otherwise we should stop calling our selves Christians, Mr Speaker.

In fact we have no right to call ourselves Christians if we cannot forgive one another.
Sir, in approving and adopting the Truth and Reconciliation Commission framework and legislation under its present form, the government under the leadership of this Prime Minister will be directly responsible for prolonging the peace process because the people who really matter to the work of the commission will never, never come forward Mr Speaker.

Never, Mr Speaker.
Never, Mr Speaker.

The way the government handles the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Program is another glaring demonstration of this continuing carelessness.
Sir, the CNURA Government Reconciliation and Rehabilitation Program can be best described as ‘stand alone series of unfocused activities that will not hold’, because it failed measurably to address the issues that caused the breakdown in relationship between the parties in the first place nor provide a surety that the issues concerned will be addressed at all.

It also has the potential of creating feelings of neglect, Mr Speaker.
It is also clear that the government has no clue about the extent of the outstanding issues to be addressed before a meaningful reconciliation can be pursued, and the result of the people affected to have them resolved before they would agree to any reconciliation.

What the government and the foreign advisors that now have direct access to the Prime Minister must appreciate is that reconciliation at the national level is the end of the line activity.
The climax of a peace process after all the issues of contention are resolved amicably at all levels to the satisfaction of all conflicting parties.

This is because the government has caused a big blunder in this.

They tried to reconcile but nobody turned up be because complaints came up.

I am just telling you to think.


I am saying that, Mr. Speaker, because reconciliation is a two way thing and we made the point on the floor of this parliament during the last meeting 48 that the government’s attitude towards reconciliation so far has been very disappointing and pathetic, to say the least.

If you wanted peace you must ensure that the people affected by the illegal actions of the aggressive party are properly attended to.
The old saying that ‘justice before peace’, probably is very relevant here or I guarantee that justice will ever be served on these people at all.

It is obvious, Mr Speaker, that the government used reconciliation as a panacea for peace on the assumption that somehow the people will respect it.

This is wishful thinking, and I made the point on the floor of this parliament that what we must remember is that we are dealing with people with feelings, not some inanimate objects that we can move about at will.
We are dealing with people.

The Oppositions’ concern is confirmed by the irrational action of the Prime Minister during his quick trip to Malaita.

We apologized to the people of Malaita for the sufferings and loss they endured during the ethnic crisis, which saw more than 20,000 Malaitans displaced and have been struggling ever since to rebuild their lives.

Whoever advised the Prime Minister to do that is grossly insensitive to the feelings of people who suffered so much during the crisis.
I am telling you facts, Mr. Speaker.

Sir, this is trivializing the issues that brought the country to its knees in the year 2000.

In fact, the action is a slap on the face ….

Hon Sikua: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of Opposition is the Member for East Choiseul.

I am the Member for North East Guadalcanal and my people are the ones involved and affected by this ethnic tension and indeed the whole island of Guadalcanal, which I come from and Malaita.
I feel that the Leader of Opposition is trying to sensationalize the issue, which he does not understand and his people have not felt.

I ask that he refrain from making any further comments on this issue.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Mr Speaker: Thank you Hon.

Prime Minister.

Maybe you could elaborate yourself when your turn comes.

Mr Sogavare: Thank you for that ruling, Mr Speaker.

I fail to see how I am breaking any rules here.

I am just telling facts.


Yes, I am the Member for East Choiseul and I am also the Leader of the Opposition of Solomon Islands and I am speaking on a national issue.

Sir, whatever the motives of the Prime Minister’s stand alone public apologies to the people of Malaita, the government must understand that it is a total abuse of the process and those affected will not rest until they are assured that they will be properly compensated.
Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, it is not 49 clear in the policy of the government where the people who abandoned their lands on Guadalcanal will be properly compensated.

Sir, reconciliation and apology as intimated above can only be accepted if the people are duly compensated for the return of the land they properly acquired back to the people of Guadalcanal or some assurance that that will happen.
Sir, I also raised the point that the reconciliation in Weather Coast is another example of an ill-conceived and hasty reconciliation program.

We did inform Parliament during the last sitting that feedbacks from the people of the Weather Coast suggest that the reconciliation ceremony was received with very mixed feelings.
There are people who still insist that the government compensate the people of Weather Coast for the destruction caused to properties and houses during the illegal police raid in one of the villages there in 2000.

I think a number of issues as well between the people themselves need to be settled before they would accept the reconciliation as genuine.

Sir, the government is completely silent on this matter.
This is irresponsible, Mr. Speaker, and if that is not enough to insult the people affected, the Terms of Reference of the Commission of Inquiry on Land dealings on Guadalcanal continues to confirm this government’s carelessness.

The Terms of Reference explained by the Prime Minister still falls short of a lot of issues.
Indeed, the government’s selective approach to addressing the issues that affect our people as manifested in the vague and irresponsible Terms of Reference for the Commission of Inquiry into all dealings in Customary Land on Guadalcanal prior to January 1998 passed by Cabinet still fall short in a lot of areas.

It is clear that the government is either ignorant of the pain or basically plain careless on this matter.
The Terms of Reference deliberately avoid issues that really matter to the people of Solomon Islands as far as land dealings on Guadalcanal and else where for that matter are concerned.

Mr. Speaker, for example, inquiry into alienated land on Guadalcanal was deliberately left out by the government in direct defiance of the expressed concerns of the Townsville Peace Agreement.
The government needs to appreciate that one of the root causes of the ethnic tension is the feeling of deprivation by the indigenous people, landowners of alienated land, not only on Guadalcanal but elsewhere, who were forced out of their lands by foreigners.

This is gross carelessness which only confirms the attitude that is manifested in the leadership style of the Prime Minister and his Deputy who placed more emphasis in pleasing others over and above the concerns of the people of this country.
50 The return of Lungga/Tenaru land to the original landowners, which we were going to address as a matter of priority had we remained in power is unnecessarily delayed by the CNURA Government.

Is it because the Prime Minister has direct vested interest in it?

Maybe he will explain this later on.


In fact, Mr Speaker, the Lungga/Tenaru land is the easiest of all the alienated land to be transferred to the indigenous owners because they do not have to come up with a development plan because there are already developments on the land.

All they need and want is the perpetual title of the lands.
By leaving these issues out from the consideration of the Commission of Inquiry, the Government is basically saying that it does not care about the concerns of the indigenous landowners of Guadalcanal who were forced to It is plain criminal for anyone to become landless in their own province.

knowingly deprive anyone in this country of his or her rightful title to tribal heritage.
The return of alienated land is a case in point and this government under the leadership of the Prime Minister must properly look into this issue.

Lost property is another thing.

The Terms of Reference is very vague about any inquiry into the issue of lost property.

The Government needs to appreciate that property on land is part and parcel of a full consideration of the land in question.
Thousands of Solomon Islanders have yet to be fully compensated for the loss inflicted on them by the ethnic crisis as a result of none The government cannot just turn other but the government’s carelessness.

around and disregard this concern when it is common knowledge that the people affected were deprived by the very system that should protect them.
They are Solomon Islanders who were placed in a situation not as a result of their own making but they were forced into this situation by the Solomon Islands Government irresponsible handling of the concerns and the injustices raised by other Solomon Islanders.

The Solomon Islands Government cannot just disregard this issue.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, it is very insulting to Solomon Islanders concerned who lost so much during the tension to know that the very people who are saying that we should not commercialize the peace process were the very ones who benefited most from the compensation money secured from the people and the Government of the Republic of China.
By disregarding the peoples’ loss, Mr. Speaker, the government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy are saying that they do not care about the concerns and welfare of our people.
This irresponsible decision just continues to add weight to the argument that this government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy has mishandled the country’s peace process and should not be allowed to continue in office because they will 51 only drive the country further into a situation of despair and uncertainty.

This decision carries on from the position taken by the government that was in power in 2003.
It was decided and announced publicly by that government that no more compensation would be considered for people who lost their properties during the ethnic crisis.

How can leaders of this country be so careless?

This position, Mr Speaker was taken by the government then when RAMSI arrived.

The thinking then was that the government can make tough and decisive stand on the issue because it would be protected by RAMSI if Solomon Islanders decided to revolt.
Mr Speaker, this matter is not about taking tough decisions.

No, but rather, it is about Solomon Islanders who lost so much as a result of a crisis that is not of their own making.

Solomon Islanders were forced to suffer loss because of government’s carelessness.

Let that sink into our brains, Mr. Speaker, if it not, cram it.
These are Solomon Islanders that we are elected to this House to represent, so how can we continue to call ourselves leaders and the government of the people when we disregard their feelings and concerns.

They are the ones we represent in this House.

Who do we refer to as ‘our people’ and ‘my people’ in our public speeches whenever we are invited to address public gatherings?

Are these people not our people and worthy of our recognition and attention?
The fact that Solomon Islanders concerned keep coming up with this issue proves that the government cannot just ignore it and think that we will get away with it.

No.

It will catch up on us one day.

Compensation for land abandoned by settlers on the Guadalcanal Plains.

If that is not serious, the Terms of Reference of this Inquiry is very vague on the issue of compensation for land properly acquired by settlers and other buyers on Guadalcanal.
If the expectation here is for the victims to simply forgive those who demand the return of the lands, then we are simply sowing seeds of disunity and instability in this country.

If you expect these people to reconcile, you are wasting your time.

It would be difficult.

How can we become so irresponsible to disregard an issue that is so dear to the heart of the people who lost all that they worked for during their lifetime?
Family assets that have been passed down from father to son for generations were destroyed overnight.

We would be seen as uncaring monsters by the people we serve.

The problem, Mr. Speaker, with us is that once we settled in with our fat salaries and attractive working conditions, we become oblivious to the issues affecting the lives of our people.
The intimation that the government will not bother itself about the issues of compensation for land forcefully removed from the people was evident in the baseless apology that the Prime Minister expressed 52 to those people when he went to Malaita.

This is very irresponsible Mr. Speaker, very irresponsible of a government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and only goes to demonstrate how insensitive the government is in the way it handles issues that touches the very heart of the victims.
We are talking about lifetime savings of victims, mostly from the people of Malaita that went into the development of these lands.

You cannot just expect our people to forget that.

No, it is difficult.

Neither would any forgiveness without any guarantee for restitution will work.

Hon Fono (interjecting): Why don’t you do that in the last two years?

Mr Sogavare: It is a comprehensive package that we are working on.

We were working on a comprehensive package; we were not isolating these issues.
The Commission of Inquiry on land issues on Guadalcanal was going to sit first.

The inquiry into the riot, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, all these commissions need to finish their work before these issues can be addressed in a package.

We were not isolating one or two issues and think that it will work.

And that is what this government is doing and is causing hardship on itself.

I am raising these issues, which is now really sticking.
I am pleased and in fact excited to hear the Member for Savo/Russells starting to talk now.

It really sticks, Mr Speaker.

Sir, the other one is the Honiara Land, and I am talking about issues that are inside the bona fide demands.

A very significant exclusion in the Terms of Reference is the Honiara land.

The issues attached to Honiara Land are two-fold.

The first area, of course, is the illegal allocation of land by land administrative authorities in the Ministry of Lands.
In many cases, they succumbed to bribes.

The government appears to be ignorant of the issue because it did not bother to understand the content of the report of the Commission of Inquiry into the April Riot where our people have openly expressed their concerns, and this was broadcasted, Mr. Speaker.

This is the concern about illegal allocations to foreigners, and identified these allocations as the driving force behind the April 2006 Riot.

You did not take this up in the Terms of Reference.
I am talking about irresponsibility.

By ignoring this issue, the government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and his Deputy is clearly condoning corruption in the public service.

This is contrary to the expressed statements that they will not tolerate corruption and will address it head-on.

Well, Mr Speaker, they fail miserable here.

The second concern had to do with the original indigenous landowners of the Honiara Land.
One of the demands of the people of Guadalcanal is for the Solomon Islands Government to design some form of rentals for the use of 53 Honiara Land.

This is not an unreasonable demand and one for which we should appreciate - the understanding of the original landowners of Honiara Land.

The demand is not for the return of the Honiara land, but for the government to recognize the original owners by way of a regular monetary compensation.

That is what they asked for.


One would just have to see where the original landowners are located and how they are treated by the Government and the residence of Honiara, to see the injustices caused to these people.

The best the government could do for these people is to arrange some kind of compensation for the manner in which the land was acquired in its use.
Again, by failing to recognize the concerns of our people, the Government is acting irresponsibly, which only goes to demonstrate how insensitive the government is about issues that have the potential of derailing our peace process.

The Grand Coalition Government was going to adopt a special arrangement through an Act of Parliament to recognize all indigenous landowners whose alienated land cannot be returned for strategic reasons in lieu of an annual rent.
Unfortunately, we were not given the opportunity to do that by none other than the Prime Minister and his Deputy.

The other issue that people were bringing to us, which I would like to tender on the floor of Parliament and may be hear the response of the Prime Minister is the Burns Creek Land.

The government is clearly confused and may be undecided about how to handle the Burns Creek Land and the plight of the settlers there.

That settlement, as we all know, has more than 4,000 people living there.
They have become an easy target to lay blame on for crimes committed in the City.

Whether this is a fair branding of our fellow Solomon Islanders residing in the area boils down to the way responsible authorities respond to their plight.

The information we have now is that the Prime Minister wants to build a sports stadium in the area.

The Prime Minister will explain this later, but our views when we heard this, is quite serious.
By making such a proposal the Prime Minister is demonstrating total lack of sensitivity and disregard for the welfare of Solomon Islanders who found themselves unfortunately locked up in the settlement because they have nowhere else to go.

We need to remind ourselves that most of the people settling there were driven from settlements in lands outside of Honiara during the ethnic crisis where most of them lived all their lives.

We are talking about issues that we must address.


These are the people the Prime Minister took the time to go to Auki to apologize for the suffering they endured during the crisis.

Most of them faced the reality that they do not even fit into the communities in the Provinces they originate from, Mr Speaker.
It is 54 outright hypocrisy for the Prime Minister on one hand pretending to be sorry for the suffering that the victims had to endure on Guadalcanal and then on the other hand virtually slap them on the face by saying that you must get out of the area because he wants to build a sports stadium there.

There is no logic in these actions.


The key and first step to addressing the plight of the settlers in Burns Creek is to deal with the demands of the original indigenous landowners of Burns Creek on Guadalcanal to return the perpetual title of that land to the original landowners.

It only needs a decisive action.

The issue of the Burns Creek Land is no longer a simple matter of honoring titles previously granted to people.

It was taken over by the concern for peace and stability.
That is the issue now of that place.

The government needs to move in and quickly act on it.

I suggest that we reacquire the fixed term titles granted to the current holders and reassign them to people who are now forced to live illegally in those areas.

This needs a bold decision, Mr Speaker, and a government that appreciates the value of Solomon Islanders.

This is not how the leadership of the CNURA Government views the people living there.

They are considered instead as liabilities to the nation.
By taking that line of thought the CNURA Government will continue to perpetuate fear and insecurity in the minds of Honiara residents because of the potential treat and a negative reaction to the negligence of the government may create in the minds of our people living there.

Sir, I just want to touch on one issue here and then I will finish with this issue.

I will leave the other areas but I think I have made my point here.
The other one is the government’s no commitment to national unity, and that is quite serious.

The government under the leadership of this Prime Minister took national unity very, very lightly; not very seriously.

Mr Speaker, the fact that national unity is an important cornerstone of the government’s very existence, as a government it is not clear how it intends to address that issue.

They just put coalition for national unity and rural advancement.
What is even more confusing is that a number of recent Court actions and decisions were contrary to the ideals of national unity.

For example, the failure of the government to recognize the concerns of the people of Temotu who have been, with due respect, falsely accused of swearing at a particular ethnic group which was later discovered to be a setup.

We understand that the Premier of Temotu Province made representation to the government on this matter but there was no response from the government.
Sir, what we need to appreciate is that national reconciliation is not the same as national unity.

National unity is an outcome of the implementation of a 55 series of peace-conscience policy that aims at removing feelings of hatred and division and the tendency to break away.

National Reconciliation on the other hand is the desired outcome of a peace process that includes, as a very important strategy, the need to address the issues that caused the rift between two or more warring parties.
Policies to address this concern, Mr Speaker, range from fair distribution of development, fair distribution of national wealth, fair distribution of revenue from exploitation of resources to attending to outstanding issues that drove the country down the path of ethnic crisis in year 2000.

The key to addressing this concern, Mr Speaker, lies in addressing the needs of the provincial government.
This is where the failure of the CNURA Government to attend seriously to the issues raised by the Tengano Premiers conference becomes a serious matter of concern.

The premiers made it absolutely clear that the government is duty bound to prepare the provincial governments to cope with the demands of the proposed state government system.

What the government is doing now through the aid donors by concentrating on strengthening of institutions of governance is akin keen to doing nothing for the provinces.
I am not surprised that the provinces are now demanding the Central Government to address their development needs.

The Malaita Province has submitted $26million project assistance request.

The Choiseul and Temotu Provinces have submitted their separate project proposals.

The Guadalcanal Province outstanding request with the national government as contained in the Bona-fide demands.

Isabel Province is requesting funding for a new boat, and I am sure the other Provinces will follow suit.
I am just using those as examples of neglect.

The issue here is that the government cannot bank on the proposed state government system as a panacea for development related problems currently facing the Provincial Government System.

No, in fact it should be the other way around.

Provinces must be prepared now to cope with the proposed state government system.

Mr Speaker, the government is sowing seeds of disunity.
The spirit of the resolution demands a new approach to structuring the national budget, allocation of human resources and provisions of logistic support.

As a matter of fact the provincial governments have all the rights to make such a demand because they are agents of the central government in the rural areas.

The point of this argument is that the present CNURA Government’s development strategy is unclear and plays very low priority on national unity.
This is simple unacceptable for a government that announced its very existence on national unity.

The ‘NU’ acronym in the name of the present governments 56 stands for ‘National Unity’.

Unfortunately Sir, it failed miserably to leave up to that commitment.

Instead it actively sows seeds of disunity.

Sir, national unity is a very important cornerstone of peace and stability and the government cannot afford to be careless about it.
The Prime Minister and his Deputy, Mr Speaker, must take personal responsibility for this negligence.

Sir, as I have said I have a lot of other issues to talk about here but I respect Members of Parliaments who have listened to me and I thank them very much for listening to the Leader of the Opposition.

This motion, as we have already said, is not ours.

It does not belong to this side of the House, as I have explained in the beginning but it belongs to the people of Solomon Islands, your people.
In fact, if I tell you the names of the constituencies that come and see us, even the Member for East Kwaio, his people too also came, as well as Marovo too they come telling us their concerns.

Sir, in fact I totally agree with the Member for Savo/Russells on what he said.
The intention of the opposition at this sitting of Parliament is to table a motion to dissolve this Parliament because we agreed and may be we are not talking, may be some people told their thinking about us to you, and so it does not make sense.

People of this country look at us and say “Who are you.

We elected you to be there and yet you are playing around and not addressing our concerns.

You just go there to play politics”.


In fact my deputy was going to move a motion to dissolve this Parliament and let us test ourselves.

In fact, if you want it I will notice one next week for us to debate it first so that we can see who wants to dissolve the Parliament, Mr Speaker.

I think we will do it, we will notice one and then we try and debate it.

But anyway that issue aside, this motion does not belong to us, and I do not care if it is defeated on the floor of this Parliament.
It is just simple as that.

It belongs to the people of this country.

You defeat it, you are answerable to them.

We have outlined the issues and it is clear in here now.

You probably have the next month or a number of years to deal with these issues.

If you do not deal with them you face them.

That is what it is.

It is clear.


It is either we deal with these things under the Constitution of Solomon Islands and deal with them on the floor of Parliament or you let the people handle the constitution in their own hands and deal with us.

That is how this thing is going to happen.

So I do not care if this motion is defeated.

We are doing our part in bringing the voice and concerns of the people on the floor of this Parliament.

But if it is defeated it is up to you.


With that, I fully support the intention of this motion, Mr Speaker.

Sitting suspended at 1:30 pm 57 Hon FONO: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me the floor to contribute briefly to this motion.

In fact, I did not intend to talk but after listening to the recent speaker, the Leader of the Opposition prompted me to talk.

Because the Leader of the Opposition talks as though the motion of no confidence is on the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.
I was implicated in this motion and that is why I need to contribute to clarify some of the allegations that he raised.

Mr Speaker, a vote of no confidence in any Prime Minister is a democratic right of every opposition group to raise issues against the government on any particular time, and therefore, I do not rule out that it is the constitutional right of the mover, none other than the MP for West Honiara in moving the motion.
However, when the mover and the Opposition Group said that this motion belongs to the people, one of the questions is that who are those people supporting this motion to remove this current government.
Because as other colleagues on this side of the House have said, current Members of this Government also represent our people, and some of them fully support this government to continue in office for the rest of this term of parliament in order to implement government programs and make a difference in the lives of our people.
Sir, when I look at the way this motion was put together and was supposed to be moved on the 25th July, the Opposition withdrew it so that it was not debated that time and was resubmitted and put on notice for it to be moved today, the 8th August.

Information that reached me, Sir, has it that 8/8/08 is a very special number to the Opposition and so they want to move this motion on this day.
Sir, the Leader of the Opposition has been trying several strategies to gage the support of the people in Honiara, and that is why he asked the MP for West Honiara to move the motion rather than moving it himself because he might not have the support of the people in Honiara.

I was told that he even approached the MP for Central Honiara to move it before asking the MP for West Honiara.

This is in order to gage the support of people in Honiara.
It would seem to me that only people in Honiara have been going to his office telling him to remove this government.

Sir, even earlier on before this motion I had very reliable information that the Leader of the Opposition was trying to influence our boys from Malaita who used to be part of the ethnic situation.
He even wrote to them promising cash payments, and that is why I went against that in the media publicly to say that that is an evil strategy adopted by none other than the Leader of the Opposition.

And in that letter or MOU that he signed and gave to our boys from Malaita he promised them cash payments.

(I don’t want to call them former combatants or 58 militants but I called them my boys of Malaita).
They are my boys because a majority of them are from Kwara’ae, some of whom have mixed feelings and did not agree to what was in the letter because they said who would want to end up being remanded in prison whilst the Leader of Opposition is enjoying his life outside of prison.

That is why I was very strong to say that enough is enough to stop using my boys from Malaita to further your political interest.
I have very reliable sources telling me that he has given them letters and even met with them promising them that if they help him remove this government when he comes into power, he will give them $20,000 within the first month.

Within 12 months my government will give you $150,000.

That is from information passed on to me by my boys.

It is therefore very true that he has been using evil strategies to oust a democratically elected government.
That is why I went to the media earlier on condemning that approach.

Not only that, Mr Speaker, I believe the grassroots network email information that was circulating must be part and parcel of the opposition’s strategy.

Because the person that was named in that email information is none other than the secretary general of the Socred party which the Leader of the Opposition is president.
You see, Mr Speaker, that is why I condemned it again as it is trying to influence the ordinary people of Honiara to back him on his evil strategy to oust this current government.

Mr Speaker, when you look at the composition of this current government, most provinces is represented in this government.

I must tell my good people of Malaita that 13 Members of Malaita are in this current government, and we are confident that we can make a difference during these two years.
Just give us time, Mr Speaker, I ask my good people of Malaita and see us.

We should not allow evil strategies that the current Leader of Opposition is trying to oust this government.

That is why I made it very clear that he came into power using similar strategies in 2000 and later on after the April Riots.

I made very clear the rehabilitation program that the CNURA Government is implementing.

I ask my good people and my good boys, give us time.

In fact it is in our policy statement.


If you look at the last government’s policy statement, it was not even included in its policy statements.

A lot of the things the Leader of the Opposition is blaming this current government for, why didn’t he do it during the two years he took power after the April Riot?

It is very good that because you are in the opposition and so you start accusing the government.

Why didn’t you do it during your time in the government, may I ask, Mr Speaker?
The Leader of the Opposition seems to be sensationalizing a lot of issues he raised in order to gain the support of ordinary people.

He talked about lost properties, he talked about people were victims, he talked about the land issue 59 on Guadalcanal, but why didn’t he address those issues during the last two years when he was in power.

Why?

That is the question this whole nation should be asking?

Is it because you are in the opposition and so you raised those issues in Parliament?
Mr Speaker, I am confident that this rehabilitation package that is in the CNURA Government’s Policy is slowly putting together a project to assist our boys, not only boys from Malaita but from Guadalcanal and also boys from other Provinces who were affected or were part of the tension.

The government is being very mindful of those involved in the ethnic tension as they are not the only ones who were affected.

The victims are there - those who actually lost properties, those who lost their investments.
All these sectors need to be considered by any responsible government.

But we do not promise things that we cannot do.

That is why I made it very clear to some of the boys concerned, not only here in Honiara but also in Auki that the government program is not a promise of cash payment.

Not at all, not even during the lobbying, which the Leader of the Opposition alleged that it was the Deputy Prime Minister who promised the boys.
No, Mr Speaker, I did not use the former boys or the government to help us in the lobbying time in December last year.

No, I only asked some of the young boys who voted for me not only in the 2006 elections but also the last three consecutive elections to provide security for me.

That is all.

Never at anytime did I promise the young boys any cash payment of $150,000.

That is why I refute the claims made by the Leader of Opposition.
He cannot mislead this Parliament and this nation for saying that it was the DPM who promised the boys that his government is going to give that money to the boys.

No, Mr Speaker, I totally deny that claim, now as well as previously through the media.

Never at anytime had any government promised cash payment to the boys.

Mr Speaker, you being the Chairman of the Peace and Monitoring Council, also made it very clear that there was no such promise in the Townsville Peace Agreement.
For the Leader of Opposition to capitalize and use that as an issue is not good enough.

It reflects the kind of leadership, and the kind of character the Leader has who is always trying to sensationalize and use these issues for his own political ends.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, I am surprised at the mover of the motion and other speakers on the opposition side for questioning why the government contributes another $5million under the current supplementary budget.
Mr Speaker, the right time to raise this issue for our debate is when we come to debate the supplementary budget and not now.

Mr Speaker, if you do not accept that money then you are a hypocrite because it is our people who are going to benefit and not you personally as the 60 Member of Parliament.

No, unless you are dishonest and used the money it for your own ends.

Some of us with a big population see that $1million RCDF as not enough, and that is why the government needs to put in this contribution.
We are starting off with this $5million.

If government programs and revenue is good, it is going to be increased before the end of this year so that we can implement some of the projects that are in our constituency plans.

Some of us are implementing constituency plans.

If you go to our constituencies now you will see us building classrooms and clinics.
I have just recently improved certain feeder roads in my constituency, which is the responsibility of the Province but it did not do it and so I did it for my people.

You go to our constituencies and you will see it.

This funding does not belong to Members of Parliament so that it is raised here.

I am even surprised at the Leader of Opposition commenting on the benefits of Members of Parliament under the PER as though he is not a beneficiary.
The government did not approve these entitlements but it was by an independent commission, Mr Speaker, which you know every well.

It was the Parliamentary Entitlements Commission that approved those packages.

Why Mr Speaker?

Those are privileges that any leader should get so that he works honestly with his people.

I am surprised when the Leader of Opposition raised this as though it was the government that approved these payments, and as if he is not a beneficiary.

No, Mr Speaker.
No, Mr Speaker.

Sir, when I was Leader of Opposition I only used a second hand reconditioned hilux for two years.

But just look at what kind of vehicle the Leader is using this time.

He is using a very fancy vehicle.

That goes only to show what sort of character he is.

Even now as the Deputy Prime Minister I am still using a hilux.

I do not ask for very fancy and expensive vehicles because I know the government cannot afford it unless we asked for it ourselves.
Mr Speaker, whatever we raise in Parliament must not be confusing to our people.

It is not the government that approved the benefits that Members of Parliament are receiving at the moment.

No, as you know very well, Sir, the Constitution mandates the Parliamentary Entitlements Commission to approve the terms and conditions of Members of Parliament.
Knowing very well as leaders we have a lot of pressure by our people, we have a lot of responsibility and we are not available to involve in any business activities that can help support ourselves.

We give our all to national duty we have been called upon to serve.
Mr Speaker, I see the better way in addressing the problems and the concerns that the mover of the motion and the Opposition Group are raising is through motions for the government to consider on Fridays rather than a motion to oust the Prime Minister.

There were two previous Fridays that was allowed 61 for Private Members motion and yet no motion was brought in.

This shows that the Opposition Group is not prepared to work with the government.
It should suggest to the government the strategies for us to work on so that we improve the livelihood of our people.

Mr Speaker, it is good that they have written 66 questions because 666 is a very popular number of the Leader of Opposition.

Sixty-six questions have been noticed which shows they are hardworking in trying to get the government to answer these questions.
But what about private member’s motions so that government can look at addressing some of the issues raised under this vote of no confidence.

If at the end of this Parliament Meeting, Mr Speaker, and there is no motion moved by any private members or any member from the Opposition Bench then it reflects very badly on the Opposition.

Because when I was in the opposition, Mr Speaker, if one cares to look at the Hansard Reports since 1997 when I came into Parliament, I moved a lot of motions.
And some of those motions are now being implemented.

And I am looking forward to making changes to certain legislations to address some of the motions I raised in Parliament and was passed.

That is an avenue the Opposition should have utilized to bring up some of the issues raised under this motion rather than moving this vote of no confidence that we are now debating.
Sir, as I have said I will be brief and just to clarify some of the issues and allegations raised by the Leader of Opposition because he was implicating that the motion needs to be adjusted so that the no confidence is on the Prime Minister and the Deputy, and not the Prime Minister himself.

With those few remarks, Mr Speaker, I oppose the motion.

Hon HAOMAE: Mr Speaker, I shall be very brief.

At the outset, I would like to thank the mover of the motion although this motion is quite a strange motion.
I say this because although the Opposition or any Member of Parliament for that matter have the constitutional right under the Constitution to move a motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister, even if for check and balances to seek Parliament’s approval to remove the Prime Minister for the third time in a That apart, Mr Speaker, my parliament is quite strange, Mr Speaker.

contribution will be based on national interest or whether this motion is in the national interest.
Mr Speaker, the question of no confidence in a government or in a Prime Minister is also a matter of confidence.

It is a matter of confidence and the mover of the motion as well as the Leader of the Opposition touched on matters of performance of the government.

So I beg your indulgence, Sir, to address some matters of the government’s performance.

As I said at the outset my contribution will be from the perspective of national interest.
62 Mr Speaker, upon assuming the mantel of power, the CNURA Government in one month produced the policy statements of the government.

That, I believe is some sort of a record.

I remember that only in 1994 was the then Government for National Unity produced its program of action before it actually came for the vote.
This is close to a record, and in 1989 when the Alliance Party won the majority of votes for purposes of forming a government, its manifesto formed the basis of the Development Plan for that particular government, Mr Speaker, although the government did not last the term of Parliament, and that was also a record Mr Speaker.

In terms of this government, Mr Speaker, to come up with policy statements that guides the government through objectives, the overall policies that guide the government.
Any government needs policy statements to guide it, and so for the policy to be in place within one month is a good performance, from my perspective is a good report and record.

Within three months the government came up with the Translation, Interpretation and the Implementation Document, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, that is also a record and a good performance.

It means the government has been working.

Sir, within five months the government came up with its Medium Term Development Strategy.
That is also a good performance.

In terms of the guiding principles and guiding policies of the government, those were put in place within the first five months it assumed the mantel of power.

These documents are there to guide the government, and this is good performance.
Mr Speaker, in terms of the management of the foreign policy of the country, which falls under the purview of my Ministry, Mr Speaker, my observation of the previous government under the Prime Ministership of my friend, the Member for East Choiseul (I was his Deputy Prime Minister before and so he is my friend), the previous government has a good foreign policy.

The problem is the implementation of that policy.


If I may put it this way, Mr Speaker, it is like a man who goes fishing with a good fishing line, a good bait, and throws his fishing line into the sea, but instead of the fish coming to eat the bait he throws a big stone after the line and so the fish run away and do not eat the bait.

That, I think, sums up the implementation of the Foreign Policy of the previous government in terms of the South Pacific Region.
Hence having assumed the mantel of power, the CNURA under the Prime Minister and consistent with the Policy Statement of the Government, we say that one of the priorities of the government under National Security and Foreign Relations part of the Policy Statement, is to go and mend the strained relations that Solomon Islands has with our neighbor countries.
Hence, in fulfillment of 63 that policy objective, the Prime Minister took the first call to the regional countries, our neighbors accompanied by his Foreign Minister and other officials who visited PNG, Australia and New Zealand for purposes of mending the strained relationship that exists between some of the countries in the region and also Solomon Islands.

Before that the CNURA Government handled the side issues, the stones that were thrown after the fishing line.
Stones like the former Attorney General’s issue; the issue of the government’s mixed signals sent to the Region in terms of RAMSI, of our calling RAMSI at the United Nations General Assembly, as an occupation force.

That is the kind of stone I am talking about, and also the issue of our non-attendance at the Forum Meeting in Tonga.

Those are the stones, Mr Speaker, in terms of Foreign Policy, because it is diplomacy.

Even though you may think it is not important, it is a very serious matter.
The implications in terms of the management of the Foreign Policy of the country and in terms of diplomacy, is a serious matter.

Hence, today Solomon Islands has normalized its relations with our neighbors and we have become credible partners in regional cooperation.

We have regained, in my opinion, the trust of our neighbors.

Not only that, Mr Speaker, but we also at the same time addressed the national security of the country in terms of RAMSI.
Like it or not, the national security of this country is in the national interest of our country and our people, including the very people referred to by the Leader of Opposition today.

If the national security of this country is misplaced or not addressed properly in a comprehensive manner, we will be in trouble.

I do not want this country to return to the situations that have affected our country in the early 2000.

I do not want our country to revisit those situations.
Mr Speaker, we have come to the stage where we are now in the executive government and have handled matters of policy in terms of RAMSI.

We have good working relationship now with RAMSI.

On the legislative front, as we know already, the Facilitation of the International Assistance Act will be reviewed by the Foreign Relations Committee.

This Committee is going to sit to review that because time has changed.
In 2003 when our neighbors came in to help the situation has truly changed, and so we need to review the Facilitation of International Assistance Act.

The operations of RAMSI have been reviewed, but that is done by a Regional Committee and Parliament is required to review this Act and that is now being given to the Foreign Relations Committee to work on.

Mr Speaker, I listened very carefully to my honorable friend, the Leader of Opposition’s presentation.

He referred to two key words.


The first one is ‘comprehensive’ and the second one is ‘selective’.

Sir, from the beginning I did not intend to speak.

But my personal computer detects that the presentation, with due respect, by my friend, the LOO is very selective in nature and is not 64 comprehensive.

Therefore, even though the approach is selective in terms of the handling of the various issues he referred to, his presentation was selective.
Mr Speaker, I put to you that the peace process and the policies attached thereto of the present government are comprehensive.

They are very, very comprehensive and not necessarily selective.

There are no isolated instances.

Those forms part and parcel of the holistic and comprehensive policy put together by the government and being implemented by the government.

Mr Speaker, it is only natural that in the implementation of that comprehensive policy, certain issues will be prioritized.
Someone has to come first, others later, and then others later on because of the limitation of resources.

That is why we have a budget.

Because I would have thought that instead of concentrating on sensationalizing other issues like property, the reconciliation process and lands, which the government is handling anyway, they are in the comprehensive policy and planning of the government but the government goes beyond that as well.
It is also addressing the economic roots of the problems that If you analyze them very carefully, Mr Speaker, all of those we found out.

problems have economic roots, and so we have to address the economic roots through the policy of rural advancement.

Therefore, the government through rural advancement is coming up with a policy to give development projects to rural areas.

Whilst that is addressing the peace process, it also ensures that economic projects like the Auluta Basin are in Malaita.
It is encouraging and giving more funding towards this project.

There is the Waisisi, the Suava Bay, and also other things to be extended to other provinces in order to cement and foster national unity.

Because mind you, Sir, national unity does not live on bread alone, but it has all the embracing and subsuming situations that we must harness and build so that they go together, Mr Speaker.

Yes, I agree that we must ensure the peace process must go ahead.
We must also ensure that we spare our resources to advance the peace process.

In terms of reconciliation, Mr Speaker, and the Minister of Reconciliation might be speaking on this later on, but let me say that reconciliation is a process, and it does not happen in one day.

It will take time.

Even today after 200 years the people of the United States are still reconciling due to the Civil War, Mr Speaker.

Even today, the rehabilitation process in Vanuatu at one of the events in 1980 is still going ahead.
Reconciliation in those neighboring countries is still going ahead.

So it is a process.

Just a few years ago Germany just reconciled fully with Israel as a state over the events of the Second World War.

Therefore, reconciliation and rehabilitation takes time.

You cannot just say it is here and there.

That is why I am saying that the presentation by my friend, the Leader of Opposition is selective.
You 65 yourselves have to imagine where it is selective because it seems to address certain issues that are disturbing to our people, and to their mentality in doing something, and he left out the other bigger picture.

As the Prime Minister will be speaking later on but on behalf of the government I am presenting a wider picture in terms of reconciliation.

It is a process and it takes time.


The Ministry of National Unity and Reconciliation, appointed four men from Small Malaita to go now and consider case by case those situations so that individuals and their families, communities, tribes to reconcile.

They have identified the people involved because we believe that reconciliation must come right down in order to be meaningful.

This is because reconciliation must come from the heart.

You cannot buy reconciliation.


And we must be careful not to make compensation into an industry.

Our custom is compensation but if we make it to become an industry then it is beyond the actual connotation of the custom.

Mr Speaker, as the Deputy Prime Minister has said and I support him, I do not want to use the word ‘ex-militants’ or ‘ex-combatants’, as it has negative connotations.

I think he has selected a good term by saying ‘our boys’.
I think they happened to be caught up with the situation of that time and so we must help to steer them so that they can come back to the fold of society.

That has been and will be done through the process of rehabilitation.

I do not want to touch on that because the Deputy Prime Minister had already explained that on behalf of the government.

Mr Speaker, I want to come back to the issue of respect.

It saddens me that we are acting as though our country has no problems, difficulties or challenges.
We have problems, in my view.

I do not about you but we are in a post conflict situation and we have problems, and so we must address those problems.

We must not make political expediency or other concentrations to elbow out the resolution to those problems, Mr Speaker.

If we do that, Mr Speaker, we will be in trouble.

Our country will be in problem.

I want to remind colleagues that our country must be managed very well as it has problems.
We have to ensure that other concentrations do not elbow out or displace to attempt to resolve those problems, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, as I said at the beginning, the performance of the government has been talked about in this motion.

On matters personal to the Prime Minister, he will have the opportunity to reply to them.

But in terms of the management of the Foreign Policy of the country and the development projects attached thereto in the development plan, there are four.
I highlighted this because I speak about the performance of the government, and in this case, with due respect to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade, of which I am the current Minister, Mr Speaker.

66 The first project is the Solomon Islands Chancery Office in Port Moresby.

Mr Speaker, the implementation of the Solomon Islands Chancery Office in Port Moresby is progressing well.
The recommendation for the Tender Board has gone to the Central Tender Board today, which will make the decision on who are the applicants that are going to build the Chancery, and work will begin this month.

So to say that my Ministry is not performing in terms of that development project, is wide off the mark.

The building of the Solomon Islands Chancery in Port Moresby will begin this month.

All the processes have gone through and decision has been made today.
The Solomon Islands relations with PNG, our nearest neighbor is very important, and the construction of this phase of the Chancery underlies the importance of that particular relationship, Mr Speaker.

In terms of the Solomon Islands Chancery in Canberra, the committee is managing the process of formulating a design to reflect our identity and values.

The Committee is committed to this undertaking.


The same Committee that built the PNG one will also build the Solomon Islands Chancery in Canberra with the change of High Commissioners.

So it is the High Commissioner in Canberra that will come into the committee.

The committee has already met and so construction of the Chancery in Canberra is expected by to start next year.

That will be reflected in next year’s budget.

This year is just for the design work.


Mr Speaker, the Ministry is going to send a delegation from Foreign Affairs to Suva, Fiji this month to identify buildings to establish the Solomon Islands High Commission in Suva.

That has been done as well.

To say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not working is out of the truth now.

In terms of the VIP Lounge, Mr Speaker, as it is inside the Development Budget, tender will go out soon.
The Government has opted to outsource the architectural responsibilities to fast track the management and supervision of this project.

It is anticipated that the government will receive the design and commence the construction of this project by the end of 2008, Mr Speaker.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade is proactive and articulate in the consultation process of the policy statement, policy translation and the interpretation framework and recently, the medium term development strategy for 2008 to 2010.

In terms of performance, Mr Speaker, these projects are for national interests.

They are not for Members of Parliament.

They are in pursuit of the foreign policy of the country.
Mr. Speaker, let me come back to the issue I had raised earlier about respect.

I respect the mover of the motion.

Respect should also be reciprocal.

In 2000 I attended all the committee meetings; the Ceasefire, the Townsville Peace 67 Agreement, which I also signed with the then Deputy Prime Minister, the Member for Savo/Russells who is now the Minister for Forest.

In all those meetings, if you sum up everything that have been said, they can be summed up in one word and that word is ‘respect’.
We must respect people, we must respect each other, we must respect peoples’ land, we must respect peoples’ properties, we must respect their women and we must respect their point of view.

It is all I think, Mr Speaker, if we respect each other, this beautiful about respect.

country endowed by God with a lot of natural resources and good beautiful people, if we manage those resources well, it will become one of the best countries in the South Pacific.

But we must respect each other first.


We must respect other peoples’ betel nut; we must respect properties such as coconuts and all those; because if we do not respect them, they also in turn will not respect us.

Solomon Islanders had in nature, trait of kindness but let me warn you to not take the kindness as a matter of weakness.

No.

We are very kind people but if that kindness is abused, it can potentially turn against you.
In terms of the execution of policy matters on RAMSI Mr. Speaker, that is still on-going.

In terms of the Legislative side of it, as Parliament had already known, it is before the Foreign Relations Committee for purposes of the review, Mr Speaker.

It is my assessment and analysis that this motion is not in the national interest, Mr. Speaker and therefore I oppose the motion.

Thank you Hon TOZAKA: Mr Speaker.


I will be contributing very briefly on this motion moved by the Member of Parliament for West Honiara.

Mr. Speaker, I will be brief and on the spot on some of the things that I want to contribute to this motion.

Sir, first of all what I would like to say is about my difficulty supporting this motion on behalf of my people of North Vella.
When I say this, I also refer to the statement or to the claim by the Member of West Makira that 99.9 percent of people are supporting this motion.

I totally reject that.

I dispute or do not support and agree with him on that statement, and I think it is irresponsible on his part as occupying one of the very responsible position as number two to the Leader of Opposition to make such a statement that actually defy facts to justify it in this House.
The other thing, Mr. Speaker, I have been trying to listen very careful, as I am a little bit deaf on my left ear, and so I could not take some of the issues that were mentioned by the mover of the motion in trying to justify the reasons for moving this motion at this particular time.

But I find it very difficult too that he was not able to convince me, unfortunately, to support this motion.
I say this because already this motion has been defeated and I also see that the Opposition in fact has already been working with us on this side of the 68 House, particularly on these two bills that we introduced to this House and was passed because the Leader of Opposition himself rendered his total support for these two Bills.

Sir, that indicates in a way the reality that we are supporting each other and are working together.
One point that stands out very clearly here is that the system of government is not a destination, but it is a process.

It is not something that you go inside and start to initiate policies of the government with the hope that you will achieve those policies immediately or at your point of time.

That is a problem we leaders find ourselves in when we operate this system of government, which is not our system of government.
It is something we adopted from our colonial masters and we are living with it right now and we are trying to understand it.
In fact it is only on Monday that this Duke of Gloucester was given the opportunity to speak to us and one of the things he said (the only thing I can still remember, I do not know why, but it came straight into my mind) was that: “the message I left with you is this, that you must work together and accept each other.” Not only us in here, in this country alone or in this chamber, but also other countries outside.
In other words, we are not living in the coo-coo land anymore; we are not living in our little houses and huts in North Vella.

We are living together in a big village.

It is a big village and we need each other.

Listening very carefully to the Leader of Opposition, he has made some very good points which I have taken note of.

He referred to one of the things that also reminded me about this motion, which he said is the motion of our people.
Of course, the motions we move in here is representing our people.

We are representing our constituencies and anything we say in here represents our people.

He also said that the people he referred to are the people in the market places, the shops, the streets, who came and made their representation to him about some of the things in this government’s policies that they are not happy about.
I like to also remind the Opposition that the same people that see him and his group also came to see us on this side of the House.

I want to assure you that, and who are these people?

These people are representing all of us in here in this chamber and they came to see us about their problems and difficulties.

And the things that they say to you are completely opposite to what they say to us.

In fact they say that the government is doing a very good job.

“Thank you very much.


Things have moved positively, we are very happy with you, with the leadership of the Member of North East Guadalcanal, the present Prime Minister.

We are happy with the leadership of his number two, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Member for Central Kwara’ae”.

They are satisfied.

When they come to us, what do we do with these people, Sir?

Do I see them as people from North Vella?

No.

We are leaders, I am a Minister and I am 69 a Solomon Islander.

I am wearing a lot of hats here.


I saw them as Solomon Islanders.

I saw them, whether a North East Guadalcanal man meets me, when they say they need help, I did not say wait I will move a motion of no confidence on this one.

No.

I sit and listen to him about his problems.

Never mind, whether I am from North Vella I will help.

This is a positive way of looking after our people.

We do not say that man is like this or like that.

We together and collectively help our people.


We understand each other, our shortfalls, and our inadequacies in our country.

We need to rebuild our nation and I do not expect all of us to be perfect at this time but we must share the little resources that we have from our coconuts, from our marine resources and what the donors give us.

Let us try to put them together to help our people.
Let us always put up a leadership face in situations when our people come to see us for help Sir, when I look at this motion, it is defeated on technical point and all forms of reasons that I can think of and rational thinking.

Looking in terms of the timing of the motion, it is also defeated.

When looking at it in the context of number, it is also defeated.

When looking at it in the context of position, it is also defeated.
In other words, it is not the time and, I believe in time as the Leader of the Opposition and some of us here, who work in the Public Service, time is very important and I have taken his advice.

In fact, on my Ministry of Public Service, he said: “watch out, you are not going to deliver within that time”.

I still take note of that very good advice and I said yes I will take it.

So that is the challenge to me on what he said.


The other thing that I would also like to remind us is that it is only five months ago that we passed the budget.
We also understand each others difficulties, having a deadlock with issues that we managed to come to an understanding and then of course time was not on your side, Leader of Opposition, that we managed to have this side of the House formed and is currently led by the Member for North East Guadalcanal, and we are very happy that we have his leadership.
Sir, in regards to the things that I would like to say, I think we are all satisfied that there is nothing as the Leader of Opposition said and that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the motion because it reminds us that it is their job and that they should put us in place.

But we have to be mindful that there are a lot of business that we need to complete in this House and motions like this destroy our minds so that we do not attend to some of the most important issues that we need to attend to.
Sir, very briefly in regards to the Public Service.

I am very happy that before we actually started this Meeting, Mr Speaker, you allowed me to make a statement about the Public Service Reform.

I do not deny that there is also weakness in the Public Service.
Some of the things we are doing are not very 70 good but we have taken up the initiative that the Opposition Group has come up with the policy it has not been able to implement during its time, but again it is a process and so we have taken it up and have kicked start that program.

So we are addressing the Public Service issues and the things that all of us are concerned about collectively about Public Service improvement.
Sir, some of the things directed to the Prime Minister and also the Deputy Prime Minister, we must always be mindful of the fact that our system is based on consultation and collective agreement.

I would like to assure the Opposition group that we have a very good group on this side and we base most of our decisions on consultation and also collective decision-making.

And those issues that we have were approached exactly in those manners that you have said.
Sir, when I say all these things, I come back to the point that, yes, I think the motion before us comes from our people but the point I would like to reiterate is that our people need us more to work closely with them.

I am sure that the Prime Minister himself when he speaks later on will assure us that we are going to take off this time around; we will go full speed after all the things that we have done that has been very successful.
You would remember some of those things and I do not want to remind you but sometimes when we talk we tend to forget them.

For instance, not very long ago the Trade Show that was held very successfully where most of our provincial people came and took part in the programs.

Is that not being successful?

Is that not pride for us?

Very, very good!

So this is one thing that we have done.


Recently we have had a very successful Arts and Cultural Show in Pago Pago, American Samoa, which my Honourable Colleague, the Minister for Trade and Culture attended.

That was very successful as well.

Our people also participated in that festival.

We are also a very successful country in sporting.

We also sent a team, small as we are, our financial base is very strong and we are going, we are leaving, we are representing our country in Beijing.
These are very good, and as far as our relationship is concerned we have mended our relations and we have done that one very earlier and now we have created very close friendship with outside people.

We have very good friendship and now that we have our very good friends with our donors, we are now coming back to address the issues that our people are interested in.
I would like to assure here that I do not know how you feel about it but I am feeling very excited at the moment; excited that our country is going to move forward this time.

Another thing that I know too is that we debate these things and we talk about them and we are not people who take things for granted.

That is the 71 nature of our people in the country of Solomon Islands.

That is one thing good about us.

I am also happy that things are moving positively ahead as far as RAMSI is concerned.
We are also happy that we have taken the points from the Opposition Group and we will now face to face with RAMSI to improving our agreement with them.

Mr Speaker, I am pleased that I am able to convey some of the things I have mentioned in contribution to this motion.

Once again, sir, I would like to reaffirm my support for the Prime Minister and his Deputy Prime Minister and also the government.

In saying this I resume my seat by opposing the motion.
Hon TAUSINGA: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Member for West Honiara for the motion now before the House.

I also would like to make a very short observation on the substance that was brought before the House to give reasons, and put in motion.

Mr Speaker, there are two particular important hosts in the government of Solomon Islands: One is the Prime Minister and secondly the Leader of the Opposition.

These are the only two important hosts that are built into the Constitution of the country.
The Leader of Opposition is the alternative government and in the event the Prime Minister resigns or vacates the post, the logic and the practice is that the Opposition normally by popular support assumes the post as Prime Minister.

The motion before us, Mr Speaker, appears to suggest the Opposition is ready should the government be unseated to take up the post of Prime Minister and so it is quite in order that the motion is brought before the House.
Mr Speaker, the provision on which the motion is based, Section 34(1) of the Constitution, if I am right, the designers of the Constitution, in my view, put that provision as a safety measure in a situation where a Prime Minister does not command an absolute majority and thus risks the passage of government bills and government businesses through Parliament.
In such a situation, where the Prime Minister does not command the popular support of the majority, the government then becomes inoperable and becomes a liability, thus needs changing.

It is on this basis, in my view that the constitutional provision is in place to act contrary and to invoke that provision regardless of popular support, is an abuse of democratic process.
And so, the first test, Mr Speaker, in considering the motion is the question of whether or not the Prime Minister fails to command majority support in its leadership.

In democratic practice, for a leader to lose popular support simply means the Executive no longer remains intact and the parties or the coalition that makes up the government, the members of that coalition deserve a new leader.
72 This scenario usually emerges, Mr Speaker, when the leader is alleged to have acted or is making decisions outside the coalition’s understandings and agreement, or the leader has acted in a manner corruptible putting the government and the people of the country in disrepute, and so he loses the support.
Mr Speaker, the logical remedial measure in a situation where the Prime Minister loses the support, is for the Prime Minister to tender his resignation as provided for in Section 34(3)(d) of the Constitution.

And this had happened decades ago, as you would remember in those yesteryears, if one cares to research into the history of our Parliament and the past executive governments.
However, while our Prime Minister governs a minority and when he ceases to command the support of the majority and refuses to resign then obviously Section 34(1) of the Constitution comes into play, and this is the circumstance that the designers of the Constitution envisaged and thus provided us with that safety measure.

Mr Speaker, does the Prime Minister acted outside of the coalition partner’s understanding and agreement in the exercise of his executive duty?
Does the Prime Minister conducts the affairs of the country in as far as decision making is concerned in a dictatorial manner as opposed to democratic processes?

Does the Prime Minister acted in a manner contrary to the policy decisions of the ruling government?

Does the Prime Minister acted in a corrupt manner that puts the government and the people of Solomon Islands in disrepute?
The answers to these questions, sir, obviously will surmise whether or not the present Prime Minister loses the support of the Coalition Partners.

The present government under the leadership of the present Prime Minister, Mr Speaker, comprises of various Parties, which are the Christian Democratic Party, the National Party, the Peoples Alliance Party, and the Solomon Islands Party for Rural Advancement, the Association of Independent Members and the Independent of the Independents.
This Coalition binds itself on the basis of the common manifesto on which the Development Program of all the people in the country for the next 26 months is derived from.

Our Party, Mr Speaker, is at liberty to a supreme cause their own manifesto, the document and the work program that is current in the government is the result of consultation with each Coalition partners.
And therefore the Coalition parties or as I would like to term it the Coalition of the Willing to serve the people of this country, binds them on a development and work program.
Almost all the development and work programs, Mr Speaker, that were put in place by the defunct Grand Coalition for Change Government are included in the present development work program and priorities because all the major Parties that once made up the GCCG are now in alliance known as the 73 CNURA Government and they had the development programs and priorities introduced in the Coalition.

The CNURA, Mr Speaker, has no leadership problem in so far as decision making is concerned.
The Cabinet is well and functioning.

Discussions are conducted with open mind and without fear of being sacked, Mr Speaker.

That is a sense of maturity and openness in all the discussions and importantly, there are continuous consultation between Party Leaders and the Prime Minister on matters of great importance for the country.
So there is this feeling of togetherness and a sense of belonging to a group, which further helps to instill within a sense of ownership of the various development programs and priorities and the urge to achieve what has been put down for implementation.

And therefore, Mr Speaker the questions that I raise to test the popular support in the Prime Minister acted outside the Coalition Party’s understanding in the exercise of this view, Mr Speaker.
Yet the Prime Minister conducts the affairs of the country in as far as decision making is concerned in the dictatorial manner as opposed to democratic process.

If the Prime Minister acted contrary to the Policy decision of the ruling government, the test, Mr Speaker are these questions: The base upon which decisions are made in the CNURA government is consultation and as evidence Mr Speaker and the respect by the Prime Minister on Cabinet decisions, caucus decisions and party leader’s decisions.
On that score, Mr Speaker the Prime Minister still enjoys the popular support of the Coalition Partners.

There’s no reason the motion should be brought into Parliament to discuss because the scenario is that there is no likelihood that the motion will succeed in this Parliament.

Mr Speaker, to use the provision of the Constitution for purposes of debate is an abuse of the democratic process.
There are avenues Mr Speaker, for which the allegations for which the reasons that were brought in support of the motion should have been directed.

They have Supplementary Appropriation coming up in which the Opposition can and should discuss and debate issues with areas to be the substance of this motion.
And to use this opportunity, Mr Speaker to tarnish each other in my view is the immaturity in leadership for the scenario that I have outlined to test the popular support of the Prime Minister does speaks of the inappropriateness of the motion itself.
Of course, Mr Speaker members of this Parliament are privileged to speak what they want to share in terms of the issues they identify but Mr Speaker to bring down a Prime Minister is in my view should only be done if there is every reason the motion is be successful.

Other than that, Mr Speaker I think there is no merit.

Of course, Mr Speaker, amongst the issues raised by the mover of this motion is the computer issue that was believed to be inappropriately administered.
74 Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Education does not really know the full story of the issue because the project was not initiated by the Ministry itself.

And I think the mover of this motion should direct his allegation or should seek explanation from none other but the Leader of Opposition, Mr Speaker.

I say that with due respect to the Leader, sir but because he was the government of the day at that time.

So I lodge that he explained the computer issue to the members of Parliament in this Chamber.
I do not have information to explain issues or rather I have limited information to explain the issue.

Mr Speaker, I think I have said what I need to say, because I was trying to portray the second chance upon, which has motion should come into Parliament.

Of course, the Prime Minister will defend himself on the allegation leveled at him but Mr Speaker who in this Parliament is without weakness?

Who in this Parliament is sinless?

Who in this Parliament Mr Speaker is pure?


Mr Speaker, listening to the mover of this motion I was reminded of the beautiful story of that woman that was dragged to our Lord and alleged to have been living in immorality.

And you know, Mr Speaker, the good Lord said, “Whoever of you people that do not have any sin, whoever of you people are pure?

Cast the first stone.” Without the Lord knowing everybody dispersed and no one was there when He looked up”.
And so I was reminded of that story Mr Speaker when I listened to the mover of the motion because when you have a discussion alleged or discussion that shows some kind of weaknesses of others you are implying, Mr Speaker that you are better than the other.

Or when you talk about that the Prime Minister is incapable then you are indirectly saying I am capable.
So you are comparing your ability that you can do better and I think in my view such a judgmental attitude is inappropriate under the circumstances for which this motion is being moved.

So Mr Speaker, I’m trying to somehow give you the appropriateness in the circumstances of the motion.
And I think it is important that as leaders in here assess situation before we bring in motion that can only tarnish each other rather than achieve the objective for which it is designed under that very relevant Constitutional provision.

Mr Speaker, I do not have any other issues to raise.

In fact, I was trying to put forward my argument to assist Members of this Parliament to make the decision and position themselves in respect of the motion.

Mr Speaker, I oppose the motion.


Hon SIKUA: Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this motion, the motion of no confidence moved by the Opposition.

Mr Speaker, the mover of the motion and the Leader of Opposition have tried their very best to 75 discredit me and my government outlining and manipulating a number of issues as reasons for this motion.

Mr Speaker, let me at the outset state that this motion is not in the interest of our people as claimed by the other side of the House.
This is not our peoples motion the majority of our people wants the CNURA Government under my leadership Mr Speaker to continue to serving our country because they see that we have a better chance to build a better Solomon Islands under this current government, the CNURA Government.

Under the leadership of the Leader of Opposition when he was Prime Minister, Solomon Islands was destined to a gloomy and dull future as he was busy creating one crisis after another.
He has lost focus Mr Speaker, he has lost focus he has lost version he has lost the sense of purpose, sense of direction and Solomon Islands then become increasing – increasingly isolated Mr Speaker Sir.

Our people were confused, our people were asking where were we heading and we knew Mr Speaker that the ship, Solomon Islands, was heading for the rocks and it was sinking.
Thus, Mr Speaker we had to rescue it by democratically changing the captain on the 20th of December 2007 and the person speaking to you now is now the Prime Minister of Solomon Islands.

Mr Speaker, in the last 8 months I hope that our people can see the difference and judge for themselves that this country has a better chance to achieve progress and prosperity under my government’s leadership than under the leadership of the other side of the House, if ever there is an alternative government.
It is unfortunate that the mover of this Motion and the Honorable Leader of Opposition are attempting to shift the focus of our people from the positive and excellent progress that my government has achieved just a few months after we came into office by focusing on personal and petty issues.
Mr Speaker, hence while I have taken note of the various issues that have been raised Mr Speaker, and I would now like to respond to some of the issues that have been raised in the process of defending myself as I am the subject of this Motion as Prime Minister.

Almost every thing that the Mover of the Motion has said, Mr Speaker, sounds vile, sounds bad and it sounds very sour, as if is been poured from the mouth of an evil spirit.

But I know my good friend, the MP for West Honiara.
He is a personal friend of mine and the words that he used are nothing like his personality.

He is a good gentleman, Mr Speaker, and he comes from a very good family and so he doesn’t use this kind of rude and evil words in our day to day interactions, and it is not something that comes out of his own thinking.

So I do believe that it was planted there by people with evil intentions who are rude and hide their faces behind masks.
76 The only statement that was worse was that of the Leader of Opposition who wasted a lot of time and energy and people’s patience on being rude, on being arrogant and almost psychotic in his demeanor.

I have something to say about that kind of behavior in a minute, but Mr Speaker, please let me remind the Leader of Opposition that shouting in this Honorable House and Parliament is unacceptable.

I don’t think we all can put up with this kind of shouting.
If in other parliaments I think the Leader of Opposition would have been ejected for abuse of the dignity of this Parliament.

On quality leadership, Mr Speaker, what the Mover of the Motion is essentially saying is that ‘Sikua, you are not fit to be Prime Minister’.

That is what he is essentially saying.

At the same time he is also saying that he and his colleagues are also not fit.

What kind of leadership is this Mr Speaker?

What do we call leadership?

Do you not recognize strength when you see it?


Do you think that a dictatorship style of leadership is good?

Do you think that a bully who doesn’t listen to his colleagues is a good leader?

Do you like someone who shouts like, you know, someone who is shouting in Parliament and uses fancy words we can find to stir up emotions?

If that is quality leadership then, Mr Speaker, we are not a higher form of animal.
Mr Speaker, I recognize the fact that we lead in a Cabinet form of government, and we have to accept the fact that you have to consult, you have to be inclusive and you have to rule by consensus, and that is my style of leadership Mr Speaker.

In every capacity that I have served very well, and that is why I am successful in my career and I am sure I will be successful in politics without this kind of leadership as well.
Mr Speaker, maintaining national unity is something that has been mentioned and we need to remind each other that this is the Parliament of Solomon Islands.

We are the family of many languages.

We are a family of many languages, of many islands, beliefs and some variations in social and cultural arrangements.

I am very proud, Mr Speaker, to be a Solomon Islander and I am very proud to be involved in Parliament and in government.

We have wonderful and good people.


We have had problems but we have a good future if we listen to our hearts and work, and work with good will.

Mr Speaker, I am a family person, I am a family man and when I think of our roles as Members of Parliament, my view is that we represent the social fabrics of our society.

Let me explain this, Mr Speaker.

When our women weave the mats we use, each strand helps to strengthen the whole mat because the strands are 77 weaved together the whole mat is strong.
The mat represents our whole national unity and community.

The Opposition Leader and my colleague the MP for West Honiara are trying to weaken those strands.

Those I will tell them Mr Speaker, because the country as the other speakers who have spoken said, needs our unity, we need to work together.

Otherwise where is your loyalty and where is your patriotism?

We cannot win everything that we want in life Mr Speaker, and it does no good for anybody to be rude and arrogant.
Mr Speaker, I am being accused of being a compromised Prime Minister.

Mr Speaker, life is full of compromises.

That you must understand.

For example, when people elected the MP for West Honiara they made compromises because there are also other good candidates who offered to represent them in the last elections.

When people chose their leaders, they listen to different policies; they look at different characteristics of candidates.

So no one is ever perfect, and so compromises are made.
In our debates in Committees, even here in Parliament, in our Provincial Assemblies everyone is different and everyone has to listen to the views and perspectives of other people.

But by discussing things and hearing each other we finally find consensus.

We finally find agreements.

Those agreements always involve giving and taking, making room for each others views and feelings.

That is what compromise is all about, and that is the leadership style I opted to adopt as Prime Minister.
You can see therefore, Mr Speaker that compromise can result in consensus and I am happy that I was elected by consensus in December last year and that is what I have been trying to practice in my leadership style Mr Speaker Sir.

Mr Speaker, the MP for West Honiara should take advice offered by one of our senior politicians and the MP for Savo/Russells, and I encourage him to listen to him and to moderate your own behaviour before you presume to judge others.
Don’t listen to those people who want to runt and raid and use fancy words.

I do not want to take up too much time with this nonsense motion, Mr Speaker, especially the accusations of a deranged Mr Opposition Leader, but since I am accused Mr Speaker I will defend myself.
But some of the accusations should be the subject of questions in Parliament so that we can provide the answers, especially the imprest for the PM’s constituency tour, issuing of contingency warrants, the schools computer project, the hotel bills, RCDF and others.

But let me go back to this issue of the imprest that I took when I went for my constituency tour, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker you will accept the fact that all Prime Ministers in the past and likewise in the future will have or had to tour 78 their constituencies at one time or another and therefore my recent visit to my home constituency of North East Guadalcanal is no different.
When I toured the constituency Mr Speaker, it was my first visit to my people since holding the post of Prime Minister and so the imprest that was mentioned by the MP for West Honiara or the mover of the motion, Mr Speaker, was applied for and expedited in the normal manner.

And of course the Leader of Opposition would remember that when he was Prime Minister and during his term he has had similar funds being made available to him to ensure that his tour was successful.
For example, Mr Speaker in 2002 the Leader of Opposition when touring his constituency, the sum of $80,000 was taken under the PM’s special discretionary fund.

Mr Sogavare: Point of order Mr Speaker.

It is different from that.

I was touring the provinces, not only going to constituency, my constituency is different.

Once you tour Province you are entitled to imprest.

Hon Sikua: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The submission was for projects.


The submission for $80,000 was for projects but then it went to constituency tour.

So it is two different things.


Mr Speaker, but the expenditures that I have here is that this is all for expenditures that I had incurred during my constituency tour for hiring of vehicles, for paying allowances for the officials that I went with, and other related costs whereas in other circumstances Mr Speaker, the $70,000.00 would be on top of paying for diesel and ration and other things.

So I don’t see any difficulty in this Mr Speaker.


But that’s all I want to say about that particular issue, Mr Speaker, and of course you will accept the fact that I tour the constituency as a Member of Parliament for North East Guadalcanal, and at the same time as Prime Minister of Solomon Islands.

Mr Speaker, on the other issues I would encourage the mover of the motion to put them into questions so that we can answer them or relevant Ministers can answer those questions.
There are other issues that have been satisfactorily dealt with by my other Ministers and the Deputy Minister Mr Speaker, and I do not wish to bore you and my colleagues any further on the same issues Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, with those few comments and remarks I totally oppose the motion.

Thank you.

Mr Tosika: Thank you Mr Speaker for giving me the opportunity to wind up the motion.

79 First of all, I would like to thank all the Members who contributed to this motion.
As has been said, this motion belongs to the people and also, Mr Speaker, I take note of the comments raised during the discussion and presentations on this debate.

To those that were contractedly and purposely made from both sides, I am grateful for your wisdom and for those that were made on personal grounds I leave those aside and summarize as follows.
As highlighted by the Minister of Education, I submitted the motion to the House Committee and it is its wisdom and deliberation that allowed the motion to be tabled in Parliament.

This has been mentioned by him under Section 34(b), which I am not aware of.

It is not my responsibility but it is the responsibility of Parliament and also the House Committee.

Mr Speaker, I am very surprised that motion is just like a cake on the plate.
The previous government had been eating the cake and putting it over here, the same cake and then they started to bite the cake, except that it was poisoned.

The same cake that they made up and then we gave them back the same cake.

Mr Speaker, as has been said this motion does not belong to me as person but belongs to the Opposition.

I as a leader, I am disappointed to present the motion of no confidence.
As national leader, I have to accept responsibility for us to take this country and the lives of our ordinary Solomon Islanders.

I have taken a calculated piece of this motion Mr Speaker, sir, that I feel the hearts of our people, who are crying out there with bitterness and tears and I will not fade my freedom, my dignity for the benefit of our country.
It is my heritage to stand tall with pride and to be unafraid to take the heart of my ordinary people who are suffering at the benefit of occupiers in this country, and also includes some of us who are master minders of these issues.

We are being been reduced to nothing because we have no sense in ourselves and no pride in our country.
Mr Speaker, a test of life brought to you and me not to kill us, our strength grows out of our weaknesses, problems, faults and failures not until we keep the punches that weakens the right under.

To conclude, please, members take this motion and take that criticism constructively.

I beg to move the motion, Mr Speaker.

Thank you.

Mr Speaker: Honourable Members the question is that the National Parliament resolves that it has no confidence in the Prime Minister.
Normally, under Standing Order 41 no collection of voice is taken first before division may be called.

However, Section 34(1) of the Constitution expressly states that a motion of no confidence may only be passed if it is supported by an absolute majority of the votes of Members thereon.

It is 80 unlikely that I will be able to determine whether or not this motion has the support of that kind of majority by a simple voice collection.
As such we will go straight to a division in a manner set out under Standing Order 42.

And I’ll ask the Clerk to help out here.

The Clerk: Hon.

Members the division bell will be rung for two minutes.

If all Members are here before the two minute is up we will stop bell and we’ll take division.

Hon.

Members I will ask each Member separately in alphabetical order how he wishes to vote.
When I call out your name please give a clear ‘aye’ to vote for the motion or ‘no’ to vote against it, or abstain to indicate that you do not wish to vote either way.

I will now proceed with the division: Result of the division 5 - Ayes 38 - Noes 4 Abstention - Absent 1 - 48 Total The motion was defeated Hon.

Sikua: Mr Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The House adjourned at 4pm.

81