Electoral Bill 2015 subjected to heated debate in Parliament

A report by a Parliamentary Select Committee on the Electoral Amendment Bill 2015 was the subject of a heated exchange in Parliament before the Bill was eventually passed on Friday.

Tabled by the deputy Chairman of the Committee and deputy Speaker of the House, Agafili Patisela Eteuati, among other things, the Committee rejected part of the Bill that deals with the division of constituencies.

The Committee argued that the constituencies should be divided based on cultural linkages, even if it results with the uneven number of voters. For example, the committee suggested that Safata should be divided into Safata East (Sa’anapu, Sataoa & Lotofaga) and Safata West (Nu’usuatia, Vaie’e, Fusi, Tafitoala, Fausaga & Mulivai).

Under the new law, Safata East covers Vaie’e, Sa’anapu, Sataoa, Lotofaga and Tafitoala while Safata West includes Mulivai, Fusi, Fausaga and Tafitoala.

When Agafili moved a motion for Parliament to pass the report, the Minister for the Office of the Electoral Commission, Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, took the floor.

“Mr. Speaker, the Committee’s motion is before parliament but I stand to amend the motion,” she said. “The amendment is to continue with section 13 in the bill except for section 13 (1) E which is to be put aside…”

Agafili, however, disagreed.

“Under Parliament procedures,” he responded, “you cannot amend a motion moved by a Committee. I am a member of the Committee and I say this that the Committee does not accept the amendment to the motion.”

Fiame though would not budge.

“The usual procedure,” she reminded “is that if one moves to amend a motion, the question should be put forth. If it’s not accepted, the initial motion is put forward.”

Prime Minister, Tuilaepa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi, supported Fiame.

“When a Minister stands to move a motion, that counts all Cabinet Ministers and everyone in this political party,” he said referring to the H.R.P.P.

“Even though it’s a (motion) from the Committee, it does not take away political party inside Parliament.”

But Opposition leader, Palusalue Fa’apo II, was disturbed so he cut in.

“I am really sad today with the democracy in this Parliament,” he said. “The Prime Minister talks about Cabinet and political parties but the Committee process was opened for everyone to attend to voice concerns especially on sensitive matters.”

Fiame objected.

“The sensitive matter in the report is the division of the constituency,” said Fiame.

“The proposed change in the bill was based on recommendations from the Commission of Inquiry in 2012 where the changes to six constituencies are laid out. It is with the purpose of one person, one vote, one constituency.”

“The truth is that Mr. Speaker, the division of Safata in the electoral bill is Satunumafono from Vaie’e, Sa’anapu, Sataoa, Lotofaga and Nu’usuatia. Alataua is from Mulivai, Fusi, Fausaga and Tafitoala.

“The difference is on the village of Vaie’e and Nu’usuatia where the committee has not accepted (the changes in the bill) but I stand to maintain the clauses and proposed change in the bill.”

By now, Palusalue was visibly unhappy.

“I am a member of the Committee,” he said. “It is clear from what from the Minister said that the change was based on findings from the Commission of Inquiry where one member of Safata made the change before any suggestions were made by the Commission.”

Fiame did not take this lightly.

“The claims from the Opposition leader are very serious,” she told Parliament.

“That person is not here to defend himself from the accusations. You speak of Leota who was in the Commission but how about you as a Committee member (and your conflict of interest).”

At that point, M.P. for Siumu, Tu’u’u Anasi’i Leota took the floor in support of Palusalue.

“I stand as one of the Committee members. It feels as if we are moving away from procedures,” said Tu’u’u.

“Cabinet presents a bill to Parliament, it is then debated and referred to the Committee to investigate and present their findings. In the report on the second page, the Committee had asked to meet with the Minister and that is where they should’ve dealt with her amended motion.”

Tuu’u went on question the validity of the Committee if its recommendations are ignored.

“I ask myself, what is the use and relevance of these Committees and their work now?”

Tautua Whip, Lealailepule Rimoni Aiafi, who is also a member of the Committee, took the floor.

“When the Committee started their work,” he said, “the first thing I asked if whether to divide (constituency) by number or cultural linkages.

“The answer was cultural linkages and that was the recommendation from the Committee.

“We didn’t make those decisions based on our political parties; we made those decisions based on what is best for Parliament.”

Prime Tuilaepa interjected saying: “The bill is quite simple.

“It’s very easy and simple and everyone is getting all worked up. Some have their blood boiling.”

Tuilaepa said foresight is used when it comes to matters like this.

Minister of Women, Community and Social Development, Tolofuaivalelei Falemoe Leiataua, agreed.

“I believe the motion (from Fiame) is not to amend anything but to reaffirm the proposed changes in the Electoral bill.”

Still, Palu was not happy.

“That is not foresight, that is what you call trickery,” he retorted.

He also accused Fiame in relation to what he claimed as conflict of interest.

“It is easy for you to speak of conflict of interest but you don’t think of your conflict of interest in this,” Fiame fired back.

Palusalue responded: “You are changing foundation of the constituency.”

Not so, Fiame said.

“The only thing that the bill is doing is drawing a line for the voters. Others from the your constituency had submitted what you are arguing for while others side with what the government is proposing.

Fiame also reminded Palusalue that the final decision is made by the government.

“When I hear you say that the government does not make those decisions but that is why we were elected to be here. It just shows how shallow you are.”

Palusalue did not take this well.

“The constituency had met twice about this,” he said. “But you, you just want to be the Prime Minister.”

Fiame rebutted: “I don’t need to be a Prime Minister for people to know me. As for you, you are undecided. You sit here and then you go there.”

Fiame reminded Palu to “think about the old man that worked to earn that extra seat for Safata. Safata is lucky that it has two seats.”

The M.P. that Fiame was referring to is veteran Member of Parliament, Tuiloma Pule Lameko.

The Speaker of the House, La’aulialemalietoa Leuatea Polataivao, called for order.

La’auli informed the House that it was the Minister of Works, Infrastructure and Transport, Manu’alesagalala Enokati Posala’s time to speak.

Manu’alesagalala who is another M.P. from Safata said his constituency is dear to him. While acknowledging both Satunumafono and Alataua, he said Cabinet has not taken the matter lightly.

“The division in the bill makes it fair for all,” said Manu’alesagalala.

Manu’alesagalala added that he thought Tu’u’u would object to the Committee’s report because he represents a constituency that has ties with Alataua.

“Siumu is listening and it seems that the role of Lio is not being recognised here.”

But this upset Tuu’u who immediately took the floor to warn Manu’alesagalala.

“You now being rude with your words,” said Tu’u’u. “I want to make a correction to what he said.”

But Manu’alesagalala said it was Tu’u’u that was being rude.

Palusalue again interrupted.

“Think of our constituency, they are listening,” he said. “My poor constituents, they have walked the road to ensure their traditional foundation is protected and kept.”

But Tuilaepa stood to make a clarification. He pointed out that the traditional foundation is not affected in the division.

Minister of Revenue, Tuiloma Lameko, also spoke in support of the Bill. He said the correct division of the constituency is the one in the bill.

At this point, M.P. for Aana Alofi no.1, Leaupepe Toleafoa Fa’afisi took the floor.

Leaupepe told parliament that the debate has caused the M.P. for Siumu to punch desks. He pointed out that this could be a problem for those who have heart problems.

In the end, Palu moved a motion to have a standing vote on the motion moved by Fiame to amend recommendations from Committee’s report.

It was seconded by Deputy Leader of Opposition, A’eau Peniamina Leavaise’eta and others.

The result of the standing vote saw 29 M.P.s siding with Fiame while 10 opposed.

The Electoral Amendment Bill 2015 was then read for the third time by Fiame and passed by parliament. The amendment means the Individual Voters no longer exists.

It’s now being replaced by two Urban Constituency seats.

The new law also targets the problem of electors residing within the Faleata and Vaimauga constituencies who have swelled the rolls of constituencies in rural areas.

Another key change involves the o’o and momoli to be undertaken after the declaration of polls and the removal of the power of pulenu’u to confirm candidates wishing to contest the election.

The bill seeks to amend the Electoral Act 1963 to give effect to the recommendations in the 2012 Commission of Inquiry into Electoral Matters as approved by Cabinet and the F.K. dated 2 April 2014.