M.P. and matai at loggerheads

Opposing views as to where electoral boundaries should be drawn are at the heart of a dispute between a sitting M.P. at Faleata West and two matai from the same constituency.

Accusations that the M.P. is not in tune with his electorate have been countered by the M.P. accusing the matai of not bothering to attend the consultations he held.

“I have consulted the high chiefs of the constituency, the pastors and people living in Falelauniu and other villages,” said M.P. and Tautua Whip, Lealailepule Rimoni Aiafi. “I cannot consult people who do not want to be consulted…they never wanted to come to consultations and when the constituency came with their views; we sang the same song.”

M.P. and Tautua Whip, Lealailepule Rimoni Aiafi has made his position clear with others of the constituency in opposing the boundaries outlined in the Electoral Amendment bill (2). However, the two matai, Panoa Tavita Moala of Saina and Toamua and Toi Ioane Ilalio of Vaitele tai disagree with the M.P.

The matai support the boundary defined under the bill for Urban constituency West.

According to the bill, the boundary “commencing the coast at the eastern boundary of Vaimauga West Electoral District and continuing in a generally south-westerly direction by that boundary to its intersection with the Safata Electoral District boundary, and from there in a generally west north-westerly direction along the Safata Electoral District boundary to the eastern side of Lake Lanuto'o, and from there in a generally northeasterly direction to the southern end of the boundary between the Vaiusu and Vailoa villages, and then by that boundary to the coast and then by the coast back to the point of commencement and includes the villages of Vaimoso, Lepea,Vailoa and part of Alamagoto.”

Panoa’s reasons for supporting the boundary are that Vaitele should not be pushed on the other side, to be included under the urban seat roll.

“Traditionally the boundaries for urban areas is always measured from no further than four miles from the town clock,” said Panoa.

“If you look at it having Vaitele included under urban, that will be more than five miles and we don’t support it.

“I believe that the roll for the urban area will grow in the next 10 years and the same with Vaitele. If Vaitele is included in the urban area then that means that the roll will grow rapidly and we will have to look for another solution to solve the growing numbers (of people).”

Panoa suggested that Vaitele should be left alone where it is with Faleata West but have an additional seat for the constituency.

“If the M.P. (Leala) is saying that the number of people for Faleata is about 5,000 plus, then the only logical solution is to add another seat,” he said.

“There is no justification in segregating those living on freehold land (like Vaitele) to be included in urban because they, and those living on customary lands will still cast their votes wherever they are.”

To support his reasons, Panoa pointed out that the constituency of Vaimauga already has three M.Ps and four, once the urban seat east is passed.

“We only have two seats for Faleata and three with the urban seat west… but if there is another seat, then it will balance the numbers and will be the solution to the growing number of people here.”

Panoa accused the M.P of not consulting the villagers but simply pushing his views that do not reflect those held by the constituency. He said the M.P had only wanted Vaitele to be included in the urban seat for his reasons to run from the other side.

Toi Ioane Ilalio supported Panoa.

“It is true that there are people living on freehold land in Vaitele,” he explained.

“But they are the future of Faleata.

The reality is a boy from Faleata will marry a girl from Gataivai and they will be living here with their children in the future. They will no longer be called people living on freehold land; they are people of this constituency.”

Toi added that an additional seat for Vaitele is needed to avoid differences in the villages.

“If Vaitele has the growing number of people then it is more appropriate to give that additional seat for an M.P. in Vaitele.”

The matai from Vaitele tai said the views from the M.P. differ from those of the constituency. Asked for a comment, M.P Lealailepule said the matai are free to voice their opinions on what they believe.

Leala laughed at claims that he is only against the boundaries because he wanted to run from the urban seat.

“If the boundaries stay the way they are now I’ll have more chance in winning,” said Leala with confidence. “That is not what we are arguing about. We are asking for something that will benefit the constituency not me…but I urge them to run in the general election.”

Leala also claims the matai do not understand the electoral bill.

“Yes we all want additional seats but we are starting with the urban seat now,” said Leala.

“This is for Vaitele to help its growing numbers; if we don’t, then it means that Faleata East will have two seats.

“I believe that the urban seats were put in place to cater for the growth in Vaimauga and Vaitele.”

As for the boundaries and where they should be drawn, Leala claims that Cabinet had approved and specifically outlined that Vaitele is included in the urban area. “It’s been defined by PUMA and that is why I’m saying they do not understand and are being selfish.”

The parliament committee’s report into the Electoral Bill (2) will be tabled in parliament on Tuesday.