Revelations of ‘dirty politics’ tactics and allegations of fraudulent misuse of Samoan chiefly titles to deceive Samoan voters in the Mangere electorate have angered a number of Samoa’s community leaders.

Earlier this week, sitting MP for Mangere Su’a William Sio sought and gained proof that National’s candidate, Misa Fia Turner’s use of the Matai (Chief) title Misa has not been registered in Samoa; therefore she is not a Matai.

In a TV3 news interview, Misa Fia Turner told the reporter it’s none of their [Land and Titles Court] business.

Misa Fia’s disrespectful tirade at Samoa’s Matai system is noted by community leaders, but it is the manner of how Su’a sought verification of Misa’s title that is of greater concern. In the process of getting the verification, Su’a has breached a number of key protocols in Samoa’s ancient customary Matai system.

Protocol dictates Su’a should have contacted Misa Fia in the first instance to discuss the subject matter face to face before taking up other measures. Misa Fia has since confirmed to Pacific Guardians, “No, he [Su’a] did not contact me first before taking other measures.”

However, the most serious breach of protocol in this instance is Su’a writing direct to the Lands and Titles Court seeking verification of Misa’s title.

This breach of protocol is one of the worst kinds in the faaSamoa [Samoan way of life] according to Tuifa’asisina Mea’ole Keil.

“This is a huge transgression because Su’a’s query sent to Samoa’s Lands and Titles was not made by Misa Fia’s family or a Matai from her village of Falelatai. What we have here is an outsider interfering with a family and a village’s sacred lineage and title, their very identity. This outside interference is a no, no in Samoan society, and the gravity of it is viewed in the past as justifiable homicide. A point Su’a himself made to the TV3 news reporter.”

The public spat using Samoa’s Matai system as a vehicle for vote getting have reduced their campaigns to a mud-slinging contest and the reason why Tuifa’asisina and a number of Samoan community and religious leaders in other New Zealand centres are calling on Su’a and Misa Fia to stop.

“With child poverty, high unemployment, low wages, poor health, substandard housing and so forth, Su’a and Misa have now taken Pacific Island issues to the gutter, that is not how we behave in public and it is making a mockery of our Matai system,” said Tuifa’asisina.

“This is not the way Samoan chiefs as heads of families and ambassadors of Samoa behave. It is not how our Matai system operates.”

The public behavior and etiquette for Samoan Matai are defined by Samoa’s Head of State, Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Efi in a speech he made in honour of Samoan and Tongan victims of the 2009 Tsunami. Interestingly, Tui Atua’s address is located on Su’a’s website.

“The ideals of family in the Samoan context are shaped by respect for each person’s mental, physical, social and spiritual wellbeing.  It is the responsibility of the family, especially the heads of families, to make sure that each person in the family is happy,” Tui Atua said.

“In my Samoan indigenous reference, each member of the family has an inheritance, including individual gifts and talents that are bestowed from God, nurtured within the family and shared with the community.  Individual talents are used for the benefit of the whole.  Ensuring that the good of the whole is always just requires competent and vigilant family heads, capable of commanding authority or pule on the one hand, and demonstrating grace and personal integrity on the other.”

How a Matai acts and interacts with other Matai, and different levels of Samoan society is enshrined in the Samoan proverb, Manao i le i’a, ae manumanu i le upega (When you are fishing, ensure the net is preserved.) added Tuifa’asisina.

“The message in the proverb, which Samoan leaders constantly give their descendants is a reminder on how to behave in public is a reminder that we must always care for our family, care for the village, and care for our country. We must never appear divided in public and that we must always remember who we are. We must always come out united and demonstrate the best of Samoa for the world to see.”

The same proverb provides the cornerstone for Samoa’s informal national anthem “We Are Samoa” composed by Jerome Grey.

Tuifa’asisina re-emphasised why Su’a and Misa’s public Matai mud-slinging must stop.

“They are risking turning our Matai system into a circus. It’s a path that will dilute the prestige and mana of our Matai system that was built on the blood and valour of our ancestors through the ages. Also what sort of lesson are we setting for the young ones, our leaders of the future.

“The public fight between Su’a and Misa mean they have forgotten the message in that ancient proverb,” added Tuifa’asisina.

“As a result of that, they have brought shame to us all.”

He warned the two major parties they should be concerned about the antics of their candidates. It could influence how Samoan communities up and down the country cast their votes in this general election and in the future.

To the executives of the National and Labour parties, Tuifa’asisina urges them not to judge the Samoan community based on Su’a and Misa’s performance.

“For us, it is a great honour that the two largest parties selected them, as Samoans, to be their political candidates. It is a shame they have not reciprocated the respect and honour endowed on them.”

It is not lost on Tuifa’asisina that the Mangere electorate was also the electorate where the first New Zealand parliamentarian to be tried, convicted and jailed, Taito Phillip Field hailed from.

“With the disappointing performance and display by Su’a and Misa, plus the lingering fallout on the electorate from Taito Phillip saga, Samoans in Mangere and national should rightly feel aggrieved about the caliber of the people who are representing them at leaders.

“It is why I tip my hat to the Green Party’s Mangere candidate, Rev Mua Strickland and James Papali’i, an untitled Samoan, representing Internet Mana. They have quietly gone about their campaigns holding the Samoan flag high in Mangere for party votes.”

For non-Samoans interested in the Samoan psyche about family, kin and relationship to the environment and cosmos, included below is the full text of H.H. Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Efi’s address to give you an idea.

And if a reader asks, why is Tuifa’asisina Mea’ole being invited to comment on Samoa’s Matai system? You need to be a Samoan to understand, because his second name says it all.

H.H. Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Efi address

Dedicated to the victims of the 2009 Tonga and Samoa Tsunami

Published 6 Nov 2009

O lē e lave i tiga, o le ivi, le toto, ma le aano

He who rallies in my hour of need is my kin

When I think of the idea of family, I think of the relationships of kin and belonging and of the ties that sustain us as social and spiritual beings.  As I have said elsewhere,

“I am not an individual; I am an integral part of the cosmos.  I share divinity with my ancestors, the land, the seas and the skies.  I am not an individual, because I share my tofi (an inheritance) with my family, my village and my nation.  I belong to my family and my family belongs to me.  I belong to my village and my village belongs to me.  I belong to my nation and my nation belongs to me.  This is the essence of my belonging”.[1]

A lot has been said about the strengths and challenges of Pasifika families.  Questions about what constitutes a Pasifika or Samoan family are important to ask.  Determining what kinds of help to give families, which families need more help and why, are fundamental to the good of society.

When I say that I am not an individual, I do not mean that my individual happiness is not important.  The ideals of family in the Samoan context are shaped by respect for each person’s mental, physical, social and spiritual wellbeing.  It is the responsibility of the family, especially the heads of families, to make sure that each person in the family is happy.

In my Samoan indigenous reference, each member of the family has an inheritance, including individual gifts and talents that are bestowed from God, nurtured within the family and shared with the community.  Individual talents are used for the benefit of the whole.  Ensuring that the good of the whole is always just requires competent and vigilant family heads, capable of commanding authority or pule on the one hand, and demonstrating grace and personal integrity on the other.

When preparing for this address I kept thinking about what it is that holds families together and keeps them well despite the turbulences of life?  How have the values of a Samoan family survived such turbulences?  How have we named and captured these values?  How do we celebrate the joys of family?  How do we cope with its challenges, paradoxes, ironies and riddles?

Sometimes the best way to provide an answer to hard questions is by telling a story.  I want to share some stories told to me by some of the survivors and counsellors of Samoa’s recent tsunami to help illustrate the point about the power and fragility of family and of the importance of understanding and nurturing what is best in families.

Family as source of love

A few days after the tsunami, my wife and I went to visit the hospital where some of the survivors were and I was told a profoundly moving story by a grandmother who was grieving for the loss of her grandson.  Her family lived close to the sea in Saleapaga, one of the worst affected areas of the tsunami tragedy.  In the early morning, as was usual for their family, she and her grandchildren would wake and then go about their morning rituals.  This morning was no different.  She recalled how she had given some coins to her grandchildren to get some goodies at the local store.  She remembers them going to the store, playing on the way.  The next thing she recalls was the emergency warning for all to go to higher ground.

In the chaos of trying to locate her grandchildren she remembers the roaring sound of the wave, screeching towards them with driving rage, as if belching from the bowels of hell, whistling eerily, taunting death and destruction.  This grandmother tells of how she yelled to her grandchildren who were nearby to run for their lives.  Being a big lady she knew she would slow them down if they were to run together.  As she tried to move herself along as quickly as possible, she was horrified to see her young seven year old grandson come back for her.  He grabbed her hand tightly and pleaded, “Sau, ta o” (Come with me).  Realising that the young boy was not going to leave her, she stood up, held his hand tightly and tried to move quickly.  When the wave reached them, the sheer force and magnitude of it caused their hands to be ripped apart.  When she recovered from the force of the wave she realised that she was no longer holding his hand and that the wave had taken him.

Amidst tears she told me of how she still sees his face, feels his hands gripping hers, hears his voice firmly telling her to hurry along.  And, despite her loss and grief she decides that she owed it to him, to the strength of his love and his gesture, to keep living and be thankful for the gift of her life.  In a barely audible whisper she says, “E oo mai nei e le’i maua se tala i si au tama.  Toe fia vaai tasi iai (Up till now I have not heard whether or not his body has been recovered.  I would like to see him once more)”.

There is poignancy here about the arresting power of love and the fragility of life.  In most families there is a close bond between grandparents and grandchildren.  Theirs is a special relationship.  The elderly grandmother and the young grandchild in this story represent the most vulnerable of family members.  Yet the nature of their love demonstrates what is most compelling and strong of family.  Here life and love is no less enduring because it is fragile and mortal.  The physical power of the tsunami can not overwhelm the strength of true family loving, if anything it underlines it.

In the immediate aftermath of the tsunami there are many images of the strength of family, of the pain of parents who have lost children and children who have lost parents.  But nothing as heart-wrenchingly raw and vivid as the sight of a mother, at the call of a new body being found, rushing over to see if it is hers and on realising that it is, oblivious to the stench of the rotting body, hugs and kisses it as if it were newborn.  The depth of the bond between mother and child is captured here.  For me watching this scene, both grotesque and beautiful, my stomach turns, my heart breaks, my legs go weak but in my mind’s eye I see the strength of the pute (or umbilical cord), the vae vae manava (sharing of body and life), that links mother and child.

On deeper reflection the tsunami not only caused death and destruction, unexpectedly it also gave opportunity for a reappraisal of family and societal values and a cleansing, if you like, of that which, in the light of so much pain and grief, became peripheral, nonsensical, vain and excessive.

Let me turn to the issue of family faalavelave or to the culture of reciprocal obligations and the social stigma that is sometimes associated with it.

Family faalavelave and social stigma

In Samoan the word faalavelave literally means an interruption.  It speaks of an interruption to the family’s usual schedule.  Families would have to reorganise their day or week in order to rally family members for enough resources to meet their faalavelave obligations.  In earlier times faalavelave made it possible for the burden of resourcing large family events to be shared.  The belief was that participating in faalavelave were acts of reciprocity.  In the ideal these acts were manifestations and demonstrations of family love and bonding.  They personified the best of family loving.

Samoan custom and usage finds the quid pro quo principle relevant in this context.  There is a common saying – ‘A e iloa a’u i Togamau, ou te iloa foi oe i Siulepa (literally meaning, if you do me a good deed in Togamau, I will reciprocate in Siulepa)’.  The reciprocal performance of the custom or duty implicit in the cultural imperatives of faalavelave is not to be motivated only by what one can receive in return.  Rather it should be motivated by the knowledge that if performed with the best possible motives then it will be reciprocated in kind.

The disparaging comments too often associated with faalavelave today are cries for reappraisal.  This is implicit in the discussion between a chief or matai of my family and his sister.  This matai, who lives in Wellington, rang up his sister, and said gently: “the faalavelave is now over; I suppose you had forgotten about your contribution?” She responded: “Look here dear brother, one of my principal prayers is: Dear God, call us to heaven before our children spurn what we ask for because there are too many faalavelave!”

The tsunami has created the ideal context for reassessing faalavelave.  For years now our funeral culture has been the target of fierce criticism and discussion.  The focus has been on corruption, exploitation and abuse, said to be motivated by vanity and greed.  In one fell swoop the tsunami imposed a context, forum and environment within which to re-examine the core values of the Samoan funeral culture.[2]

Sorting through the scale of destruction and the number of dead, dying and injured preoccupied the community so much after the tsunami that funerals of the deceased victims became very simple affairs.  The sheer number of decomposing bodies requiring immediate burial dictated the imperatives of when to hold the funeral, how, where and who should attend.  When driving past these funerals the absence of the village congregating in the falelauasi [funeral house] and of the Greek chorus which usually accompanied the procession to the church then to the gravesite, was poignantly conspicuous.  The paraphernalia that we have become accustomed to seeing at a Samoan funeral, especially one held in the villages, was so scaled down that one could not help but ask: how much of it do we really need? Will our funerals and their cultural imperatives lose meaning and substance if we gave to the grieving and demanded nothing or only accepted the bare minimum in return?  Would the dignity of the deceased and his or her family be undermined by simple but true gestures of reciprocity?

Funerals are meant to provide relief (financially and emotionally) and do justice, i.e. dignify the memory and legacy of the deceased.  Instead Samoan funerals have become very expensive and stressful, with some families getting into grave debt financially, mentally and spiritually by the end of it.  The social stigma of losing face if family resources are found wanting is so great that family heads are willing to do almost anything to avoid it, including creating inter-generational debt.

The seeming ordinariness of the tsunami funerals, with the minimum fuss and bother that surrounded them, did not, however, lose any face by their simplicity.  Instead they gained in that they reminded us of what really mattered.  In this instance, rather than raging menace the tsunami chastened and cleansed.  We might say that it forced us to front up to our vanities and cupidity, violently shaking and unmasking us of the façade and exploitations that befalls status at funerals and making profane anything other than what is fundamental to the act of celebrating life and providing relief from sorrow and pain.  In a nutshell, the tsunami has forced us to ask – Are our families suffering because of our own misplaced and inflated expectations?  If the answer is yes, then we must take pause to sort out why this is so.

Humour as coping mechanism

In the Pacific context humour is often used to deflect, if only for a moment, the deadening weight of pain or rejection.  In the opening quote of this text, I stated that I am not an individual because I share divinity with my ancestors, the land, the seas and the skies.  For indigenous Samoans the sea is kin.  For those who lived near the sea before the tsunami, the sea was their friend, their provider; it was family.  The trauma of the tsunami was not only felt in terms of the devastation impacted by a life-threatening force, but also in terms of the pain of being rejected and chastised by kin.

In dealing with family trauma humour offers natural relief.  The ability to laugh at one-self is healthy.  This applies whatever the crisis.  Status and social stigma take on fresh meaning when viewed from different front seats.

In a story told by and involving a catechist – a Catholic feasoasoni – the idiosyncrasies of Samoan humour as coping mechanism is exposed. Taking full advantage of the opportunity to make a point to his wife, a very large Samoan woman, the feasoasoani becomes infectiously alive as he forgivingly exaggerates his story; delighting all in his audience, except of course his wife.  The feasoasoani shares that in seeing the wave coming towards him he runs for his life, as he passes his house he sees his wife, he turns and nonchalantly says to her, as if going on an ordinary run, ‘fa’ [see you].  He then climbs up a nearby breadfruit tree and looks back towards her, she is now screaming at him to come and help her.  Clinging onto his breadfruit tree trunk, he calls out to her, ‘pii mau [hold on tight]’.  Then he see’s the highest ranked chief in his village, Ale,  being swirled around by the wave, he looks over at him and waves to him.  He yells, ‘fa, Ale’ [good-bye Ale].  There is insight here not only into how our people are coping with the trauma of what they experienced, but also how they make their points about social roles and status and poke fun at the fragilities of our humanity.

When such natural disasters take place, worrying about social etiquette just seems silly.  In sharing stories, a group of men told of how the wave took one of them, twisting and twirling him towards the sky. In the process this man, who is of significant status and mana in his village, lost the lavalava or sarong he was wearing and that morning he did not have any undergarments.  In an uproar of laughter they explained how two of them were below, looking up at their chief swirling around in the sky, naked from his waist down, his private parts fully exposed and dancing all on their own – one part going one way, the other parts going another.  In those moments one could not care less about the stigmas of society.

New times, new sources for family power and wealth, each create opportunity for shifting old norms and/or boundaries.  Where Pacific household heads in the past could control and regulate change through stringent appeals to precedence, history, custom or tradition, today the forces of change are too great.  What Pacific household heads can do is to appeal to ideals and values, those that are life-affirming, love-affirming and faith-affirming.

This does not mean we deliberately ignore the depressing challenges, negative contradictions and recurring problems that also face many Pacific families. It means that hope for a positive way out is better generated when leadership approaches are based on strengths-based rather than deficit-based models.

My final comment reflects on the stigma of single-families and the issues of Pacific fathering.  I do not pretend to be an expert in this area, far from it.  But this is one of the hard issues that we as Pacific leaders must tackle if we are to keep our young men meaningfully employed and out of prison.

Fathering and single-parenting

I am told that in New Zealand the proportion of single-parent Pacific families has been increasing over the last 25 years.  The ideals of a Samoan family find the concept of single parenting a misnomer.  Samoan households are extended family settings.  Kin should always be on hand to share in parenting responsibilities.  In the ideal, fathers should always play a role in the care of their children.  Male role models for fathers, husbands and brothers are important.

The emotional strength of men, if I may say, is sometimes underestimated.  In my household it is true that women are the real power, I would dare not say otherwise.  But in searching for what is best of male culture, I was struck by the physical and emotional strength of a young man in Vailoa, Aleipata, another of the villages struck by the tsunami, who battled the elements and the odds to save his family.  His young wife was and still is heavily pregnant, his parents are elderly.  His parents and other siblings lived in the family home right on the seashore.  When the call came to go to higher ground his mother was in the village women’s committee house and his wife and father were in their respective homes.  When the wave hit he searched for his wife and parents.  He saw that his wife and his father had been swept away by the wave.  He swam for his wife and unborn child, then for his father and brought them all back to shore and onto higher ground.  Without a second thought he then went straight back into the fury of the wave to find his mother.  He risked his life but the old lady was not to be found.  Such bravery takes more than just physical strength; it takes an emotional courage that is just as much a part of being male as physical prowess.

With so many of our Pacific young men in prison or youth correctional facilities and with family violence continuing to be an issue, understanding the ideals of Pacific fathering is important to the framing of appropriate solutions.

We shouldn’t be afraid of the hard questions because we see ourselves as weak or mortal failures.  The lessons we may draw from the stories of the Samoa tsunami survivors is that our imperfections as humans should not demean or diminish our search for what is true and good in family.  There are no perfect human beings and so no perfect families.  People and thus families can only strive for perfection, for those ideals we value and which will stand the test of time.

Conclusion

The purpose of this fono is to acknowledge Pasifika families’ research and to meaningfully discuss its findings.  The fono launches valuable research into changing Pasifika household compositions, into family wellbeing, parenting, the influence and importance of Pasifika cultural values and the resilience of Pasifika families and youth despite adversity.

Pasifika families are like flowers, they are both strong and fragile, they need constant love and tenderness to survive and grow to their blooming best.  We need to nurture our young, care for our old and sick, and affirm our strong.  Social stigma can stunt growth and cause disease and ill-health.  In Samoa the tsunami of September 29^th was potent not only for the death and destruction it caused, but also, as has been the case throughout history, for the invitation to reassess, cleanse and make anew.

Samoans will remember for some time the power of this tsunami.  We will remember this one not just for the paradoxes of its rage, but more poignantly for its rallying, reaffirming and cleansing of the ideals of family.  The essence of family I believe is its ability to come together in times of need.  The Pasifika family extends beyond the shores of the Pacific.  The love and support to Tonga and Samoa that poured in from countries all over the world demonstrates our shared humanity.

Today I want to acknowledge our kinship with New Zealand.  Samoa and New Zealand share so much.  We share history, culture and rugby players.  We share genealogy, faith, common environment and a future.

New Zealand and Samoan family values and ties have changed so markedly over the years that the response of New Zealanders to the September 29^th tragedy can only be described in terms of what would be the response of loving kin.  The same must be said of Australia.

The idea that we share and believe in our kinship bond is evidenced most vividly for me by the gestures of kindness shown by different communities all around New Zealand.  But for sheer impact factor, I have been most struck by the image of the young Whangarei pre-schoolers who together with their teachers and community rallied together to carry out a hikoi to raise funds for the tsunami victims.  Nothing offers as strong or as powerful a message of the heart of family as the purity of children in their gestures of love. And, nothing tests the strength and longevity of family as the legacy of Sir Maui Pomare and Sir Apirana Ngata, who fought on principle for Samoa’s behalf in the late 1920s.  Each of these acts continue to grip my heart and gives power and substance to the Samoan saying – ‘O le e lave i tiga, ole ivi, le toto ma le aano.  He who rallies in my hour of need is my kin.’

References

Tui Atua, T.T.E. 2009. Eulogy – Tuifeamalo Tuatagaloa Annandale. [See appendix].

Tui Atua, T.T.E. 2009. ‘More on meaning, nuance and metaphor’. In Suaalii-Sauni, T., Tuagalu, I., Kirifi-Alai, T.N., and Fuamatu, N. [eds]. Su’esu’e Manogi; In search of Fragrance, Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Ta’isi and the Samoan Indigenous Reference. Apia; National University of Samoa.

We are Samoa
performed by Jerome Grey

Our Samoa, The Greatest place of all
She is green and blue lush with beauty
And hearts are pure as gold
Touch someone with tears of joy
Touch someone with smiles of love
Oh! What happy feelings
From such happy people

We are Samoa
People from the sun
We are Samoa
And our heritage lives on
Teach world humanity and hospitality
We are Samoa
And we trust in Thee

Samoa, e pele oe I si ou fatu
O le a ea se mea e ao ona fai
E tautua ai mo oe
O sasae ma sisifo e tasi
O le viiga lea I le lagi
Aiga ma nuu taitasi
Tuu mai lou aao
Ta pepese faatasi

Uso Samoa
Fanau mai le la
Uso Samoa
Manumanu I le upega
A oo I nuu ese le loto alofa
Samoa mo oe
Samoa mo Le Atua

 

 

National must explain why its candidate for Māngere Misa Fia Turner appears to be using a Matai title she is not entitled to, Labour’s MP for Māngere and Pacific Islands Affairs spokesperson Su’a William Sio says.

A Matai title is a legally-recognised chiefly title bestowed as an honour by Samoan families and their villages.

“The Samoan Ministry of Justice and Courts Administration says it has no one registered under the name of ‘Misa Fia Turner’,” Su’a William Sio says.

“The Ministry also says that under Samoa’s Lands and Titles Act 1981, ‘the use of an unregistered Matai title is illegal as it is considered an offence to wrongfully use such a Matai title’.

“Under Samoan law the ‘rightful holder’ is a person ‘who has been appointed in accordance with the customs and usage of the Samoan people’ which includes being recognised through a court judgment.

“The rightful holder also has to have had a traditional appointment in the village to which that name or title belongs.

“If National’s candidate is using a title she has not had, that is an affront to the people of Samoa and the Samoan community in New Zealand.

“The National Party must investigate the discrepancy between Misa Fia Turner’s title and the view of the Samoan Government,” Su’a William Sio says.

 

Labour will act to recognise the five main Pacific languages in New Zealand including through the education system, said Pacific Affairs spokesperson Su’a William Sio.

Announcing Labour’s Pacific Island policy he said that there must be a strong commitment to Pacific languages now and into the future. Labour will work alongside Pasifika communities to achieve their aspirations for the next generation of Pasifika people to thrive in New Zealand and to be smart, healthy and bilingual.

“Instead of seeing Pacific languages and cultures as barriers, we should see them as resources, as a gift to the nation and something that enriches all our lives. Unless New Zealand acts quickly and decisively will they cease to be living languages in the coming generations.

“Labour recognises the importance of Pacific people becoming highly skilled and we will fund 1,500 Pasifika Trade trainees over the next four years

“We will bring together Pasifika community groups, the Industry Training Organisations and tertiary providers to encourage young Pasifika people to succeed.

“Labour will investigate, as part of our wider commitment to public broadcasting, the establishment of a Pasifika television channel.

“Labour will also establish a Pacific Futures Forum. This will build a new collective vision for Pacific people in New Zealand.

“We have one of the fastest growing and most youthful populations in New Zealand. These demographics affirm the role that Pacific people will play in New Zealand’s future.

“For New Zealand to do well, Labour believes Pacific People must also do well. The significant role that Pacific people will play in the future social, economic and political fabric of New Zealand cannot be overstated,” says Su’a William Sio.

OPINION

The Government’s announcement today of a $10million five-year investment to grow Asian languages is a slap on the face of Pacific communities who have implored the government to intervene in the preservation of their languages, to no avail.

It cuts deeper as statistics from Census 2013 confirm the trend to extinction is real as reported by University of Auckland researcher John MaCaffrey. At the same time, Pacific Guardians sources say a sinister plot has been in play to kill off Pacific languages and rein in the Pacific population to stay in the low strata of society. They point to an alleged link with the government’s immigration policy that favours Asia while building bigger barriers for Pacific islanders to migrate here.

There is merit to their assertions. Ever since the National government came into power six years ago, they successfully managed to put a stop to the publishing of key Pacific education resources, critical amongst them are the Tupu and Folauga series.

When it happened in 2010, the Pacific community could see a perilous future and in one of their rare public showing of protest, they organized a lobby group and formally marched to government to present the Pacific Languages and Literacy Petition calling for bilingual and bi-literacy schooling.

National’s Pacific MP Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga refused to accept the petition for a ‘party-line’ reason according to some members who marched that day. They say the government had already planned to narrow the ensuing Pacific Language Inquiry’s terms of reference to focus only on the issues of bilingualism at the early childhood level. It would not allow a wider scope to investigate bilingual and bi-literacy education to include the formal education sector.

Because of that approach, the government’s response to the Inquiry due on 18 March 2014, made it easy to activate the ‘no obligation’ option and opt out of intervening. Instead they would be able to fob off the responsibility for language preservation to Pacific communities and families.

To complete the rout, there was a deliberate move during the committee stages of the 21st Century Learning Environments and Digital Literacy,that the production of Pacific digital resources be deleted from the relevant section. A move that none of the Pacific MPs in the opposition were awake to – a big disappointment.

The move was critical to leave Pacific education resources out of the digital movement. It means when the Network4Learning platform is activated, there would be no raw material to teach or develop Pacific languages and programs. Why? If there are no digital resources, then the tools and material for teaching or developing language programs cannot be created hence Pacific languages cannot be included as school options and therefore easily excluded and eventually disappear.

It is therefore no surprise when latest statistics reported by Auckland University confirm Pacific languages heading to extinction.

The key reason why government is investing in Asian languages, with a special focus on Chinese Mandarin, is trade and the potential for a bigger share of the Asian market. It is placing money ahead of its historical ties and special relationship with the Pacific.

In her statement today, Mrs Parata said “We need to provide young New Zealanders with opportunities to learn the languages of countries that we have strong trade relationships with.”

Programmes where primary and secondary schools work together so that pupils can continue to learn languages throughout their school life are the priority she said added. “This might include sharing teachers and resources, or even sharing classes online.” This particular component is the same one that was deliberately removed from the Pacific Language and Literacy Inquiry.

Continued Mrs Parata, “Our long term goal is that all New Zealand students will develop reasonable proficiency in a second language. Not only are there cognitive benefits, but it also helps develop cultural awareness and enables New Zealanders to communicate around the world.”

These statements confirm the contradiction of her government’s position when Pacific languages are included in the picture frame.

On 18 March this year, the National government was required to respond to the Report by the Pasifika Language Inquiry. It was no surprise when their “hands off” response was delivered.

Mrs Parata in a statement confirmed it, “Pacific communities are committed to ensuring the revitalisation and retention of their heritage languages. The Government is proud to support them to achieve that goal.” Support will be delivered through early childhood education and the Pasifika Education Plan.

In essence, the government stance is not to invest in Pacific languages. This is despite experts, academics and teachers pointing out that government intervention and development of Pacific education resources are needed for Pasifika languages to survive and grow.

Ms Catherine Delahunty, the Green’s education spokesperson was disgusted. She told Pacific Guardians in March, “The Government’s lack of response in the report show their refusal to value Pasifika languages and communities. And the refusal to value the proven educational benefits of learning in the mother tongue and/or heritage language.”

She said if the Greens become the government, there will be government interventions.

Ms Delahunty believes that bilingual or multilingual, starting with Te Reo Maori and Pacific languages should be a Government priority and that the entire country would benefit from more support for bilingual education at all levels of the education system.

“If we are in the Government by September 21st we will support the production of digital education resources for Pasifika,” she confirmed to Pacific Guardians.

“And [we will] make sure that the ‘Tupu and Folauga’ series are made available, I understand they still exist.”

But Mrs Parata pointed out in today’s announcement that the government is providing support to Pasifika languages through the Pasifika Education Plan 2013-2017.

The Plan focuses on increasing the number of Pasifika early childhood education language services teaching in a Pasifika language or culture, by 2016.

However, the opposition and Pacific providers were critical in a number of areas to the government approach.

The first according to Labour and the Greens is it is herding Pasifika children into a monocultural/monolingual system.

“It’s a policy which ignores the personal, cultural and educational benefits of Pasifika languages to school children with Pacific heritage with the effect of making those children monolingual in English by the time they leave schools,” Su’a William Sio told Pacific Guardians.

“In other words, National’s treatment of Pasifika languages in education is really a road to nowhere for Pasifika communities.”

Another criticism points to inherent barriers to Pasifika enrolments at ECE level that are still very much part of the system. And the government’s exclusive taxpayer partnership with corporate provider Kidicorp to increase participation was a step in the wrong direction say Pacific providers. Not only is it corporate welfare, but Pacific leaders say it can destroy some of the deep seated cultural bonds and historical connections inherent in Pacific communities. These issues were featured by Pacific Guardians in its March article: Pasifika Community Unhappy with Hekia Parata and Kris Faafoi.

The other major concern is in relation to digital education resources. Irrespective of how many schools subscribe to the Network4Learning network and how fast the broadband connections are; if there are no Pacific education resources, then teachers and language programmes cannot be created.

This year, New Zealand will commemorate special relationships with three countries in the ‘Realm of New Zealand’. It will commemorate 49 years with the Cook Islands; 40 years with Niue and 88 years in administering Tokelau.

What is sad about such close personal ties is the fact these three nations are the ones whose very languages are most at risk of extinction here in Aotearoa because of the current government’s approach.

 

National leader John Key launched his party’s election campaign yesterday at Manukau, the heart of Pasifika’s south Auckland community.

Highlight was the announcement of a housing plan aimed to increase homeownership for low income earners by doubling first home buyer subsidies. A taxpayer funded plan estimated to cost an extra NZ$218 million over four years.

South Auckland was the perfect venue to announce the housing plan as the majority of Pacific islanders living there are the group who need it the most. As detailed by Pacific Guardians feature: Affordable Housing the Pacific Equation the lowest home ownership group in New Zealand, at only 18.5 per cent, are Pacific islanders – the next lowest grouping is Maori with 28.2 per cent.

But the bad news is the majority of Pacific islanders will not be able to access National’s housing plan. Of the 90,000 estimated new homebuyers National says will benefit from its ‘housing plan’, very few Pacific islanders will be counted amongst them. The reasons why is illustrated in the following example of how National’s housing plan could work for a couple living in Auckland.

A couple with a combined income of NZ$100,000 in Auckland who had savings and subsidies of NZ$50,000 for a deposit would have to borrow five times their gross income with a 90% LVR loan to afford a home and land package costing NZ$550,000.

How many Pacific families in Auckland, or anywhere else for that matter, have this type of profile? Not many. And this is why.

Statistics NZ show that 26.9 per cent of Pacific islanders earn $5,000 or less; while a total of 63 per cent or 106,557 of them earn between $5,000 and $30,000. That is 90 per cent of working Pacific islanders earn up to $30,000. It means that a the majority of Pacific couple’s combined income would fall $40,000 of the required $100,000 income in the above example. The income threshold is not a problem for other working Kiwis as the New Zealand average hourly rate is $28.20 which equates to an average annual salary of $58,656 according to first quarter 2014 figures from Statistics NZ.

The other barrier to Pacific homeownership, as the statistics show, is that many of them with jobs are working in casual part-time employment, majority would be on minimum wage. In those jobs, they will face insecurity such as uncertain hours of paid work, a real risk of losing their jobs, or other kinds of insecurity.

On top of that, current changes being made to the Employment Law will give them even less protection and bargaining powers to better their wages, terms or conditions. These law changes would have been passed by now except for the fact John Banks critical vote (Maori Party are against the changes) was lost when he was found guilty by Justice Edwin Wylie in June.

But those changes are only stalled.

The bill will be back in the House if John Key’s national party returns to government after 20 September according to Labour minister, Simon Bridges. In recent media interviews, he said that if re-elected, National would push for the industrial changes in the law as soon as they could.

The changes would be horrendous and disastrous to Pacific islanders.

As the Council of Trade Unions (CTU) point out in its ‘It doesn’t have to be like this’ media statement, New Zealand’s employment law already “lack support for high-value, high wage industries [and] have created low wage, low-value work which is too often insecure.

“Over 600,000 New Zealanders are unemployed or in ‘insecure’ work – jobs that are badly paid, can be terminated at any time or changed at a few hours’ notice, and make it impossible to plan a life outside work.” These conditions are real as pointed out by Su’a William Sio that since 2009, the real median weekly INCOME for all New Zealanders has fallen by $10 a week to $575, but for Pasifika adults nationwide (after adjusting for inflation) it has dropped by $77 a week  to $381.” The  statistics reveal that 50 per cent of all Pasifika adults are trying to live on earnings less than $19,812 per annum.

Added Su’a, “It is much worse for Pasifika people living in Auckland – since 2009 their median weekly income dropped by $88 a week to $379 while the overall weekly INCOMES for Aucklanders is $575 a week.”

Insecure jobs also has another real impact on Pacific islanders aspiring to homeownership – they are cut off from mortgage financing as banks do not lend to applicants with insecure jobs.

However, amongst the estimated 1,500 turn-out at the Telstra Event Centre, the Minister for Pacific Islands Affairs, Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga was more than happy tweeting the launch “an unmitigated success.”

He added, “There was of course the welcome housing announcement which would see subsidies for first home buyers of up to $20,000. We’ve been working hard for New Zealand during some tough times during the past six years.

“We’re now asking New Zealand for another three years to keep the momentum going in the good days ahead.”

John Key at the launch said the plan is simple for low income Kiwis struggling to buy their first home.

“You join Kiwisaver, you save between three and five years and you want to buy a home, under National there’s a very realistic chance that your deposit will be there for you.”

A couple buying a new home who received the maximum KiwiSaver tax credit for five years would receive an extra NZ$10,000 in Government subsidies and be able to withdraw an extra NZ$5,210 from their KiwiSaver accounts for a deposit on first home.

Opposition parties have said National’s plan is only a short-term “band aid” that avoids fixing the real cause of the housing crisis, which is short supply of affordable housing.

“The fundamental problems are lack of supply of housing, planning rules that constrict development, and unrestricted speculation,” said Labour’s David Cunliffe.

“Unmet demand is driving house prices through the roof, and instead of addressing the fundamental problem now, National wants to spend $218 million of taxpayers’ money to fuel demand even more. It will drive prices even higher.”

But even though Cunliffe said Labour will fix the housing crisis by building 100,000 affordable homes for first home buyers, sort out speculators, and free up planning restrictions – they also have not provided a clearer picture on how low-income Kiwis can become homeowners.

Greens co-leader Russel Norman agree that shortage of supply is the problem and points to housing speculation as one of the root causes.

“Under National median house prices in Auckland have gone up by $228,000. The reality is they’re not dealing with the demand signs…the big demand from offshore, demand coming from those buying investment properties.”

He said if the Greens become the government, they will deal to house speculators by introducing a capital gains tax and place restrictions on foreign investors. They will build more affordable houses and state houses to boost supply.

While for low-income Kiwis, “Our Progressive Ownership policy will allow low income families to ‘rent-to-own’ government-built houses at an affordable price. The Green’s policy addresses the real drivers of housing affordability and will deliver for those New Zealanders who have been priced out of the market under National.”

The Minister of Pacific Island Affairs can boast all he wants about changes to employment statistics for Pacific people but the reality for many Pacific people is nowhere close to National’s promised brighter future, Labour’s Pacific Affairs spokesperson Su’a William Sio says.

“While everyone welcomes the slight improvements in unemployment figures, the fact is that at 11.4% Pacific unemployment is still higher than for Pakeha, Women, Maori and Asian groups.

“Unemployment is even worse for Pacific youth aged 15-24 years at 23.8%.

“The work by the Auckland Action Against Poverty in the last 3 days in Mangere has highlighted just how out of touch National is with the plight of many local unemployed and working Kiwis.

Not only are families struggling to put food on the table doing part-time casual work, but they are also been penalised by WINZ imposed sanctions.

“This is terrible treatment for people who are desperate through no fault of their own other than they are not getting their fair share of the economic improvements this government is talking up.

“The HLFS shows almost 100,000 kiwis are underemployed, people in work that require more hours, and more than 236,000 are jobless.

“The evidence is clear from our communities that when National says they are working for all New Zealanders, the people of Mangere know that they are really only working for their rich mates.

“We know that only 177 individuals and families on the NZ Rich list collectively increased their wealth by $3.3 billion to a combined total of $ 51.2 billion dollars. That’s more than 20% of the NZ gross domestic product.

”The reality for many Kiwis is despite their hard work life is just plain tough. That’s why Labour is focussed on providing better working opportunities and higher wages. We will support families with young children and make sure all our children get the best start in life.”

A Tuvalu family has been granted New Zealand residence after claiming they would be affected by climate change if they returned home.

Reported by the Herald on Sunday last weekend, it is the first successful application for New Zealand residency based on humanitarian grounds in which climate change featured.

The decision was made by the Immigration and Protection Tribunal.

As a result, many in the Pacific community are asking: “Does this mean other Pacific islanders can file claims for refugee status based on the threat of climate change?”

The simple answer at this stage is no, as the international Refugee Convention does not recognize victims of climate change as refugees.

Environmental law expert Vernon Rive told the Herald newspaper the tribunal would be keen to avoid opening the floodgates to other climate change refugee claims.

And even though he sees the Tuvalu family decision “as quite significant” it does not provide an open ticket for people from all places impacted by climate change.

It is still the case that to be granted residency, as in the case of the Tuvalu family, there is “a very stringent test and it requires exceptional circumstances of a humanitarian nature.”

How difficult those tests are have been played out in the courts through the case of ‘climate change refugee’ Ioane Teitiota, a 37-year-old native of Kiribati.

In 2007, Teitiota and his wife moved to New Zealand after deciding that life in Kitibati was no longer sustainable. He filed the refugee bid after overstaying his visa.

Teitiota’s lawyers argued that New Zealand’s refugee laws were outdated, also stating that high tides, breached seawalls, and rising ocean levels were creating imminent danger for the islander and his family.

But after a series of unsuccessful appeals, the last in Auckland in November 2013, Justice John Priestly put the nail in the coffin of Teitiota’s case calling it “novel” and ultimately “unconvincing.”

With millions of other people living in dangerously low-lying island nations, Priestly found that an asylum bid based on global warming concerns did not meet the terms of a 1951 UN convention of refugees. The current requirements in the convention state that a refugee must have a legitimate fear of persecution in his home country.

When the authorities asked Mr Teitioata if he was persecuted because of his race, religion, nationality, or his membership in a particular social group or because of political opinion, he said it is climate change that he feared, rather than his own government, which rendered him powerless when it comes to activating the protection of the Refugee Convention.

Said Justice Priestly, “By returning to Kiribati, he would not suffer a sustained and systemic violation of his basic human rights such as the right to life … or the right to adequate food, clothing and housing.”

The end result was deportation for Mr Teitioata and his wife back to Tarawa, Kiribati. His three Kiwi-born children were also deported because New Zealand does not recognize the offspring of illegal immigrants.

What’s critically important is that people must realize the Refugee Convention is not providing physical refuge or legal protection to climate-change victims.

Put in another way, the international Refugee Convention does not recognise victims of climate change as refugees.

So what was different in the case of the Tuvalu family that enabled them to gain New Zealand residency?

The history of the family is virtually identical to that of Ioane Teitioata.

They moved to New Zealand in 2007, but have had no legal status in the country since 2009. Their two children, aged 3 and 5, were born in New Zealand.

The father is a qualified teacher but has been a maintenance worker at a fast-food chain becausehe couldn’t register as a teacher. His several applications for work visas were refused.

In November 2012, the family lodged claims for refugee and protected persons status.

In March last year, their claims were dismissed. And then just last month the tribunal turned down their appeals because they did not meet the refugee convention.

However, they appealed the latest decision on humanitarian grounds. An option that allowed the tribunal wider discretion to consider whether it would be unjust to send a person back to their country.

The family’s lawyers believed that on humanitarian grounds, the effects of climate change should be recognised.

“A lot of people are affected by illness when they go back, they get sick from drinking polluted water. The island is porous so even when the water is not flooding, it penetrates the rocks under the land,” they said.

With extra discretion allowed under the humanitarian lens, the tribunal was able to consider other factors such as “their character, the fact they’re going to contribute to New Zealand and that they have a connection to New Zealand is also taken into account,” according to the lawyers.

The family also has three generations of relatives living in New Zealand.

In his ruling, Justice John Priestley pointed out: “At a stroke, millions of people who are facing medium-term economic deprivation, or the immediate consequences of natural disasters or warfare would be entitled to protection under the Refugee Convention.”

Parliamentarians have the power to authorize the ‘stroke’ Justice Priestly mentioned above.

Of the four members asked by Pacific Guardians, only Labour’s Su’a William Sio provided comments. Staff for Minister for Pacific Islands Affairs Peseta Lotu-I’iga say “We are unable to provide this comment today’. Will get it to you asap (sic)”.

Le’au Asenati, Pacific spokesperson for NZ First has no reply. While Jan Logie, Greens’ Pacific spokesperson also responded that a comment will be forthcoming.

Su’a says he welcomes the Tribunal’s decision in favour of the Tuvalu family. However, he did not reveal or discuss the position a Labour government would take on getting climate change included in the current Refugee Convention and New Zealand’s refugee law.

“It is a significant decision that recognises that climate change and its impact on the South Pacific region, like rising sea water levels drowning islands is very real. That Pacific island homes and its people are under real threat from climate change.”

Climate change emphasised Su’a “is not make believe, it is real and it is genuine.”

He told Pacific Guardians that Small island states have raised awareness of the issue but are being rebuffed by “some of the major industrial countries, whose governments seem to believe, their pollution isnt harming anyone (at least not any of their citizens).

“The National government seems to taken this approach as well.”

He revealed that the projected economic impacts of climate change was one of the reasons the last Labour government established the Pacific Access Quota system specifically including an annual quota of people from Kiribati, Tuvalu and Tonga, that could have access to living permanently in New Zealand.

“Since 2009, under the National government that quota and the Samoan quota have never been filled. National changed the rules and made it harder for these island nations to access permanent residency in New Zealand.

“Our policy is that the next Labour government will not only work to protect these quotas and look at ways of ensuring these quotas are filled, and Pacific family reunification is improved to the rules before National became government, but Labour will also recognise that there are some Pacific island nations with real and genuine climate change needs.”

Labour in government will work with our regional partners and organisations to ensure that they have real and timely options for mobility across the regions.

 

 

 

 

Labour’s Su’a William Sio blames John Key and the National party for Gay Marriage becoming law.

In a statement issued in Samoan (full text below), Su’a said it was John Key who started the Gay Marriage movement when Barack Obame supported it. He re-emphasised that despite his fierce opposition to it together with 44 other MPs, it was National’s support that got the bill passed into law and that the blame lies squarely on National’s shoulder.

Su’a also explained in detail Labour’s superannuation policy and why they are supporting an increase to the entitlement age from 65 to 67.

He concluded by outlining Labour’s three election priorities:

1. More jobs and higher wages
2. Child allowance for families and payment of school bills for families in hardship, and
3. Affordable housing and cheaper rental accommodation.

NOTE: For non-Samoan speakers wishing a translation, please contact Pacific Guardians or the MP concerned: Sua.William.Sio@parliament.govt.nz

FULL TEXT OF STATEMENT BY SU’A WILLIAM SIO

Ou te manatu e ma’ea le faigapalota i le aso 20 o Setema o lenei tausaga, e to’atele sui o le Pasefika a le Leipa e tatau ona manumalo. Ae fa’amoemoe tasi i le tofa loloto ma le fa’autatuga mamao a le tatou Atunu’u.

O sui o le Pasefika o lo’o avea ma faipule a le Leipa e iai lo’u tagata mai le itumalo o Magele, le faitoto’a o Niu Sila. O Kris Faafoi i Mana i Ueligitone, O le tamaitai Rarotoga o Poto Williams mai Christchurch East. O sui o le Pasefika o lo’o avea ma sui tamomo’e a le Leipa ua iai Carmel Sepuloni i Kelston, Jenny Salesa i Manukau East, Jerome Mika i Papakura, Lemalu Herman Retzlaff i Upper Harbour, ma le tamaitai Toga o Anahila Suisuiki.

E to’atele sui tauva a le Pasefika mo le Leipa i lo sui e to’atolu o lo’o tauva nei mo le vaega a le National.

E iai si mataupu lea e tatau lava ona fai atu iai sa’u fa’amatalaga ona e tele tala sese o lo’o feaveai e nisi o sui tauva. O le mea fia fa’asa’o i le mataupu lea o le fa’aipoipoga lea na vevesi ai le palemene i le 2013.

O le taimi lava na talia ai e le Peresetene o Amerika le fa’aipoipo o le tane i le tane ma le fafine i le fafine, na muamua lava aapa atu le Palemia o John Key e talia lea mau i Niu Sila. Ma o ia lava na fa’apea atu o so’o se faipule lava e fia fa’aofi sana tulafono e aloaia ai lea fa’aipoipoga, o le ia lagolagoina ma le malosi.

Lea la na oso ai loa le faipule o Louisa Wall mai Manurewa ma fa’aofi lana tulafono i le se’i o tulafono. Ina ua manumalo mai lana tulafono i le se’i o tulafono na amata ai loa lea o le finauga o lea mataupu.

O le faiga o tulafono fa’apea, e tatala le sa’olotoga o sui faipule o le Palemene e fai le palota a le sui lava ia i le mea ua talitonu lava iai le tagata  O le tulaga lava lena sa iai.

O a’u sa tete’e ma le malosi i lenei tulafono ona o lo’u naunauga ia puipui pea le sa’olotoga o talitonuga o lo’o taofi mau iai le tatou Atunu’u, e ui o se mataupu ma’aleale i le tatou Atunu’u ona e iai foi nisi o le tatou Atunu’u e talitonu iai i lea mau.

Ona ua mae’a le finauga o lenei mataupu ma lafo loa i le palemene aoao, e 77 faipule na lagolagoina lea tulafono, ae 44 matou sa tete’e iai. O le Palemia ma le to’atele o sui o le National na lagolagoina lea tulafono. Sa fa’apena foi i le vaega a le Leipa. Ae sa iai foi se vaega na matou tutu fa’atasi e tete’e atu iai. E le te’ite’i manumalo le tulafono, na manumalo ona o le fulisia o le lagolago a sui a le National.

O so’o se sui tauva poo se vaega fa’aupufai lava e fa’apea atu latou te suia lea tulafono, e le moni lena fa’amatalaga, ona e le’o se mea faigofie le toe liliu o le finagalo o le palemene e pei ona fulisia iai le 77 faipule na lagolagoina.

E lelei lava le manino o le mata o le vai i feuiaiga o tulafono ma le mafuaaga na manumalo ai lea tulafono, ona o le lagolago a le Malo. Ia outou silafia lelei, e leai se tulafono e pasia, seia vagana ua lagolagoina e le Palemia ma lana faigamalo. O le lagolago a John Key ma lana faigamalo na maua ai faipule e 77 na lagolagoina lea mataupu.

O leisi mataupu e fia fa’asa’o o le mataupu lea fa’atatau i le penisione a tagata matutua ua malolo ritaea. O le tatou penisione o se polokalame lea e fesoasoani ai i tagata matutua ua malolo ritaea ma o lo’o nofomau i Niu Sila.

O lo’o tuputupu a’e pea o le to’atele o tagata matutua, ma o le to’atele foi o tagata matutua ua tele tausaga o latou soifua pea, ua atili ai lava ona taugata ma tele le tupe fa’aalu e totogi ai penisione o latou ua malolo ritaea. Ua matou maitauina foi o latou o lo’o maua le penisione, e le’o taitai gafataulimaina e tupe maua mai latou penisione le tausiga o latou pili masani e tatau ona totogi i aso faifai pea. O nisi foi ua malolo ritaea o lo’o faigaluega pea ina ia maua seisi fesoasoani i se tupe fa’aopopo mai latou totogi.

Ona o nei fa’afitauli atoa ma le fautuaga a le Ofisa o le Penisione, ua fautuina ai le Palemene aoao e tatau ona faia seisi la’asaga e faigamalo oi luma e puipui ai le maua pea o le penisione ina ia tofusia tagata matutua o le lumanai i se fesoasoani tupe i taimi e malolo ritaea ai. O se tasi o fautuaga ina ia sii le tausaga e agavaa ai tagata matutua i le penisione mai le 65 tausaga i le 67 tausaga le matutua.

Ua matou taliaina lea fautuaga. Ae e le suia i se taimi vave. E le suia i le tausaga fou. Fa’atoa taunu’u lea suiga i le tausaga 2032 mo latou e atoa iai le 67 tausaga. O lona uiga e a’afia ai latou ua lalo ifo o le 48 tausaga le matutua. E tumau pea le maua o le penisione i le 65 tausaga mo latou o lo’o latalata nei i le 60 tausaga le matutua.

E tolu lava mataupu o lo’o ave iai le matou fa’amuamua i lenei faigapalota. Muamua, ia tofusia le atunu’u ma galuega ma ia lelei foi totogi a le aufaigaluega. O lona lua, ia maua e aiga o loo iai le fanau laiti se fesoasoani tupe aua le tausiga o fanau ma le fesoasoani i pili o aoga a le fanau. Ma le tolu, o loo iai matou polisi e taumafai e fa’apa’u ai fale ia taugofie mo latou e fia fa’atau so latou fale umia sa’oloto ma ia tele foi fale e mafai ona nofo totogi ai le atunu’u.

O mataupu nei e tolu o lo’o ave iai le fa’amuamua ona ua matou talitonu o mataupu nei o lo’o talosaga mai ai le atunu’u lautele iai matou o lo’o manaomia ai le fesoasoani. Afai e lelei galuega, lelei totogi, ma maua le fesoasoani e tausi ai le fanau aoga, ma taugofie fale, matou te talitonu o le a fa’apena ona toe foi Niu Sila i le tulaga o le maua e tagata uma o se lumanai fiafia ma se lumanai manuia.

E ui i so’u lagona ma se matou naunauga i maua lea fesoasoani mo le tatou Atunu’u ae matou te le mafaia lava se mea seia vagana ua lagolago mai e le tatou Atunu’u. O le palota e aupito i sili ona taua ina ia sui ai le faigamalo o le palota mo le pati. O le Pati lea a le Leipa. Soifua.

 

Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga has defended recent criticisms aimed at staff, nepotism and organizational changes at the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs (MPIA).

Responding exclusively to Pacific Guardians the Minister says he is happy with the way the current Ministry restructure is being handled.

He said the changes are “not intended to achieve savings” but to improve “service delivery and policy advice” by putting in place a “new operating model”.

He emphasised, “The vision for organisational change at the Ministry is about achieving better outcomes for Pacific people, communities, and businesses through better policy engagement and outcomes.”

But accusations about CEO Pauline Winters $30,124.88 travel spend over the past 12 months, and controversial staff appointments of Private Secretary Luc Shorter, executive director Kevin Sua Thomsen and regional manager Paul Stowers, made by Winters last year without the roles being advertised, remain unanswered.

Opposition MPs have stepped up their call for Peseta to step in.

The staff appointments are serious say NZ First Pacific spokesperson Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor.

“Appointment of staff in senior positions without being advertised or going through the recruitment process can be a serious misconduct,” she told Pacific Guardians.

“The Minister ought to be asked if he can provide assurances that his Chief Executive is performing according to the guidelines of the State Services.”

Su’a William Sio, for Labour maintains the current situation at MPIA is a “shambles” and a reflection of Peseta’s lack of “leadership”.

“The Minister needs to front up and explain how his ‘leadership’ has resulted in the unfolding shambles at the ministry,” said Su’a in a statement.

“Pacific families are being hit with high unemployment, low incomes and unaffordable housing. Now the only ministry charged with advocating for better lives for our people is embroiled in internal staffing issues.”

He added, “The bulk of the extra money Mr Lotu-Iiga crowed about the Ministry getting in this year’s Budget appears to have been for redundancies.”

But Peseta is unperturbed and maintains his position, “It is inappropriate for me to comment on expenditure or staffing matters.  These are operational matters and you will need to contact the Ministry directly for comment.

“However, I have sought reassurances from the State Services Commissioner that the Chief Executive’s expenditure is legitimate.”

He also explained that the increase in the 2014/15 budget of $619,000 was “to support organisational change for the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs.

“The organisational change is not intended to achieve savings; rather it is to improve service delivery and policy advice through implementation of a new operating model.  The Ministry is still undergoing organisational change and staff are in the appointment process and it would be inappropriate for me to comment as Minister on staffing matters.”

In the meantime, Ms Winters has refused media interviews instead preferring to communicate through written ministry statements.

In relation to travel expenditure, Ms Winters said, “My travel spending is appropriate and is entirely related to the core business of the ministry. My travel programme is planned against the ministry’s work programme to assist with keeping the costs as low as possible.”

She added the ministry was going through a “change process” and that a “process of business as usual and consultation” required regular travel between Auckland, where the majority of Pacific Islanders are based, and Wellington.

But the Taxpayers’ Union has called for Ms Winters to front up “or resign”.

Executive Officer, Mr Jordan Williams told media, “Taxpayers fork out $270,000 per year for this Chief Executive and she is refusing to take calls from the media. The Taxpayers’ Union call on Ms Winter to front up, or resign.”

Last week, Mr Williams went with Taxpayers’ Union mascot Porky to see Ms Winters at the MPIA offices.

“For Ms Winter’s gallant efforts to rip off New Zealand taxpayers with publicly funded weekend trips to the exotic capital of the South Pacific known as Auckland, Porky and I visited the Ministry’s offices to present her with the first of our ‘Troughing Awards’.

“Ms Winters was in the office but refused to front-up or speak to media.

“Despite Ms Winter’s expenses being more than $30,000 she chose to hide in her office and send a spin doctor to accept the award on her behalf.

“Ms Winter’s refusal to justify her expense bill is the epitome of arrogance. She should front up, justify her extravagance on the taxpayer purse, or resign.”

PAULINE WINTER SPEND

Spending between July 2013 and July 2014:

Taxis – $5987.24 (around 80 of which were listed as AIRPORT TRANSFERS)

AIRFARES – $17,059.53 (between Auckland and Wellington)

Car rental – $3103.82 (on 10 occasions, over six months, she used a HIRE CAR in Auckland over weekends. The bill came to $2273)

Total travel expenses: $30,124.88.

 

 

 

Three weekends ago in Auckland, Ms Sarai Tepou felt the treatment she got from Newmarket Olympic Pool staff and police was racially motivated.

Mrs Tepou and her children were issued a Tresspass Order by Police based on unsubstantiated information from pool staff. She has lodged a personal grievance with Race Relations Commissioner, Dame Susan Devoy.

Their actions prompted public condemnation by Pacific parliamentarians and candidates.

Labour’s Su’a William Sio vented his anger telling Pacific Guardians two weeks ago, “We’ve put up with all this racial c%$# from day one and we won’t put up with it ever again. This is our country too, and we deserve better than this kind of treatment.”

He challenged Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, the Minister for Pacific island affairs and the Assoc Minister for Local Government [responsible for public facilities like the Newmarket Pool] to intervene.

Said Su’a, “If Peseta does not step in, then essentially it means that his government by being silent about this, is agreeing with this kind of behaviour” that “the staff decision to ban this family from a publicly funded swimming pool, without any evidence to substantiate their allegations, other than the fact they saw it was a brown looking family with a Pacific island name – that it is okay to ban people on the grounds of the skin colour.”

The minister was aware of Ms Tepou’s situation and Su’a’s challenge. Through his staff, he assured Pacific Guardians two weeks ago that an official response will be issued on Ms Tepou’s situation.

More than two weeks later, we have not received any official response from Minister Peseta except promises of a response.

Unofficially, Peseta’s staff told the writer last week, the Minister is taking the case seriously. However, he is taking time over it because Ms Tepou’s children are part of the enquiry.

However, based on the information we have been given, the only explanation for the silence from Peseta and the government is Su’a’s statement, “…it means that his government by being silent about this, is agreeing with this kind of behaviour.”

The type of behavior being condoned according to Su’a “feels like we are back to the bad old days when we were clearly branded as coconuts.”

He further believed the behaviour type is an indicator that the roots of the racial undertones lie deeper than the frontline staff involved.

“This staff behaviour wouldn’t happen if they didn’t get the authority from their seniors,” said Su’a.

NZ First’s Le’au Asenati Lole-Taylor told Pacific Guardians the treatment of Ms Tepou is a result of “institutionalized racism rearing its ugly head”.

She added, “…in this incident she is first and foremost a New Zealander with the same rights as the Prime Minister or anyone else. No New Zealander has to endure this disgusting type of treatment in their own country – full stop.”

While the Vice chairperson for MANA Pasifika, James Papali’i said, ““This type of discrimination, harassment, and judgmental behaviour by people in positions of authority should not be left unchallenged and MANA Pasifka hopes that Ms Devoy investigates the incident further and hold those responsible accountable”.