Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor
MISA TELEFONI RESPONDS
Samisoni Pareti's article in the July issue of Islands Business basically sets out to prove that when it comes to Samoa's economy "All that Glitters is not Gold". He titles the article, "Beyond the glitter and growth". Islands Business is a Fiji-based (some critics say Fiji-biased) monthly magazine. It has taken on greater regional prominence with the demise of the Pacific Islands Monthly. I was interviewed by, and spoke frankly with Samisoni Pareti. He took the time and trouble to visit Samoa, and it was disappointing that the greater portion of his article quoted a Samoan academic living in Suva. That lapse tended to personalise what could have been a good objective critique of the Samoan economy.
 |
|
|
The difficulty of writing an article that quotes extensively from those interviewed, is that the reader is left to surmise the journalist's own personal viewpoint. The article also refers to an interview with Leulu Dr Felise Va'a, which did at least provide a balance to the social issues that the article tended to focus on, rather than the economy. We must concede that this, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing, as economics is about people. Depersonalising economic issues is about the same as trying to depersonalise government policy. If a government is a democracy, then as President Lincoln said, "it is about government of the people, by the people, for the people". Just to set the record straight, on the economy, Samoa enjoyed a 14.9 percent growth between 2000 and 2002. It may have slowed in pace from 6.9% in 2000, to 1.8% in 2002, but the economy nevertheless grew at an average rate of about 5% a year during this period.
- ADVERTISEMENT -
Inflation Rate
The inflation rate may have peaked at 8.1%, but it is gradually but surely coming down as predicted by the Central Bank, and even Islands Business admits this increase is mainly the result of increases in the cost of local produce at the markets. This is cyclical. When farmers respond to these record high prices for produce, by increased supply prices will come down. We have recently kick-started the economy with $51 million worth of projects SamoaTel and Aggie Grey's Resort. The economy can stand many more projects in this same period, as long as they are foreign-funded. The point I made in Sunday Samoan (29/7/03) was that these two projects, being locally funded, would lower both the local money supply and foreign exchange reserves. I was not in any way implying our economy could not stand any other "foreign-funded" projects, during this same period.
Immigration Quota
Islands Business faxed me for a comment on the New Zealand immigration quota and I basically espoused the theory of comparative advantage, which dictates that our people would always fill the quota. But this was not in any way a reflection on Samoa's economic performance. The queues were just as long in the high growth years from 1998-2001. I could only speculate that if Fiji had such a quota, there would be rioting outside the New Zealand High Commission in Suva! The other important point is that while some do emigrate to New Zealand, each year sees "Sons for the Return Home", to use Albert Wendt's phrase, who return home on their own free will. It would have been more balanced, if Islands Business had also interviewed locally some of this group here in Apia, determining their reasons for deciding to return to Samoa to live and work.
Social Issues
If I had known Islands Business were more interested in the social issues, I would have told them to also study our fa'a Samoa social system, where the strong contribute more, and the weak less. Where no-one goes without, in our extended families.
Our traditional fa'a Samoa is a community-based social system which ensures the strong help the weak, and income is spread accordingly. The so-called "hiding of dirty linen" that is referred to is more about families taking care of their family differences "in-house", without the need to publicise the matter any further afield than that! This is not unique to Samoan society. I would also have advised them to study in-depth the major contribution of our churches to social stability in Samoa. It is interesting to note that the church establishment in the Solomon Islands has proven powerless to do anything about the recent spate of senseless violence and killings. Such a situation could never have arisen here in Samoa, as the church establishment would play a vital role in overcoming any social and political unrest and instability, such as now exists in the Solomons.
Certainly, Samoa's political leaders would have involved church leaders much earlier, and together launch a concerted effort to avoid such a blood-bath and anarchy. How can people who are committed to a God of peace so easily embrace the power of the sword to settle disputes? They have lived by the sword, and are clearly dying by the sword. Now they want others to come in and reimpose peace in their land! It is an unfortunate situation that affects the whole region. For some potential foreign investors trouble anywhere in the Pacific is equivalent to trouble everywhere in the Pacific. On economic growth, I made the same point to Islands Business that I made to Professor Duncan of USP. All growth is good. That is an undisputed fact.
But let's not kid ourselves that all growth "trickles down" to the poorer sector of the society. This point at least is supported by the article. Islands Business also makes the important acknowledgment that many of the issues raised by the Asian Development Bank-funded report on Samoa have been addressed in our recent Budget, which took effect from July 1, 2003. To paraphrase the Chinese saying, we are going about teaching our people how to fish, so we can feed them for a lifetime. This is far better than distributing fish, and feeding them for a day. In the final analysis, at least Islands Business makes an attempt to be fair to all the different perspectives,
Misa Telefoni,
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister
Samoa
FALEOMAVAEGA RESPONDS
As a Vietnam veteran, as a ranking member of the U.S. House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and as American Samoa's duly elected representative to the U.S. Congress, I am writing to express my disappointment in your recent decision to publish an inaccurate and untruthful account of my position regarding the war in Iraq, the Progressive Caucus and the Inter-agency Group on Insular Affairs (IGIA).
The account was authored by Mrs Amata Radewagen, an individual who has sought and lost her bid for American Samoa's Congressional seat in four previous elections. While I respect Mrs Radewagen's right to disagree about any and every issue she chooses, I question why she would choose to intentionally mislead your readers. I also question why Islands Business would publish Mrs Radewagen's letter to the editor in its July 2003 on-line edition under the title Mixed Reactions to Iraq War. Neither the IGIA nor the Progressive Caucus is related to the subject of the Iraq War and this leads me to question the purpose and intent of Mrs Radewagen's letter.
To set the record straight, I supported the President's decision to use military force against Iraq. However, my support like the support of other members of the U.S. House of Representatives, was based on the Bush Administration informing us that Saddam Hussein was in possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The White House has recently admitted that its intelligence information was wrong, which now raises serious questions about our involvement in Iraq. On a daily basis, U.S. soldiers are dying. It is now estimated that we will need hundreds of thousands of troops to keep the peace and there is real concern that over time this could lead to another Vietnam War. The Vietnam War lasted ten years and over the course of time, not in a matter of months, millions died.
Indeed, I am concerned about our troops and I am concerned about American Samoa's men and women in uniform. Like other Samoan soldiers, I have served my country in time of war and I can tell you war is not pretty and should not be taken lightly. Furthermore, it has never been a policy of the U.S. to use our troops for the single purpose of liberating another country. We have not liberated China. We did not liberate Russia. We have not liberated North Korea and we did not go to war to liberate Iraq. According to President Bush, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and we went to war because there was concern that the security of the U.S. was seriously at risk.
In other words, the U.S. only commits its troops in defense of our national interests because the U.S. understands that war should not be taken lightly. Given the seriousness of wars, it is disappointing that someone who represents herself as a commissioner for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders thinks it is okay to expend the lives of our young people without thought or care. While I respect Mrs Radewagen's right to believe what she will, I disagree with her naive views about war. I also have serious concerns about Mrs Radewagen's views about the Progressive Caucus. Once again, her statements reflect a lack of knowledge and experience about the subject she has broached. Members of the Progressive Caucus, which is a Congressional member organisation, share a belief in the principles of social and economic justice. Put another way, we support the rights of working men and women who make up our nation's labour force.
For example, I believe there should be an increase in minimum wages for tuna cannery workers in American Samoa while Mrs Radewagen and the political party that she supports believes wealthy executives should maximise their corporate profits at the expense of hard working people. Members of the Progressive Caucus are also dedicated to the protection of human rights. Congressman Tom Lantos, for example, is a member of the Progressive Caucus. Congressman Lantos is also the most senior Democratic member of the House Committee on International Relations and is the only member of the U.S. Congress to have survived the holocaust. In fact, Congressman Lantos escaped the horrors of a Nazi internment camp and I challenge anyone to question his participation or membership in the Progressive Caucus.
As for the IGIA signing, I can understand why Mrs Radewagen is disappointed that President Bush did not invite her to be a VIP guest at the signing ceremony establishing the Inter-agency Group on Insular Affairs. After all, Mrs Radewagen represents herself to be an advisor to the President and also publicly claims that she is responsible for the White House inviting the Congressional Delegates to the ceremony. On the contrary, Mrs Radewagen tried to exclude the delegates from participating in the ceremony and her plan backfired. Not only did the President choose to invite us but Mrs Radewagen was also excluded from the IGIA photo op and the VIP guest list. As a result, she is embarrassed and disappointed.
Nevertheless, Mrs Radewagen's disappointment in the President does not give her a license to make false statements about my participation in the signing ceremony.
Eni F H Faleomavaega,
Member of United States Congress,
Washington D.C.
URWIN'S APPLICATION
I write with reference to your Editor's Notebook column in the July issue of Islands Business magazine and wish to draw your attention to some of the inaccuracies contained in your "Letter from Suva". Contrary to your assertion that Australia's nomination of Mr Greg Urwin arrived three days late, I can confirm that the nomination was lodged by hand with the office of the Prime Minister and also with the Chief of Protocol of the Fiji Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade, as required, on May 30. It is therefore quite inaccurate and mischievous, to say the least, to infer that Australia's nomination was somehow "slipped in" as your article asserts, "three days late".
You may also recall that the Prime Minister John Howard announced to leaders at the August 2002 Pacific Islands Forum meeting in Suva his intention to nominate Mr Urwin for the position so the nomination was in the public arena for many months before formal nomination. I also note with great interest your personal assessment of the various nominations for the position of Forum Secretary-General. Your article continues to promote the suggestion that the position in question should be reserved for Pacific Islanders only. That issue, of the eligibility for the post of Forum Secretary-General, was widely discussed by Forum leaders at their meeting in Fiji in August last year.
At that meeting, leaders agreed that nominations for the position could come from any Forum member country, which of course, includes Australia and New Zealand.
Also, contrary to your claim that islands leaders will not support candidates from either Australia or New Zealand, the feedback we have received suggest there is support for Mr Urwin's nomination. As you correctly pointed out in the article, it is the Forum leaders who will consider the available candidates at the Forum Leaders Meeting in Auckland in August. We are confident that the current consultative process which is underway will not only be helpful to the leaders but, as you point out, "also transparent and fair to the candidates". We are confident that the leaders will make the choice on the best candidate, in light of the current needs of the Forum and the strengths of the four candidates who have been nominated.
Susan Boyd,
Australian High Commissioner,
Suva, Fiji
