PARTY LEADER RACE
Three candidates vying for SODELPA party leader have expressed strong views on how to prevent divisions in the party.
Former general secretary, Pio Tabaiwalu, deputy opposition whip, Aseri Radrodro and MP Viliame Gavoka agree that compliant with the party constitution and good governance is sacrosanct.
They were responding on Topic six question. If they were party leader how would they deal with grievances on the recent Constituency Council AGMs?
Mr Tabaiwalu says: “Many of our grievances have been a failure of leadership. Leaders from the president,vice presidents to the party leader must make fair and objective decisions based on our constitution. They should not be swayed based on their Vanua
allegiance, personal connections or political agenda. Party members look up to our leaders to be firm, fair and decisive.”
Mr Radrodro says: “The issue that must be understood is that decisive leaders must take clinical decisions that is for the interest of the party and its members. That priority must never shift no matter at whose expense.”
Mr Gavoka said: “A political party draws its strength from its base as ultimately they are the ones that decide the fate of the party with their votes. Put simply, if what you champion is at odds with the wishes of your base, you lose.”
Two other candidates, incumbent Sitiveni Rabuka and former president Ro Filipe Tuisawau have not responded to invitations to share their views.
These are the full texts of the responses by Mr Tabaiwalu, Mr Radrodro and Mr Gavoka in their own words:
Pio Tabaiwalu
There is clear line of demarcation on the role of the management board and working committee. The Party Constitution states in section 13.0 as follows: “The Management Board shall be responsible for conducting the business, administrative and organisational affairs of the Party” and Section 13.8.5 (b) states the role of the Working Committee as follows: “The Working Committee shall direct the affairs of the Party in between Management Board meetings and give directions to the Secretariat of the Party.”
Furthermore, the management board has authority to devolve some of its functions to the working committee or to other committees. The only exception is the issue of disciplinary procedures for which it retains its role.
The grievance procedure in Section 25.0 states as follows:
“Any aggrieved member in regards to the affairs of the Party or other matters shall put a notice of his grievances to the management board who shall appoint an independent person as an arbiter to discuss the case of an aggrieved member and make recommendations to the management board.”
So in the context of the party constitution, the working wommittee cannot institute proceedings for any grievances unless directed to do so by the management board.
It is the board which has the final decision on disciplinary matters.
The working committee core function is to ensure that the party secretariat carries out the resolutions of the management board and other administrative or party matters in between management board meetings with the exception of disciplinary issues.
What are some improvements that can be done?
We urgently need to review our party constitution which we are presently undertaking.
As an adviser to the party constitutional review committee, I have forwarded some of my recommendations to the committee in the context of my response to the questions raised on whether the Party has been too timid in resolving issues, as follows:
■ To separate administrative matters from the party consitution to a party standard operating procedures. This will resolve issues in regards to constituencies and branches. The constitution is at present too bulky and cumbersome and it contains administrative elements which should not be there.
■ To add more powers to the general secretary and the working committee to handle administrative grievances for instance the conduct of elections in branches and constituencies. The board has been burdened with all sorts of grievances and it has now become too costly for the party in terms of time and resources.
■ To review disciplinary processes and decision so as to resolve issues effectively. My suggestion is to have a disciplinary committee whose decision is final. Bringing grievances and disciplinary resolutions to the management board has created factions and political expediency rather than an objective assessment of the facts. The Party’s public image has suffered in the process.
■ To ensure that the party is not caught up with technicalities and to inculcate practicalities and common sense in some of our decisions. We have become too legalistic and anyone with a grievance is willing take the Party to Court without due consideration to the image of the Party and to resolve issues amicably within the mechanisms of the Party.
■ Many of our grievances have been a failure of leadership. Leaders from the president, vice presidents to the party leader must make fair and objective decisions based on our constitution. They should not be swayed based on their Vanua allegiance, personal connections or political agenda. Party members look up to our leaders to be firm, fair and decisive.
■ No matter how well you revise the party constitution, if you have unprincipled, dishonest leadership who are there for their self interests and willing to bend the constitution to achieve their objectives there will always be divisiveness. Being a founding member and one of the architects of the initial party constitution, I am a firm believer in transparency accountability, good governance and the rule of law which we have included as the guiding principles of the Party. And I would ensure that this is the ethos that is strictly followed by party members, officials and Members of Parliament. Anyone who breaches these principles should not be in the Party.
Aseri Radrodro
Let me start by stating that “Governance
requires ensuring there is a balance of compliance to the rule of law and managing relationships. A political party is a dynamic environment and entity, that requires as I’ve said before, decisiveness and precision of actions that must complement our utterances. Leaders differentiate themselves by the conduct of their actions and decisions.
The SODELPA constitution is a document used to guide the functions of the party. It has worked well for us in the last six years. Of course there is room for improvement in the laws it encapsulates given the evolving environment in which we operate. Politics is a gradual process of managing change and competing interests and for me, our Constitution in embracing that notion needs to be more defined and consistent with party aspirations. The document must be uniting and easy to follow, practical, workable and easily implemented.
The working committee and the management board for that matter in the way I see them, are working as best as they can within the provisions of the current party constitution. Our board is made up of admirable men and women who have put their hands up and volunteered to do the hard task of managing a vibrant party like SODELPA.
Changes keep happening within the party evolvement and transformation, including the elections of new board members from the various constituency council around the country. We have a 42 member board and managing personalities and aspirations at that level is no mean feat.
The issue that must be understood however is that decisive leaders must take clinical decisions that is for the interest of the party and its members. That priority must never shift no matter at whose expense.
Last Saturday’s management board meeting where contentious issues were referred to an independent arbiter, though possibly seen as weak, is in fact just complying with the grievance procedures laid out in the constitution of the Party.
In my personal position, I view that the Constitution as such needs to be able to grant powers that enables execution of immediate decisions or disciplinary measures for example.
At present, it must be noted that the party has already been taken to court recently for noncompliance to the party constitution. As much as we all hold personal positions on how the MB or the WC should be making decisions, my commendation is that we must adhere to the rule of law and not allow what our supreme laws encapsulate, to be flaunted. There is no doubt that there are some who will make excuses that we can always bend the Constitution at times to accommodate goodwill. I don’t agree. I see the inability to follow the rule of law as weakness and sugar coating that harms the bigger picture. It becomes band aid solutions that will erupt sooner or later.
Whatever the excuse, whether it be excuses that the Vanua may be compromised, or we will be stepping on toes, we cannot hurt our own journey by being selective in the application of the rule of law that is there to ensure compliance to standards of good governance and accountability.
This is why we need to have good leaders, those with strong ethics and good moral principles that make them sensitive to the needs of the people other than championing what
ever self-interests or agendas we may independently hold.
The people that we say we represent will not continue to give us chances. It’s the mother of all mess ups when we assume they will always support our maneuvering and our meandering . They see us from the outside and see a group of leaders unable to address issues succinctly. What will they do?
They will lose hope and move away to other options that may be available. If I am made Party leader, my history of being a decisive leader will continue!
Viliame Gavoka
SODELPA has a constitution that is very comprehensive and a structure that is all embracing. Some say it’s all too ambitious for a country with the size and make-up of Fiji. As we speak, a committee is reviewing the constitution, recommending amendments, if any, to the management board for ratification at the AGM in November.
A political party draws its strength from its base as ultimately they are the ones that decide the fate of the party with their votes. Put simply, if what you champion is at odds with the wishes of your base, you lose.
SODELPA insures against this by its structure and that gave us confidence to use the slogan, ‘The Party that listens’, in the 2018 General Elections.
The SODELPA structure is quite impressive. It provides linkages from the village or settlement, to the branches; to the constituencies; to the management board; and to the general assembly.
There are also linkages to two important segments, those of the youth and the women. And all these are served and held together by a fully staffed secretariat made up of highly qualified people.
Firing on all cylinders, SODELPA would be unstoppable. It recognises that Fijians are no longer the ’yes, sir, how high’ type of the past. They speak their mind and act on their belief as was the case challenging the legitimacy of the AGM in Savusavu.
Many have undertaken legal studies and fully conversant with the law. Cognizant of all these, the leadership treads carefully on issues with legal implications.
On the other hand, while knowledge of the law has increased, the vast majority still need lots of guidance understanding the constitution and our structure.
It would be wrong to assume that the leadership lacks the appetite to strictly enforce the rules, rather the realisation that comprehension of the rules is still ‘work in progress’ for much of the base, hence the need for patience.
As party leader, I would focus my effort on strengthening the branches. In Nadroga, for example, there are nine, making up the constituency.
These are the power bases for SODELPA with their links to the villages and settlement. What they say inspires me to deliver for them and in return they deliver votes for me.
It is a very simple strategy and the structure is there to execute it. Together with this is the gradual improvement to understanding SODELPA and how it works.
Disciplinary issues will be easier to handle and I dare say rare, as the people understand better and trust in SODELPA.