having read all of the comments, girls get confused.
1. did governement not lease the distribution system to shoreleine? has this been paid up to date, or is money still owed from shoreline to government?
2. is it not normally, when a company fish leasing an assest, the leasee return the asset to the leassor?
3. why are we trying to by back shoreline? is it not the asset (distribution system) what need to be returned to government by shoreline?
4. if so, then shy are we bidding or buying shoreline; its a company. shoreline can manufacture toilets by tomorrow. companies is not what distribute electricity, its the distribution system.
5. i like what the PR are doing, they don't want to by shoreline, "THEY WANT THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BACK". FULL STOPPING ALL THE WAY TO NEIFUUUU.
ALL OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE ABOVE ISSUES, ITS GREAT DISCUSSION, BUT NOT RELAVEN TO THE GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICITY FOR VAVU.
PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS G5 STEALING THE "DISTRIBUTION" AND SELLING BACK HIS FAILED COMPANY.
WHAT IF WE BUY SHORELINE AND SHORELINE SOLD THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM?
SECONDLY, WHAT IF WE TAKE OUR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BACK AND NOT BUY SHORELINE; ANY PROBLEM? I DIDN'T THINK SO
Vavaugirl,
If what you have noted in your previous post is in fact correct, then G5 will have his money very soon since the budget has already been approved.
The issues that you have raised here are spot on.
The understanding that Shoreline had with regard to the power assets (as noted on their website before it shut down) are as follows.
Shoreline advised that they only leased the power assets of the distribution system from the government. They did not purchase those assets.
Their web site stated the lease was for a 10 year period starting in 1998, with other options to extend.
So the Shoreline Distribution Company was set up to manage this lease and operate the power network for the lease period.
As we have previously discovered, the Shoreline Company is broke and previously was in debt (and maybe still is) to BP for the supply of fuel. It will be interesting to see if it pays for its fuel supply prior to the hand over of the assets back to the government.
So the government has no need to purchase the company “Shoreline” at all. Shoreline is just the mechanism to operate the assets that were leased. In effect, Shoreline is an empty shell.
The government simply needs to setup its own system to operate and manage the assets. The government does not need to buy someone else’s “Shell” in which to house the mechanism and people to operate and maintain the power system.
Hence, the purchase price of 26 million dollars is for nothing, since in reality the government is not actually buying anything. The sale contract is not made public and that leads me to think that the government is deliberately hiding something.
Will the government own the bankrupt company called “Shoreline” with all its debts, or does the government simply recoup the assets that that it leased out to Shoreline? And lose 26 million dollars in the process?
In either case, Tonga loses out…..or should I say….Lost out…since this is now a done deal.
Well, lady, and gent the problem is government gave out the power assets, and it is buying it back as a business. Get it?
They gave a couple of good-for-nottin' generators, and now they are buying back the "power business", which was what government supposed to do in the first place- to sell it as a business. But they were all idiots back then, and now we'll pay for their stupidity, and cowerdice.
Government is not buying Shoreline.
To me I dont think the buying back was the problem, and I dont think Shoreline is to blame. The real problem is how Shoreline acquired the power assets. Settle that.
Ko etau kikivoi ko eni, pe ko hai oku mooni ko hai oku loi. Ko e me'a pe e taha oku mahino, ko e faahinga fetukuaki ko eni oku mata'a'a a mamani ke 'ave ki he fakamaau'anga. Ka ko e ha oku ikai ke tau 'ai ai?
Ko e tali- he oku ikai ke mooni, pea oku ikai ke loi, ka oku ikai ke lava ia o convict aki ha case.
Kataki pe kau fafine mei he Lolo. Ko eku ki'i fakakaukau pe eni ko e tali lelei mo ma'a taha fakaekeeke ki ho fakafofonga. #1 mo e #2...and Clive.
Ko eku ki'i tokoni atu pe, he oku ou ilo oku fakahela e talanoa ki he Shoreline he kuo maau mai nautolu.
So, how are you going to deal with it?
Malo 'Losi for your comment.
But I just wish to clarify some of your notes.
You said:
pakolosi Wrote:Well, lady, and gent the problem is government gave out the power assets, and it is buying it back as a business. Get it?
According to Shoreline, the government never did give them anything. It was leased. there is a big difference here.
pakolosi Wrote:They gave a couple of good-for-nottin' generators, and now they are buying back the "power business", which was what government supposed to do in the first place- to sell it as a business. But they were all idiots back then, and now we'll pay for their stupidity, and cowerdice.
True, the generators were
good for nothin'. Since the King was the Chairman of the TEPB at the time, he had no idea of which end of a hammer to hold. So how could he understand power generation?? That is the reason they were good for nothin'. He spent millions on them to get them fixed...so the TEPB said anyway....maybe the king spent the money on something else when he was the Chairman of the TEPB?. Perhaps his toy soldiers?
Anyway, the reason the TEPB went into debt is the same reason Shoreline has gone broke. The Chairman is the same person.
The issue is, why should the tax payers purchase a private business that is now broke? No one else wants to buy it, so why should the government?
And now that they are buying it, the government should have done due diligence and obtained a fair and accurate evaluation of what they are buying- BEFORE they put the millions in the pocket of the king.
But i think you have it right there 'Losi. The government were idiots back then. The government should have performed due diligence with the Shoreline business to determine their technical capability and financial capability to carry out such a business.
As it turned out, the government has now spent more money paying for Shoreline to to prevent them from going into receivership than what the entire power system is actually worth.
So what the government should have done...back then...was to re-build the entire network at a cost much less than what they have paid and will continue to pay Shoreline.
So 'Losi, if the government is not buying Shoreline? What are they buying?
The power assets are already government property anyway, since they were leased to Shoreline. And anyway, the power assets are not valued at 26 million dollars.
So what is the government buying? Or is it paying for the debts of the king?
So the only issue that I have with your comment is that you failed to mention the government's position on its
idiot status has not changed. They were idiots back then and are still idiots now.
Quote:Well, lady, and gent the problem is government gave out the power assets, and it is buying it back as a business. Get it?
Loosy, government "gave out" the power assets? who give out millions of dollars of assets for free? and we are buying back something that we/government "gave out" for free? What is there to get, beside that only a king like V (V is more representative then tupou V) can do such thing. And he want 50 million TOP for what he got for free? hello, this then the real story that should be shared with the global media.
I don't have to know anything more, my sista V is a thief.
paka, its obvious you are for government, thats cool, yet just on your comment that government gave away the "assets", and now should buy it back. such comment says alot about your mental faculty capacity.
See comments to your Qtns below:
vavugirl Wrote:having read all of the comments, girls get confused.
1. did governement not lease the distribution system to shoreleine? has this been paid up to date, or is money still owed from shoreline to government? Yes, Gov't leased the distribution system to Shoreline FREE OF CHARGE! So, Shoreline does not owe Gov't any money relating to the lease.
2. is it not normally, when a company fish leasing an assest, the leasee return the asset to the leassor? Yes, according to the principles of leasing of asset 'ehe kakai 'oku nau maama
3. why are we trying to by back shoreline? is it not the asset (distribution system) what need to be returned to government by shoreline? [/b]What Gov't is trying to buy back is Shoreline's "ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT" to the assets they leased.
4. if so, then shy are we bidding or buying shoreline; its a company. shoreline can manufacture toilets by tomorrow. companies is not what distribute electricity, its the distribution system. [/b]Things are more complicated then what you think, as Shoreline had additional investment on the distribution system!
5. i like what the PR are doing, they don't want to by shoreline, "THEY WANT THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BACK". FULL STOPPING ALL THE WAY TO NEIFUUUU. [/b]That's what the PRs should have known, if there's additional investment, then a valuation should have been given before they bloody agree with leaving the $26 in the budget instead of agreeing to it. As in my comments before in the other thread, they PRs should have insisted to take the $26m out from the budget and put it in a BUDGET SUPPLEMENT to be submitted back to the House as an when the true valuation is submitted for their information. Unfortunately, they have agreed to leave it in the Budget! They have fallen again ki he kaakaa'i kinautolu 'ehe Pule'anga. How many promises Gov't have made to them that Gov't did not honour? They should have learnt their lessons from the past. But in any case, may be they did not know what else to do? koe ngata'anga pe ia?
ALL OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE ABOVE ISSUES, ITS GREAT DISCUSSION, BUT NOT RELAVEN TO THE GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICITY FOR VAVU.
PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS G5 STEALING THE "DISTRIBUTION" AND SELLING BACK HIS FAILED COMPANY.
WHAT IF WE BUY SHORELINE AND SHORELINE SOLD THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM?
SECONDLY, WHAT IF WE TAKE OUR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BACK AND NOT BUY SHORELINE; ANY PROBLEM? I DIDN'T THINK SO
[/b]This is exactly what we are trying to do. Get back the Distribution system, we are not buying Shoreline. Shoreline is just a name![/b]
So what is it if I'm pro-government? What does that make me, VVU-girl? Umm, grow up and stick to the issue.
And when I mentioned, "gave out" that is basicly it. The lease is nothing, or should I say, a set-up. But like they say, its all history now baby.
Now the issue is the "buying back", and now, under conventional circumstances, Shoreline is smart enough to involve multinational valuators. AND the whole lot of financial and business transaction process. And all is good on their side, for our demeanor.
fakatafa you are quite right. GoV is still dumb, as always, cannot do much about it. But, in all of this confusion, what do you suppose we do? Or, much more interesting- what are the PR's going to do? that should be a good one...
Come to think of it, Government means Cabinet+Parliament, since nobody raised a single hand from the "people's" side warning of today's problem. NOT A SINGLE ONE. I dont know, maybe they are indeed ALL dumbos.
I have already mentioned the Courts, since Sangstar has said is satisfactorily "independent". Should'nt we take this to the Courts? Why not?
Pro-government??? LMAO!!!! Maha pe e kato, piva leva ki olunga kau vakai atu, ta oku hala...
Yet, good questions vvugirl. Try asking yourself those questions, and come up with an answer that is at least near the Milky Way
ko koe eni...
People's Representative should represent the people in a class action suite.
what would the case?
1. king v acting in his own behalf's benefit against the constitution. Government to be impartial. 17. The King shall govern on behalf of all his people and not so as to enrich or benefit any one man or any one family or any one class but without partiality for the good of all the people of his Kingdom.
2. government for having conspired to hand over people's collective assets to g5 and not acting in the benefit of the people
3. government for not having administered to collect the leases from shoreline
4. shoreline for not having paid for its leases of distribution system
5. court order for shoreline to return distribution system ASAP
Just for the first point, remember the FIRST clause, love. You might trip.
BUT realy, GOOD LUCK...to you and your PR's..
kuo ha ae ko koe eni
koau ena
kokoe eni
come on keep things going. when we get to actions and detail, most people run for covers
you have to give something better than than sis. i don't want to argue, but lets keep things going
vavugirl Wrote:People's Representative should represent the people in a class action suite.
what would the case?
1. king v acting in his own behalf's benefit against the constitution. Government to be impartial. 17. The King shall govern on behalf of all his people and not so as to enrich or benefit any one man or any one family or any one class but without partiality for the good of all the people of his Kingdom.
2. government for having conspired to hand over people's collective assets to g5 and not acting in the benefit of the people
3. government for not having administered to collect the leases from shoreline
4. shoreline for not having paid for its leases of distribution system
5. court order for shoreline to return distribution system ASAP
Vava'ugirl, your dreaming here sweetie.
As much as I agree with you that the king has ripped the people off with regards to Shoreline (and other assets belonging to the people), there is little chance of court action against the king.
The constitution says:
Quote:King exempt from action
49. It shall not be lawful to sue the King in any court for a debt without the consent of the Cabinet.
I doubt you would ever get consent from the kings own cabinet to sue him my dear.
The problem is that we need to have seperation between the king and the parliament to prevent these actions from occurring again..and again..and again...(Shoreline, Tongasat, Liquor licensing, Airline Policies, Internet Domain ownership, etc)
My Recommendation would be to ensure that Shoreline kept operating both power and generation without any further assistance from the government.
I would then request Shoreline to provide a financial guarantee (deposit) to confirm its financial capability to continue operating. If Shoreline fails to continue to operate, then it forfeits the guarantee.
If Shoreline does not provide a financial guarantee, then I would issue a termimation of service for a specific date. Eg December 1 2008.
In either case, between now and December I would locate a suitably qualified company to supply, install & commision 2 new generators. Estimated cost of around 6 million $TOP.
In December i would terminate Shorelines Generation Contract and tell them to take their generators and get out. Simultaneously, the new Generators would come on line, so thee is no disruption to supply.
From January to June 2009, I would seek out a suitable qualified Power Distribution Operator to take over the operations of the Power Network as of July 1 2009 as a lease agreement.
As of July 1 the new Distribtion company would commence and Shoreline Distribution lease contract would come to an end. Their financial guarantee would be returned, less any funds for disbursements such as unpaid fuel bills, unpaid maintenance and for the restoration of the assets back to their original condition. (Since Shoreline has never maintained the system)
The end result will be the Government would own new generators (as opposed to Shorelines 10 year old gen sets) and has guaranteed supply for the nation at a cost of only 6 million dollars- not 26 million.
The assets would be in the hands of technically and financially competent operators that will not require the millions of dollars of hand outs that Shoreline currently gets.
vavugirl Wrote:People's Representative should represent the people in a class action suite.
what would the case?
1. king v acting in his own behalf's benefit against the constitution. Government to be impartial. 17. The King shall govern on behalf of all his people and not so as to enrich or benefit any one man or any one family or any one class but without partiality for the good of all the people of his Kingdom.
2. government for having conspired to hand over people's collective assets to g5 and not acting in the benefit of the people
3. government for not having administered to collect the leases from shoreline
4. shoreline for not having paid for its leases of distribution system
5. court order for shoreline to return distribution system ASAP
Vava'ugirl, your dreaming here sweetie.
As much as I agree with you that the king has ripped the people off with regards to Shoreline (and other assets belonging to the people), there is little chance of court action against the king.
The constitution says:
Quote:King exempt from action
49. It shall not be lawful to sue the King in any court for a debt without the consent of the Cabinet.
I doubt you would ever get consent from the kings own cabinet to sue him my dear.
The problem is that we need to have seperation between the king and the parliament to prevent these actions from occurring again..and again..and again...(Shoreline, Tongasat, Liquor licensing, Airline Policies, Internet Domain ownership, etc)
My Recommendation would be to ensure that Shoreline kept operating both power and generation without any further assistance from the government.
I would then request Shoreline to provide a financial guarantee (deposit) to confirm its financial capability to continue operating. If Shoreline fails to continue to operate, then it forfeits the guarantee.
If Shoreline does not provide a financial guarantee, then I would issue a termimation of service for a specific date. Eg December 1 2008.
In either case, between now and December I would locate a suitably qualified company to supply, install & commision 2 new generators. Estimated cost of around 6 million $TOP.
In December i would terminate Shorelines Generation Contract and tell them to take their generators and get out. Simultaneously, the new Generators would come on line, so thee is no disruption to supply.
From January to June 2009, I would seek out a suitable qualified Power Distribution Operator to take over the operations of the Power Network as of July 1 2009 as a lease agreement.
As of July 1 the new Distribtion company would commence and Shoreline Distribution lease contract would come to an end. Their financial guarantee would be returned, less any funds for disbursements such as unpaid fuel bills, unpaid maintenance and for the restoration of the assets back to their original condition. (Since Shoreline has never maintained the system)
The end result will be the Government would own new generators (as opposed to Shorelines 10 year old gen sets) and has guaranteed supply for the nation at a cost of only 6 million dollars- not 26 million.
The assets would be in the hands of technically and financially competent operators that will not require the millions of dollars of hand outs that Shoreline currently gets.
Like they say, "Easier said than done."
BUT, vvugirl has got a plan, a suggestion TO ACT at least. Which brings us back to square one- What are we going to do? Because if there's nothing we can do about it, why bother discussing it. It's already disgusting to me! It's good tafa shared his extensive records, only hope it's accurate.
Should we burn down Shoreline again?
Somebody mentioned "buying back the power business". Someone help out here, because there's also something called "Discount Cash Flow", which is highly considered in valuation of businesses. Here used for the power utilities controled by Shoreline.
Well, the 49th Clause is for petty offences I think. And nobody has even tried to sue the King and turned down by Cabinet purely out of the authority of that clause. Not to my knowledge. tafa?
Besides, how can Cabinet sue the King, when it was the Cabinet Ministers and some of the PR's that let it happen in the first place? I dont have to think far if G5 throws it at their faces saying, "Deal with it, you're idiots"!
In fact, the PM in Parliament challenged the PR's that if they had any suspicion of wrong on Gov and the King's part, "the Supreme Court's doors are wide open."
and....
quid pro quo
ko moua eni...mo ki'i 'ai ange kau sio
tafa
ki'i tanaki atu pe...
"I would recommend...", you sound like a PM man. Hope you're not one, you sound quite strict. What do you think, about your recommendations??? Are you going to run for PM???
Saying, "Request for a financial...", "I would then issue a termination date..."
What about the conditions and terms of the contract and lease, aren't you supposed to review them WITH Shoreline, and so on.
Im playin' wit' you, the Shoreline contract "TERMINATOR."
Tell you what, call the PM, suggest it to him, to PR's and lets see from there.
Fakatafa,
Its a thought through action. Lets continue.
Loosi, you don't contribute anything due to lack of electricity capacity. Sorry sis.
Tafa I like your idea. Lets see, cost to us, 6 mil vs 52 millions, we get gen sets, and distribution assets. Now thats thinking.
I would like to see both run in parallel. When we can take Tupou To'a to court given that the crime was committed when he was a princess, sorry prince.
Further, remember the 49th clause is under PART II of the constitution under - FORM OF GOVERNMENT. In the form of Government "the King" is a function of Government and thus cannot be "SUED" for "DEBT". Thus the king cannot be sued for money as he performs his duty of government.
However, if he breaks the law such in the highest form as stated in in Part I" where rights are defined, then he as equal to all citizen, cannot do things for his own benefit rather then the benefit for his people.
Tafa if you know others that can contribute to this thread, please invite them so we can collaborate on the issue. You obviously know alot about the industry and shoreline action.
Often we get caught up dealing with distractions of the likes of PAKA which is energy draining which does not move us forward of what we are trying to do for the people.
thanks for the comments. PAKA, no comment
Paka, 'Government' means "King in Privy Council" & "Cabinet", it does not include Parliament! Which really means, King, PM & Ministers!
Vvgal, yes, you still have a chance to sue K5 but you'd have to wait until after the political reform is completed, it it happens and when it happens!
If, Tafa, goes back to his records (in Gov't) you will find that the decision to sell the nations electricity (generation & distribution) was when the current K5 was Prince Reagent. That's mean he was King then, and the Constitution was in breach!
The same goes with the decision to make Tongasat the sole Marketing Agent for the Tongan Gov't to market our satellite slots! She was Princess Reagent at the time, hence she was King then.
But you have to wait until the political reform process is completed, where hopefully, we will not have the King in Privy Council and a PM & Ministers elected by the People, if at all that happens. Then there's a chance for the People to sue the King or even do what Nepalese Parliament did, disown their King!!!!!
As of now, we simply cannot do anything! The least the People’s MPs could have done was to take off the T$26m from the current budget and put it in as a BUDGET SUPPLEMENT, force Gov't to submit at least 3 valuations of the ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT to the power generation & distribution assets made by Shoreline from 3 different internationally known valuation companies before the "correct amount due" to Shoreline is paid. BUT WE CANNOT EVEN DO THAT NOW TOO! Mistake made by the People’s MPs, so now we have to wait until the political reform is completed.
Happy Coronation G5 with your T$26m! and we see you in court after political reform is done, which I think will only happen after G5 is in the ground! Lets say 10 - 15 years from now?!! He's not that stupid you know! If he had ripped his own people, do you think he will let his own people rip him in return? Oh no! He's got everything planned right from the start!
i see the idea that prince and princess region acting as king then both used the function of a king when they were in power to twist the arm of government to give them contracts of sole agents satellite and sole generation and distribution of electricity. Hence both breached clause 17.
Clause 17 is a clause for government to be impartial. Thus stating the king as head of government has to govern on behalf of all his people and cannot govern to enrich or benefit any one man (especially he/herself) or any one family (like the manilalas, his deal and intimate friend) or any one class but without partiality govern for the good of all the people of his Kingdom.
Clause 34, define the swearing in of the king which says "I solemnly swear before Almighty God to keep in its integrity the Constitution of Tonga and to govern in conformity with the laws thereof.”
Too often we look at acts and regulatuion and forget the highest law which is the constitution.
The king V and princess was and continue to be in breach of the constitution.
I like pilos idea, take both to court for breaching clause 17.
food for thoughts.
Quote:As of now, we simply cannot do anything! The least the People’s MPs could have done was to take off the T$26m from the current budget and put it in as a BUDGET SUPPLEMENT, force Gov't to submit at least 3 valuations of the ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT to the power generation & distribution assets made by Shoreline from 3 different internationally known valuation companies before the "correct amount due" to Shoreline is paid. BUT WE CANNOT EVEN DO THAT NOW TOO! Mistake made by the People’s MPs, so now we have to wait until the political reform is completed.
Since the peoples reps are the minority in parliament, they would not have suceeded in getting the votes to achieve this.
But I do recall they were adamant to the PM about getting an independant valuation.
I understand that Sevele was cunning enough to have obtained a "valuation" from Price Waterhouse Coopers. (PWC)
But this how cunning Sevele is. His instructions to PWC were not to value the assets- no- Sevele's instructions were to determine how much Shoreline had spent. They are not the same thing.
You can have a car thats worth $500.00 and spend $2000 painting it, $1000 putting a new car stereo and seat car covers in it and another $1000 on new wheels and tyres. In the end you still have a car thats only worth $500.00.
In Shoreline's case, PWC advised the
expenses were $50 Million, even though the
assets are worth just 10% of that. So Sevele has tabled the PWC "valuation" to state that Shoreline is worth $50 million.
There is little the peoples reps can do, like I said after all they are the minority here.
I think the focus should be back on Sevele for pulling this stunt off. He should be held responsible for ripping the people off.
"But this how cunning Sevele is. His instructions to PWC were not to value the assets- no- Sevele's instructions were to determine how much Shoreline had spent. They are not the same thing."
alright, although speculation I bid you good luck on proving that...and I know as well you guys that cant stand up for something especialy in the Courts.
yet I too would like to free the power utilities from Shoreline. The thing that matters most now, is action, and success of the course of action. Waiting for the King to pass 15 YEARS later, is not wise enough in timeliness.
The allegations of Shoreline is the high pays of the owners are driving the cost of electricity through the roof. We also need the king not to be involved in business because of the authority he has, it is a conflict of interests. WE NEED IT NOW.
We have already received two valuations so far.
Should an independent body from government, let's say headed by the PR's employ the THIRD valuation. Or it could be somebody else. Because of the highly suspicious position of government, even if it didnt twist the requirements, and instructions for the valuation, it cant be easily trusted.
Unfortunately, the power business will be bought according to the valuatioin made by PwC, which was done way back in 2005. The only thing we seemed to do is to make sure any additional expenses are exactly paid for to them, no more no less. Has any of you seen that report???
But if all this discussion is to brew up some sort of hatred towards anybody, there are much more positive avenues to explore. Because we all know where this is heading. More and more negativity. And its funny feeling at least when the same feeling are expressed towards us.
Even when parliament vote to pay the 50 million, the people's rep can still represent the people in a public suit of government not properly managing the agreement with shoreline. In the agreement, there is a lease of the distribution system of 4 cent per kw for 10 years.
After having looked at clause 17 of the constitution, this clause is about "government being impartial", and in this heading, the king is named becuase of his function to represent government at the highest level.
Evening suing the king is still possible, given the Part I of the constitution has higher authority that part II the form of government. Part II defines the form of government which starts with the king that heads the three branches.
A violation of government partiality where by the king "the buyer" is as well "the seller" who bought the asset for 0 money and pay no lease; and when he is done with the assets, now he is the "the sell", sell it for 50 million, and the "buyer is government" which heads agree whole hartedly; it is outright conflict of interest at the highest level, it is stealing in the broad day light and in your face type of dictatorship.
The courtroom is where we need to take our trouble and damages.
I know where the problem is, it the interpretation of the acquisitions.
Yes they leased, and yes they are selling. They are also claiming to have made $26 million worht of investments. We need somebody very good in economics and finance, to fight that in court. To make sure that we dont any extra for these so called "investments." And this is exactly what the PR's are doing.
Clear, simple and stupid.
Talking about 17th Clause, I think at least the members of the Royal household have the same freedoms we have to work and increase their wealth, which is the First of all Clauses of the Constitution. It doesnt even seem as a bad clause at all. If they can work to increase themselves, arent there already conflict of interests. So, to avoid it they shouldnt be working at all???
But even if they work, should they be restricted not to increase, or obtain success even if they run legit. Should they always be bartenders, clerks, waiters...
I am not for them, but I am for eguality. Not only that I enjoy same priviledges as they do, but also them as I.
It is indeed the hardest to free preceptions. Have you considered the fact that this may not be what is happening? We say some stuff against Akilisi, and whoever, and we let them come and explain and interpret their work. Then, we dont at least consider what the accused may be saying, but we believe what politicians say about the accused.
This is beyond humor and no fun at all, because things are quite distorted so how can we make a just judgement.
tuku atu..
fakatafa Wrote:Since the peoples reps are the minority in parliament, they would not have suceeded in getting the votes to achieve this.
But I do recall they were adamant to the PM about getting an independant valuation.
I understand that Sevele was cunning enough to have obtained a "valuation" from Price Waterhouse Coopers. (PWC)
But this how cunning Sevele is. His instructions to PWC were not to value the assets- no- Sevele's instructions were to determine how much Shoreline had spent. They are not the same thing.
You can have a car thats worth $500.00 and spend $2000 painting it, $1000 putting a new car stereo and seat car covers in it and another $1000 on new wheels and tyres. In the end you still have a car thats only worth $500.00.
In Shoreline's case, PWC advised the expenses were $50 Million, even though the assets are worth just 10% of that. So Sevele has tabled the PWC "valuation" to state that Shoreline is worth $50 million.
There is little the peoples reps can do, like I said after all they are the minority here.
I think the focus should be back on Sevele for pulling this stunt off. He should be held responsible for ripping the people off.
NO, Tafa, the People's Reps could have done a lot before the Budget was voted on. This was a critical time for Gov't to ensure stability & harmony for the coronation and they should have used this time to advanced what they have said in the papers "that the people want had wanted" instead of just publishing it in the Kele'a. Action, koe me'a ia na'e totonu ke nau fai, hono hot air!
I reckon they should have:
1. Submitted 'a 'enau Tohi Tangi regarding the T$26m and Shoreline a week after they received the Budget Estimate (i.e. the first week of June) instead of submitting it in the third week. This leaves them little time to see Gov't's reaction, which was to have a meeting with them and convinced them to leave the $26m in the Budget kae toki 'oatu 'ae valuation ke nau sio ai.
2. Call for a national boycott by the People 'ae Shoreline to show their protest, 'oua toe totongi mo'ua 'uhila ha taha including businesses in Tonga who are supportive of them; It would only take 1-2 months pea bankrupt 'ae Shoreline kae kataki'i (kalusefai) hifo 'ehe kakai 'ae tu'usi 'enau 'uhila.
3. Walk out from Parliament 'o 'oua tenau vote 'ihe Budget and call for a national boycott 'oe hilifaki kalauni.
This would have forced Gov't to take out the T$26m from the Budget 'o toki 'ai 'iha Budget Supplement later he 'oku malava pe ia ke toki fakahu in October, even Nov. he 'oku 'ikai ke nau fiema'u ke uesia 'ae coronation.
The People's MPs have missed out on a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY pea na'e mei malava ke teke'i ai moe political reform without even considering 'ae Komisoni ko 'ena 'oku fokotu'u 'ehe Pule'anga moe Savea fakahela mo fakapalataha ko 'ena 'oku nau lele holo hono fai 'ihe ngaahi koloo.
Ko e T$26m ko 'enaa 'oku lahi mama'o ia 'ihe $7m na'e fai ai 'ae WALK OUT 'ae kau ngaue fakapule'anga 'ihe 2005. Koe fu'u pa'anga lahi 'ena ke fai 'aki 'ae tufa/vahe fakalaione 'ae Pule'anga moe Tu'i pea na'e 'osi totonu ke uki 'ehe kau Fakafofonga 'oe Kakai ha National Strike 'ihe me'a ni.
Ka 'oku mahino foki kuo foki 'ae vahe 'ae kau MPs 'o fai fakauike 2, if I am correct, pea ka fakahoko ha walkout from Parliament 'e mahino te nau (People's MPs) risk 'enau fortnightly pay. 'Oku fa'a faingofua foki 'ae fa'a lau koee kihe kau ngaue fakapule'anga ke nau feilaulau'i 'enau vahe 'ihe 2005 for their cause, ka 'oku toe faingata'a when it actually come to yourself sacrificing your own bread and butter. Plus, kuo lahi moe ngaahi bills ke totongi 'ihe ngaahi hopo 'oku fai and its understandable.
Ka ko 'eku 'uhinga pe THE PEOPLE'S MP'S COULD HAVE DONE HEAPS LOT BEFORE THE BUDGET WAS VOTED ON! We've missed this golden opportunity pea ko 'etau fetakai ai pe 'eni moe Pule'anga on the same old road. Road ko LOI!
Ko 'eku fakafuofua 'e pehe ni (pea 'oku 'osi fakakaukau 'ae Pule'anga ia ki he me'a ko 'eni, I promise you) 'ae hoko atu 'ae Fale.
E 'osi 'ihe uike ni 'enau 3 weeks recess 'ae Parliament. Ko 'enau hu atu pe 'ihe next Monday 'o toe tapuni koe'uhi ko e toki kamata ia 'ae ngaahi ouau ki he hilifaki kalauni, pea fai moe ngaahi folau ki motu which may take another 3 weeks. So 'e toe tapuni 'ae Fale for another 3 weeks.
Ko 'enau foki mai pe after the "second recess" kuo mei 'osi 'a 'Akosi then they will look at the Annual Reports of the Ministries which will take them until the end of October pea tapuni leva 'ae Fale te'eki ke fai ha fo'i ngaue 'e taha kihe political reform 'ihe ta'u ni.
But it they are lucky he'enau foki tu'o 2 atu after the 2nd recess 'o toe alea'i 'ae Lao Fakaangaanga kihe Commission, koe alea ko ia tenau fetakai ai until end of Sep and if they are lucky 'o pass pea 'e kamata leva 'ae ngaue 'ae Komisoni ke toe fai leva 'ehe KOmisoni 'ae me'a na'e 'osi fai 'ehe Komiti 'ae Tu'ipelehake.
Na'a ku lau hifo 'ae Kele'a 'oe uike ni kuo ma'u 'ae ola 'oe savea 'ae KOmiti 'ae Kakai pea 'oku teu ke fakahu kihe Falee. Mahino mei hono fakangata te'eki ke 'osi 'ae savea 'oku fai 'ae feinga ke fakahu 'ae ola kuo ma'u 'ihe ava 'ae Fale ''ihe next week. Koe me'a 'oku 'ikai mahino kihe kau Fakafofonga, kapau tenau lau fakalelei 'ae Bill kihe Komisoni, he'ikai fai ha alea ia 'ihe Lao Fakaangaanga ko ia fekau'aki moe taimi pe motolo ke fai'aki 'ae LILIU pea tokua ke fakamo'oni huafa kiai 'ae Tu'i lolotonga 'ae hilifaki kalauni 'ihe fo'i Bill kuo 'asi ai 'ae me'a 'oku nau faka'amu kiaia, 'ae ola 'oe Savea 'aia koe loto ia 90% ia 'oe kakai according ki he fakamatala 'oe ola 'oe Savea.
KOe fo'i Lao Fakaangaanga ia is just to empower the establishment 'oe Komisoni mo e fakaikiiki hono fatongia and composition. Pea te nau toki fai leva 'ae ngaue ki he toe vakai'i 'ae founga ke fai'aki 'ae Liliu (further consultation with the people 'aia 'e talaangae leva 'ehe Pule'anga kihe kau Fakafofonga ke tuku 'ae ola 'enau savea ke toki fai ha sio kiai 'ae KOmisoni). 'Oku kau foki 'ihe mandate 'ae Komisoni ke nau invite people 'o fakahu ange ha'anau motolo (pea ke fakamo'oni kiai ha toko 200 kae toki consider). And I can tell you now 'e faka'ai'ai 'ehe Pule'anga 'enau kakai ke fakahu ha ngaahi motolo kehekehe pea ke toe fihi leva ai 'etau feinga 'ihe kaha'u.
Anyway, the bottom line is, we have missed a Golden Opportunity ki hono teke 'e tau me'a 'oku na'e fiema'u pea 'oku totonu ke mahino ai heni kihe kau Fakafofonga (with due respect to them) 'ae mahu'inga 'enau consult the people pe koe kakai 'e malava 'ilo kihe ngaue 'ae Pule'anga 'oku nau poupou'i 'ae reform ke 'oatu ha fakakaukau ke tokoni ki he'enau ngaue. 'Oku 'ikai foki ke 'uhinga hono fili atu kinautolu pea 'oku nau 'ilo kotoa 'ae me'a ke fakahoko he ko 'etau fili 'oku fai 'aki pe 'ae "popularity" 'ihe taimi ni and not the credibility 'oha tokotaha ke ne fokotu'utu'u ke ola lelei 'ae ngaue 'oku fai kiai 'ae fienga 'ihe Fale.
Tafa, sorry but I don't agree mo ho'o fo'i equate ko 'ena fekau'aki moe car. Ka 'oku vali 'ae car moe spare parts worth $4,000 koe new assets ia kihe car pea 'oku 'alu hake leva hono mahu'inga 'o $4,500 pea toki deduct pe mai ai 'ae depreciation fakatatau moe taimi 'oku fai ai 'ae valuation.
Kapau leva na'e ngaue'aki 'ae car 'o spent ha $4,000 ki he petrol ki hono fakalele (operatinal cost) pea ko e value leva 'oe car is still $500.
Vvgirl, yes, confirmed 'ae breached of Clause 17 but we still have to wait ke fai 'ae reform 'e malava ai ke tau (kakai) fili ha PM & MInisters to Cabinet ke 'oatu 'eta kole faka'ilo 'ae G5 ke nau tali ke fakahoko.
Good luck with the Political Reform!
Na'e fakafuofua 'e Semisi Tapueluelu he'ene Page 'ihe Kele'a 'e toki fakahoko mahalo 'ihe 2011 pe 2014 hili ha fokotu'u 'ae Komisoni which I think he is correct there 'e 'ikai hoko ia 'ihe 2010. But I also think 'e toki fakahoko pe 'ae Liliu ia after another bigger 16/11 he 'oku 'ikai palani mai 'ae Pule'anga ia mo G5 ia ke faka'ilo atu ia 'e hono kakai. We do not want another 16/11 to happen ka ko e me'a pea ia 'e hokoo he kuo tohi ia he hisitoloa 'oe ngaahi fonua kotoa kuo nau fai 'ae fa'ahinga feinga pehe ni he neongo 'ae fai kehekehe 'ange ngaahi founga ke koe principle behind 'oku tatau pe, 'aia he'ikai tuku 'ehe those in power ke nau uesia 'i hano fakahono 'oe liliu koe'uhi koe ngaahi ngaue hala na'a nau fai 'e malava faka'ilo ai kinautolu 'ehe kakai.
The only way for Tonga not to go that way,
ko ha sio loloa 'ae Tu'i ki he kaha'u 'oe Ha'a Tu'i 'o Tonga 'oku tau so proud of, ke fai ha fakalelei pea mo hono Kakai lolotonga 'ae Hilifaki Kalauni. Ke ne tuku 'ae to'o 'ae T$52m for his Shoreline kae 'ave pe me'a 'oku taau mo fe'unga mo 'ene investment totonu pea mo declare leva ke fakahoko 'ehe Falealea 'ae Fakalelei Fakapolitikale 'o fakatatau kihe fale'i 'ae Komiti 'ae Tu'ipelehake kae tuku 'ae Komisoni ka tau nounou and be at peace with each other pea tau toki fakalelei'i ai pe as we go on he 'oku 'ikai ke 'iai ha me'a 'e perfect 'i mamani
ka koe fale'i 'ae Komiti 'ae Tu'ipelahake 'oku ne ma'u 'ae napangapngamalie pea 'e potupotu lelei ai 'etau ngaahi fiema'u! King, Nobles & People
Pakalosi,
I agree that all are equal, including the Royals to work and enjoy the fruites of thier efforts.
Clause 17 is about "Government being Impartial". Meaning, that the function of a king in government to appoint through the privy council the chairman of Tonga Electric Power Board and its board members who will make the decision to lease/give the distribution power to 'Shoreline' that is "owned by the king". This is conflict of interest which make the 'government partial' namely the king.
This is what is illegal and what the constitution guide government cannot do, pointing directly to the "King" who is head of Government, that he cannot do anything in his function of government as a king to benefit himself or families but he must act in the interest of the people.
By the way, we have received words that the change has been signed into law last week, which put pilo's arguments and schedule flawed. So all the criticism against the People's Representatives may be good and correct, however, the PR has achieved what they told us. The election will be held in 2010 under the changed system.
Fakatafa wrote: I understand that Sevele was cunning enough to have obtained a "valuation" from Price Waterhouse Coopers. (PWC)
But this how cunning Sevele is. His instructions to PWC were not to value the assets- no- Sevele's instructions were to determine how much Shoreline had spent. They are not the same thing.
You can have a car thats worth $500.00 and spend $2000 painting it, $1000 putting a new car stereo and seat car covers in it and another $1000 on new wheels and tyres. In the end you still have a car thats only worth $500.00.
In Shoreline's case, PWC advised the expenses were $50 Million, even though the assets are worth just 10% of that. So Sevele has tabled the PWC "valuation" to state that Shoreline is worth $50 million.
There is little the peoples reps can do, like I said after all they are the minority here.
I think the focus should be back on Sevele for pulling this stunt off. He should be held responsible for ripping the people off.
Malo Tafa hono pukepuke mai ae talanga, in reading all this, no one makes any mention of the Deloitte Valuation... and Tafa, please enligthened please... who is inheriting the USD30m commercial loan !... Government pays out USD26, who is now responsible for the 30m loan! In effect, if it has not been sorted out, the people of Tonga is in effect paying for USD56 !!. Apart from Westpac sales, where is the remaining funds comming from ?
A reliable source says government was struggling to pay the civil servants' salary last week !!
koe 'uhila ne fakalele ia 'ehe 'eku tauhi (pule'anga) pea lahi kakai ne nau mate he uaea 'uhila 'ene motu mo tautaunoa he 'ea. 'ikai fai ha lau ia kihe matemate he ko'ene pehe pe ke mate kuo mate ia. ne fe'unga pe tauhi 'uhila hoku tauhi he taimi koia pea moe totongi 'iuniti ne ma'ama'a. pea koe launga atu 'oku omi ia 'o tu'usi kau nofo fakapo'uli. koe kau taki poate ne nau lepoleposi e 'uhila ne 'ange'ange ange 'enau kai pa'anga 'anautolu he me'a ne vahe'i ke tauhi'aki e 'uhila. 'ihe 'ikai kei lava 'e hoku tauhi 'o fakakakato 'eku fiema'u 'uhila ne fai e alea ke 'ave kiha taha tene lava 'o fakahoko lelei'i e ngaue. me'apango ne 'ave ia kihe pilinisi kalauni mo 'ene kau paatinaa pisinisi. mei ai kihe 'ahoni 'oku ou fiefia he lelei 'ae tu'unga 'eku ma'u'anga 'uhila. 'ikai ke mahu'inga ia pe kohai 'oku ne fakalele he koe pilinisipolo fakakonisiuma pe ia kau kai he maa 'a kauli 'oku ifo teu kaikai ai pe au. kapau 'oku ou 'a hake he pongipongi 'oku kei mo'ui e 'uhila ke haiane vala 'eku fanau kihe ako kou fiemalie aipe au. ko'eni 'e toe fakafoki e 'uhila kihe hoku tauhi kimu'a pea ngali tetau toe foki kihe kuohili 'o kumi haiane malala. ka me'a pea fekau ha kakai kenau tutu'i e ngaahi fu'u misini fa'u ivi pe 'e lava holo e 26 ki he 13 miliona. malo
vavugirl Wrote:Pakalosi,
I agree that all are equal, including the Royals to work and enjoy the fruites of thier efforts.
Clause 17 is about "Government being Impartial". Meaning, that the function of a king in government to appoint through the privy council the chairman of Tonga Electric Power Board and its board members who will make the decision to lease/give the distribution power to 'Shoreline' that is "owned by the king". This is conflict of interest which make the 'government partial' namely the king.
This is what is illegal and what the constitution guide government cannot do, pointing directly to the "King" who is head of Government, that he cannot do anything in his function of government as a king to benefit himself or families but he must act in the interest of the people.
By the way, we have received words that the change has been signed into law last week, which put pilo's arguments and schedule flawed. So all the criticism against the People's Representatives may be good and correct, however, the PR has achieved what they told us. The election will be held in 2010 under the changed system.
My dear Vvgal, your last para confirms how naive you are with how Gov't works mo 'enau fatunga loi 'oku fakahekeheke'i 'aki 'ae kau Fakafofonga 'oe Kakai 'o nau too ai. Tuku keu toki explain hake ho'o forum fo'ou 'ae 'uhingaa, koe 'uhii 'e a'u kihe ta'u 'e toe lele holo 'ae kau Fakafofonga 'oe Kakai 'ihe ma'u mai 'ae ola ke toe uki 'ae Kakai kihe Pangai Si'i koe 'ikai ke nau sio 'o 'ilo'i 'ae fo'i fakapona fuoloa ko 'eni kuo nau fa'a too aii.
moungakula Wrote:Fakatafa wrote: I understand that Sevele was cunning enough to have obtained a "valuation" from Price Waterhouse Coopers. (PWC)
But this how cunning Sevele is. His instructions to PWC were not to value the assets- no- Sevele's instructions were to determine how much Shoreline had spent. They are not the same thing.
You can have a car thats worth $500.00 and spend $2000 painting it, $1000 putting a new car stereo and seat car covers in it and another $1000 on new wheels and tyres. In the end you still have a car thats only worth $500.00.
In Shoreline's case, PWC advised the expenses were $50 Million, even though the assets are worth just 10% of that. So Sevele has tabled the PWC "valuation" to state that Shoreline is worth $50 million.
There is little the peoples reps can do, like I said after all they are the minority here.
I think the focus should be back on Sevele for pulling this stunt off. He should be held responsible for ripping the people off.
Malo Tafa hono pukepuke mai ae talanga, in reading all this, no one makes any mention of the Deloitte Valuation... and Tafa, please enligthened please... who is inheriting the USD30m commercial loan !... Government pays out USD26, who is now responsible for the 30m loan! In effect, if it has not been sorted out, the people of Tonga is in effect paying for USD56 !!. Apart from Westpac sales, where is the remaining funds comming from ?
A reliable source says government was struggling to pay the civil servants' salary last week !!
Mo'ungakula, can you guess why Gov't was struggling to pay the salary last week?
Sio hake kihe 'ofisi 'oe 'uhila motu'a, kuo fokotu'u hake 'ihe last Sat. 'ae sign 'oe TONGA POWER LTD.
Gay 5 would never hand over the Shoreline if he has not been paid. It has been confirmed kuo 'osi kamata hono pay out 'ehe Pule'anga 'ae Shoreline for the $26m without keeping to their promise ke 'oange 'a valuation of the investment (not the operation) kenau sio aii.
Koe founga ngaue ia 'ae Pule'anga ko 'ene passed pe 'ae Budget, legally, they have the legal obligation to implement it. Stuff ha'anau alea 'a kinautolu moe kau MPs pea koe fiha'i alea 'eni moe 'ikai ke nau (Gov't) keep pea 'oku 'osi 'ilo lelei pe kiai 'ae kau MPs. What's new, koe me'a pe 'oku tau sio atuu koe 'ikai ako 'ae kau MPs from their mistakes in leaving the counter actions ke toki fai kuo paasi 'ae taimi na'e totonu ke fai aii.
'E malava pe ia keu pehe, 'oku nau teke mai 'enau fo'i puluu kihe kakai ke nau fai ka nau hao pe kinautolu!
koe 'uhila 'ena ia kuo toe fakafoki mai kihe kakai nenau kole ke fakafoki mai. sio hifo au he kau hikinima ne 'ikai kau au 'a 'akilisi ia mo 'uliti pea li'aki ngaue 'a kalaivi ia. kou pehe 'e au na'e kau e kau tama ni he takimu'a hono feinga'i ke fakafoki mai e 'uhila?
koe ha kuotau pehe ai? 'ikai keu tokanga au ki he 26 miliona he koe veve pe ia. he 'ikai 'alu 'a G5 ia mo ha konga ki heli pe ko langi. koe koloa 'o mamani 'e nofo pe ia heni.
koe fifili pe 'eni ia. kapau tetau liliu 'o temokalati 17;9;4 'e toe lelei ange nai hono fakalele 'uhila? mei he tu'unga he taimi ni? 'e toe tu'umalie ange e kakai? 'e lava nai 'ehe toko 30 ko'eni 'o levolo'i 'ae tefesiti he fefakatau'aki? koe ha ha toe ngaahi papilika polisii 'e ngaue'aki 'e lelei ange meihe 'u papilika polisii 'oku lolotonga ngaue'aki? 'e lava nai 'ehe toko 30 ko'eni 'o holoki e peseti 'oe kau ta'ema'ungaue mo nofonoa'ia kihe peseti 'e noa? tenau lava nai 'o ta'ofi e faihia? tenau lava nai 'o tamate'i e potungaue tau malu'i fonua kae ofe'i mai 'enau vouti ke fakalelei'aki e palopalema 'oe kau tipota? tenau lava 'o fakata'e'aonga'i e konisitutone kae fakalele pule'anga hange ko Nu'usila?
koe ha 'oku tau kei totongi 'uhila ai? malo.
Peka Tea Wrote:koe 'uhila 'ena ia kuo toe fakafoki mai kihe kakai nenau kole ke fakafoki mai. sio hifo au he kau hikinima ne 'ikai kau au 'a 'akilisi ia mo 'uliti pea li'aki ngaue 'a kalaivi ia. kou pehe 'e au na'e kau e kau tama ni he takimu'a hono feinga'i ke fakafoki mai e 'uhila?
koe ha kuotau pehe ai? 'ikai keu tokanga au ki he 26 miliona he koe veve pe ia. he 'ikai 'alu 'a G5 ia mo ha konga ki heli pe ko langi. koe koloa 'o mamani 'e nofo pe ia heni.
koe fifili pe 'eni ia. kapau tetau liliu 'o temokalati 17;9;4 'e toe lelei ange nai hono fakalele 'uhila? mei he tu'unga he taimi ni? 'e toe tu'umalie ange e kakai? 'e lava nai 'ehe toko 30 ko'eni 'o levolo'i 'ae tefesiti he fefakatau'aki? koe ha ha toe ngaahi papilika polisii 'e ngaue'aki 'e lelei ange meihe 'u papilika polisii 'oku lolotonga ngaue'aki? 'e lava nai 'ehe toko 30 ko'eni 'o holoki e peseti 'oe kau ta'ema'ungaue mo nofonoa'ia kihe peseti 'e noa? tenau lava nai 'o ta'ofi e faihia? tenau lava nai 'o tamate'i e potungaue tau malu'i fonua kae ofe'i mai 'enau vouti ke fakalelei'aki e palopalema 'oe kau tipota? tenau lava 'o fakata'e'aonga'i e konisitutone kae fakalele pule'anga hange ko Nu'usila?
koe ha 'oku tau kei totongi 'uhila ai? malo.
'Oku mo'oni ho'o ngahi fehu'i ka ko 'eku tali kiai,
'E kei mamafa ai pe 'a e 'uhila, 'e kei masiva ai pe 'a e kau fakapikopiko, 'e kei fakautuutu ai pe 'ae lahi 'a e faihia, pea to e fakautuutu ange fau mo e kau ta'x ngaue.
Ko e taha eni ha me'a fakamamahi mo'oni pea kuo pau ke mahino 'a e mo'oni ko eni ki he Kakai.
Quote:Malo Tafa hono pukepuke mai ae talanga, in reading all this, no one makes any mention of the Deloitte Valuation... and Tafa, please enligthened please... who is inheriting the USD30m commercial loan !... Government pays out USD26, who is now responsible for the 30m loan! In effect, if it has not been sorted out, the people of Tonga is in effect paying for USD56 !!. Apart from Westpac sales, where is the remaining funds comming from ?
That is the question on everyone’s lips.
As the saying goes, the devil is in the details. IF G5 wants 50 million for Shoreline and Sevele is giving him 26 million, I wonder if the government will also take on the Shoreline debt as well.
I think the Delloit valuation was quickly discarded since it may have revaled the truth of the matter. (i.e. The kings ransom was very over priced) In reality from other experts, Shoreline generators are worth around 2 million, depending on regular maintenance bing conducted and confirmed by accurate reports.
The distribution system is worth around 10 million, perhaps less. But this is information that is second hand and not from Delloit.
I recall when the king went to China late last year, earlier this year with Monlylala, they asked the Chinese to convert the Shoreline loan into a
grant to the Tongan government.
I recall the Chinese were intending to give Tonga a “grant” for some reconstruction works. I don’t know the outcome of this and whether the Chinese have changed the loan over to a “Grant”.. I don’t know. But if the Shoreline loan is now a grant, that means the Tongan people actually miss out on getting the funds. Instead the king got the funds to pay off Shoreline. That is of course if the king got his way. . Either the Chinse will pay the king back and Tonga misses out on the grant- or Sevele will pay him the ransom.
Either way the people will lose.
Time will tell. IF there is 30 million missing in the budget…well we will know what happened