Kaniva commentary:
Prime Minister Pōhiva Tu’i’onetoa has claimed his government’s fasting and prayer tours to the outer islands are justified by what he calls the economic multiplier effect model.
Under this model, he claims, the visits, which are estimated to be costing hundreds of thousands of pa’anga, are helping the kingdom because the money that is spent will benefit the people.
Hon. Tu’i’onetoa said the expenditure on travel benefitted the local tourism businesses, the local stores, the people in the villages who sold handicrafts, food and dancers in celebrations. He said the money was returned to the government in the form of taxes and in that way kept Tonga’s economy afloat during the border closures.
That may be how the Prime Minister sees it, but many people would question the logic of his reasoning. There have already been accusations – which have drawn a strong response from the Prime Minister – that government spending on the fasting and prayer tours only benefit his Cabinet Ministers, their wives, his People’s Party members and supporters.
The former Auditor General now has defended the government’s actions by saying his critics do not understand economics.
Yesterday, Kaniva News reported that Tongan civil servants have complained after being told their annual salary increases, known as increments, would not be paid before the Christmas holidays as usual. After the issue was revealed in Parliament, the Minister of Finance said the money was ready, but that he would talk to the Public Service Commission CEO to see if the civil servants could be paid half of their increments before this Christmas Holidays.
After Kaniva released this story readers and social media users heightened their criticisms of the cost of Prime Minister Tu’i’onetoa’s fasting and prayer tours and asking why he was treating the civil servants so badly.
It seems the Prime Minister has not applied his multiplier effect model to the civil servants. There are more than 3000 civil servants in Tonga. His tour team to the outer islands only has about 20 members. If he was genuine with his economic model he would have made sure the civil servants were paid on time to make sure that during the Christmas holidays they used the money according to his multiplier effect model.
On Sunday night Kaniva reported that shipments of 10 consignments of watermelons, which were expected to be transported to New Zealand on December 5, had been cancelled because of a problem that could have been avoided if the government stepped in before it happened.
The issue needed immediate intervention from the Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture, Lord Tu’ilakepa, but they were in Vava’u as part of the Cabinet’s tour to promote its controversial Covid-19 fasting and prayer service.
This was another incident that really called into question the Prime Ministers’ multiplier effect model. Although there are only a small number of melon growers in Tonga, the millions of pa’anga that would be generated when their melons were sold in New Zealand would benefit the country as a whole. However, the Prime Minister and his entourage busied themselves in praying and fasting while these growers’ complaints about the problems they were facing appear to have fallen on deaf ears.
Hon. Tu’i’onetoa’s multiplier effect model is unfair as it only seems to be used to justify the expenditure on government politicians, family members and the party faithful.
What about the rest of the country? There were no benefit wages for the rest of the country including the single mothers, unemployments, the youth, orphans, school leavers, or the sick. The only benefits payment was TOP$65 for the elderly once a month. The king has an annual budget of about TOP$5 million and the nobles have received controversial salaries with no job descriptions to justify their cost for many years now.
The Prime Minister’s economic multiplier model sounds fine in theory, but is deeply flawed. It might be used to justify – in a very narrow sense – the cost of the outer island excursions, but it seems unable to justify the economic decisions outlined above.
