see post above for info on the Isabel MPs.I've held AVQ for 3...

see post above for info on the Isabel MPs.
I've held AVQ for 3 years now and i will continue to hold.

MPs use RCDF to bribe landowners: Talua Report.

Friday, 01 April 2011 10:40 NIGEL SANDY

An independent assessment report conducted by the Tulua No.8 consultancy team in Bugotu and Hograno areas in the Isabel province has found that most of the allegation raised against Sumitomo Limited are politically motivated and does not fairly represent the true views of the people of Isabel. Tulua No.8 consultancy team which is a locally based consultancy team has over the last month conducted an independent assessment on Isabel province.

The aim and objectives of the independent assessment was to get an overall fact other than mere speculations created by certain Ministers that a majority of people in Bugotu and Hograno have totally disagreed with the operations of Sumitomo Limited.

The survey was an independent survey that was free of biasness and was conducted to get factual information that fairly represent the views and opinion from the people in villages with respect to the status of the Sumitomo Metal Mining Solomon Limited and a general view on the support that has been rendered by respective land trustees and non land trustees of the International tendered areas of San Jorge, Takata and Jejevo.

The report stated that the issue of revocation of the Tender process was raised by the Community Development Officer (CDO) for Gao/Bugotu Constituency and this was master minded by the two Members of parliament for Gao/Bugotu and Hograno, Selwyn Riumana and Samuel Manetoali so that the Bugotu Chiefs can sign a petition against Sumitomo limited.

The final report compiled by the team has found that most chiefs who had signed the petition against Sumitomo limited in Vulavu village on 14 February of this year had done so because they were under pressure for the Rural Community Development Fund projects (RCDF).

It also said that the failure of the chiefs to sign the petition would result in RCDF projects for the constituencies not being given out to the chiefs.

This move by the two MP's was the reason why most of the chiefs gave in and signed the petition against Sumitomo Company the report stated.

The report also said that the sudden twist of the Member for Gao/Bugotu and the Honorable member for Hograno to turn against Sumitomo has raised criticisms and suspicions among villagers that their political leaders have been bribed to have their own interest on other companies other than SMMS Limited.

It is understood that the petition which was signed against Sumitomo limited has resulted in some Bugotu landowners moving away and signing another agreement with the little known Axiom Company of Australia to conduct mining and prospecting in their lands.

Sumitomo is a giant multi-billion company with expertise and technology in the Mining industry.

It has a 30 percent share of stakes from the Japanese government and has projected thirty years to integrate the prospects of both Choiseul and Isabel with a annual investment of $1.2 billion for the taxes and royalties to the land owners if it is to develop all of its current prospects.

It is understood that to date since 2005 Sumitomo Limited has already secured considerable prospective results on Siruka in Choiseul Province with another significant prospecting results on its operations at Tenement D at upper Lelegia areas in Isabel Province with significant findings that is enough for the company to mine until such time the lease agreement is deemed over.

The independent assessment was conducted randomly on people from villages such as Lelegia, Havihua, Midoru, Lepi, Vulavu, Binaboli, Sepi, Suva, Samasodu, Jejevo, Furona and Hurapelo to get a general view and opinion on the progress and operation of Sumitomo Ltd on Santa Isabel.

http://www.islandsun.com.sb


MPs use RCDF to bribe landowners.

Wednesday, 06 April 2011 administrator

Dear Editor,

I AM writing in respond to the recent report published on your paper on 1st April 2011 slamming the MP's of Isabel Province over the subject above.

Please enlighten us. Was this piece of so-called "Talua Report" a failed stab at investigative reporting or a laudable attempt at tabloid journalism or to tarnish the image of the two Politicians?

In either case, it was incendiary. This farcical article has marred the reputation of the two Honourable MPs of Isabel Province and their Constituency Development Officers (CDO).

First, let us question the independent nature of the "Talua Report" and on the same manner its validity and reliabilityof the quantitative information gathered.

A balance reporting should check for proof on sources by verifying the allegation on the alleged issues and person.

In this case the two purported MP's and their CDO's have never been consulted or questioned on the allegation elevatedagainst them, for purpose of verification and balanced reporting.

I also question the motives of the Anonymous author of the "Talua Report" poor decision to so publicly malign the exemplary politicians perpetrated.

On the outset, I also applaud the two Isabel Honourable MPs and their CDO's decision to not engage in a "media confrontation" over this bias report.

The report indicated that the CDO and the MPs for Gao Bugotu Constituency and Hograno has masterminded the revocation letter.

Yet, in this allegation, there are many stones being cast upon the MPs and the Gao Bugotu CDO, not to mention the judgments and Assesments are based on gossip, hearsay and assumptions. It also fabricated other reports that have no proof but assumptions.

It seems the "Talua Report" was also off the mark, mostly because it based their findings on a report full of half-truths and lies.

The two Honourable MPs and the CDOs offers advice, encouragement to their constituents and people through open dialogue.

People are often publicly praised them for their efforts and concerns. Like most Honourable members, occasional communication problems arise.

They are handled constructively, sensitively, privately and with respect for all parties concerned.

They have never used the RCDF to lure Land owners and trustees to sign for the revocation Letter nor disqualified RCDF applicants for not supporting the revocation letter.

There was nothing of the sort.

They merely have some very minor differences, which are being resolved amicably.

This is purely a propaganda on which I would not like to comment.

Furthermore, the Report attempted to portray Honourable Members and their CDO as supporters of Axiom.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Honourable MPs supported any Companies that would have listen to the demands of the landowners and that would have put higher share of equity on any developments in their constituency.

They would have never supported any Company that lack public relationship and reap LOs. Instead, our MPs have worked diligently to protect us and to keep the interests of their Constituents to a maximum.

The issue of Bugotu Landowners Association (BLA) - again the report has failed miserably to convince us that its finding had gathered information solicited from right person, to make a balance assessment.

While I respect your findings - and you're certainly not alone in your sentiments - I think there's a question that needs to be asked when we start flaming Associations and Groups. Who were the BLA members being interviewed? Is the participants view reflected the BLA's opinion?

We understand that the BLA now breaks down and most of the Executive members have swift allegiance to different Companies - some to Sumitomo Ltd, Silander and others to Axiom KB Ltd.With ever-increasing financial benefits, promises and pressures being placed on them, they have now separated and went grass-hoping to other Companies.

Therefore, the existence of BLA is questionable and so the participants who were interviewed on the BLA behalf certainly does not represent BLA but individual Land owners.

I believe that Bugotu Land owners and people must have seen the bait, not the hook and that would have prompted them to revoke their signatories for Sumitomo and not what the "Talua Report" has surfaced. Who knows?

The fact is that the "Independent Assessment Team" resides at the Sumitomo Cockatoo Camp during the tenure of their findings, they were fed, enjoys the lucrative accommodation at the Camp and their logistic expenses were met by Sumitomo - and perhaps their allowances too.

What would you speculate on this? Is this Assessment Report truly independent?

Let us keep this report as it translated and let us forget it.

Generally, it was also published in the "April Fools Day" and perhaps it also meant to fool readers.

Mr Silas Muda

http://www.islandsun.com.sb