HON. SENATOR H.D. KHAN.- Mr. President, Sir, I am not quite clear as to what the honourable Senator's reference to "ministries" means, because a lot of these claims are not necessarily Government civil servants claims, but also private sector claims.  The list that I had tabled, shows exactly which workplaces they refer to and which worker belongs to which workplace.  Many of them are obviously civil servants and many are from the private sector as well.

Increase in Workmen's Compensation Claims

(Question No. 27/06)

            HON. SENATOR L.W. PADARATH asked the Government, upon notice:

                        Would the honourable Senator responsible for the Ministry of Labour and Industrial Relations inform the House on the following:

            (a)      Does the Government have any plans to increase the maximum claim on Workmen's Compensation?

            (b)        If the answer is in the affirmative, when and for how much?

            HON. SENATOR H.D. KHAN.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to respond to the question, as follows:

            (a)        Yes.

            (b)       The Ministry of Labour and Industrial Relations will be embarking on the final phase of the Labour Reforms in 2007, and this will involve the complete overhaul of the outdated Workmen's Compensation Act.  The Ministry is committed to ensuring that the new pieces of legislation will be modelled to the latest internationally recognised compensation schemes.

In line with this Compensation Reform is the calculation of claims, quantum and the amount to be paid out to the dependents of the deceased, as well as to the injured workers.  The current payout of $24,000 for a death case was amended in November, 1994 from a previous figure of $9,000.  For serious injury cases, the maximum payout has been increased from $16,000 to $32,000, and the minimum payout has been increased from $3,000 to $6,000 in 1994.

                        The new amount to be decided upon will be a Government-policy decision in consultation with the relevant stakeholders and this will very much be dependent on the socio-economic and vibrant of the country.

            MR. PRESIDENT.- Honourable Senators, I had allowed honourable Senator Lavinia Padarath to ask more questions as we are nearing the end of this meeting as she has been away on official business overseas all last week.  I will also be invoking this rule till Friday.  This will also apply to questions filed by honourable Senator Laufitu Malani.  Standing Order 32(3) will be duly suspended for this reason.      

FIJI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BILL, 2006

            HON. SENATOR DR. T.L. BABA.- Mr. President, Sir, I beg to move:

                        That a Bill to make provision for the establishment of the Fiji Institute of Technology as a corporate body, for the establishment of a Board of Directors to manage the affairs of the Institute and for related matters (Bill No. 19/2006) be read a second time.  

            HON. SENATOR RATU J.L.S. BOUWALU.- Mr. President, Sir, I beg to second the motion. 

            HON SENATOR DR. T.L. BABA.- Mr. President, Sir, this Bill, Bill No. 19 of 2006, provides for three things:

            (a)        The functioning of the Institute as an autonomous body.

            (b)       The establishment of an administrative framework for the effective governance of the Institute as an independent entity.

            (c)       Giving the authority for the Institute to plan for and meet the demands for education and training in a global economy, given the changes in technology. 

            The FIT was granted autonomy through the FIT Decree in 1992.  This Decree was further amended in 1998, but since 1996, the Institute has been involved in putting in place policies and systems to guide it along through the unchartered waters of a corporate body.  The FIT Management, Sir, have been constrained somewhat from running the Institute as a fully autonomous entity, by the fact that the majority of fixed assets in both land and buildings were still vested with the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Finance. 

            In 2004, the Government mandated the Ministry of Education to undertake a review of the FIT Decree of 1992, with the view of amending it.  The Bill which is now before the House is a result of that review, it therefore represents the culmination of the hard work put in by relevant stakeholders.

            Sir, the Bill proper has 32 clauses.  Let me highlight some of the more important ones and comment on them as we move along. 

            Clause 3 provides for the establishment of the Institute as a body corporate with perpetual succession and common seal.  It also deals with relevant powers necessary for the functioning of such entity. 

            Clause 4 establishes the Board of Directors and the appointment of its members. 

            Clause 5, we see the details and the functions of the Board. 

            Clause 6 talks about the delegation of powers of the Board to its members; that is a very important part of running an institution, for the Board to have the ability to delegate, particularly to the Chief Executive Officer and other relevant officers of the Institute. 

            Clause 7 provides for the appointment of the Secretary of the Board. 

            Clauses 8 to 11 provide for regulations of the Board, the disclosure provisions, the removal and resignation of members and the provision for the protection of members from actions and proceedings, in respect of acts, admonitions done or made in good faith; that also is a very important provision (the running of an institute). 

            Clause 12 provides for the appointment of an Academic Council.  Sir, the Academic Council is a very important part of a tertiary institution.  Its members, you will note, consist of all the academic people in the Institute, with the CEO of the Institute as its Chairman, the Head of Academic Services as Member, the Head of Schools, the Librarian, representative of staff and students and others as detailed in the Schedule.  The Academic Board is responsible for all academic matters of the Institute, that is responsible to the Board.  We hear from the CEO of the Institute at the briefing last week, Mr. President, Sir, that the Institute deals with a lot of numerous corporate partners who bring in resources and funds.  He said that these matters (according to the CEO of the Institute) have no bearing on academic and education considerations when they decide on such issues.  That is important, Sir, because partners that come in with a lot of resources and funds can unduly influence the academic operation of an institute.  We get the assurance from their CEO that their coming in, their contribution has no relevance to the academic considerations of the Institute, that is in terms of results, performance, programmes, priorities, et cetera.  This, no doubt, will be a continuing challenge, now with the granting of full powers to the Institute, as provided for in this Bill.

            Clause 13 provides for another important body - the Advisory Council.  Sir, this is a body that includes representatives of industries, the professions and sub-professions like the accountants, engineers, technology specialists, information and media specialists, arts and cultural personnel, et cetera. 

            This body advises the Board on such matters, relating to; "management and welfare of the Institute" and "other matters that the Board considers appropriate."  The membership of this body is drawn from industries and professions, and the body will bring its experience and expertise to bear all the operation of the Institute and its relations with industries and professions.

            Clause 19 preserves to the Institute copyright and other intellectual property rights in any work created by an employee, consultant, or other persons performing assignments for and on behalf of the Institute.  Sir, this is an important provision for all tertiary institutions and intellectual property rights are now being concerned with WTO rules of trade and cover creative works, books, compositions, painted work and so forth, one that the Institute might like to fully exploit.  Such provisions create wealth for the Institute and the country, and it is part of what is known as "knowledge economy". 

            Tertiary or post-secondary institutions are increasingly expected, as the mark of their quality to contribute, not only to relevant industries, but also to national economy.  This is why discerning governments all over the world are providing legal and organisational framework to coordinate the work of the institutions under bodies like the Tertiary Education Commission, for the benefit of the institutions and the country.  I understand, Mr. President, that the honourable Minister for Education has already alluded to this body in her address at the other place on the debates on this Bill. 

            Clause 20 is another important clause, which provides power to the Minister on the recommendations of the Board to make regulations, and for the Board also to make laws and by-laws for the operation of the Institute.

            Finally, Mr. President, Sir, for those who might be worried about the guaranteeing of full power to the Institute and especially how these powers might be exercised in the context of an increasing globalised environment, they need to remember that much of those powers pertained in this Bill are exercised, and I quote "after consultation with the Minister" - just as the membership of three important bodies of the Institute like the FIT Board, the Academic Council and Advisory Council are appointed "after consultation with the Minister".  So, while there is full delegation of powers, there is also provision for consultation with the Minister responsible, as well as with relevant stakeholders, who are represented in the various bodies of the Institute.  This is what is known as the system of checks and balances, to make sure there is transparency and accountability in the operation of the Institute.  There is every reason to believe that the objectives of this Bill will be achieved even in the short-term.

            With those comments, I commend the Bill to the House.

            HON. SENATOR G. AHMED.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute to the Bill before the House.  Let me assure honourable Senators that I support the Bill in two fold.  The first one is that the Bill will give free discretion to the FIT Board to work out its strategy and expand. 

            Mr. President, Sir, I am happy that FIT graduates are recognised in countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America, where they are welcomed and able to get jobs because of their qualifications attained from FIT.  So far, FIT is doing a good job.  The FIT Management is doing well and I would like to thank Mr. Kolinio Meo for his good leadership.  He is doing quite well compared to what it was before.

            I am also happy for the fact that he has brought in some rules on dress codes in FIT, which I want to share this morning with my fellow colleagues.  For any institute, there has to be some sort of dress code, that is decent.  We should not allow people wearing clothes which are provocative or tempting.  Sir, there are thousands of people who support the dress code rules in FIT.  For those people who do not support the dress code that has been mooted by the Director, I would say that even though we have our fundamental, constitutional and democratic rights, those rights cannot right the rules of one institute.  Whatever dress code is given by the FIT, I fully support that.  For example, in this House, we have a certain dress code.  Nonetheless, we have our own constitutional and democratic rights, and we have our own religious ways of wearing clothes, but then again, the rules of this House are supreme and that is why we have our own dress code.

            The second issue (and I am sure the mover of the House will reply to), is with regard to the assets owned by Government in FIT.  Will these be owned by FIT after this Bill is passed, or what sort of assets will FIT dispose of? 

            Sir, clause 5(1)(f) says, I quote:

                        "The Board shall have the general management and control of the Institute and for that purpose;

                        (f)         may initiate and engage in entrepreneurial activities with a view to the Institute becoming more and more self-funding."

            The problem that I have with this clause is that the Board and the Management can easily be tempted to go into ventures outside the core functions of the Institute.  I feel that there may be some dangers, which may creep in, with vested interests, and may affect the functions of FIT.  I would like to urge the new management that will come into power to work out a way that would not affect the functions of the FIT, because there is a wide power given to the Board.  These are some of the concerns, which I would like to share with my fellow colleagues.

            At the outset, as I have said earlier on, that I support the Bill before House, and it is a very simple Bill.

            Sir, before I resume my seat, I would like to share two observations.  First, is the sporting event of last weekend, where Ba again became the true champion by scoping all major tournaments of the year.  Sir, although the newspaper quoted that I supported Suva,  as you know, I was born and hail from Ba.  I therefore, support Ba and I would like to congratulate the Ba Soccer Team for winning the five prestigious tournaments over the year.

            Secondly, Sir, I stand to be corrected, on the appointment of the mover of the Bill to a diplomatic posting.  On behalf of honourable Senators from this side of the House, I would like to congratulate the honourable Senator Dr. Baba for his new posting, which he will shortly be taking over.  We wish the honourable Senator Dr. Baba all the best in his new endeavour.

            Mr. President, Sir, with those few words, I support the Bill before the House.

            HON. SENATOR A. SADOLE.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute briefly to the Fiji Institute of Technology Bill, 2006.  In general, the Bill shows that the Government has answered Fiji's need for this is a need based Bill that positively impacts the heart of every family that sends a member to train at FIT.  My brief contribution will be mainly student centred because one of the underlying assumptions of this Bill is that the FIT and Board of Directors, as well as the Academic and Advisory Council are there to work in the best interest of the students, as well as all the stakeholders.

            Mr. President, Sir, as the local international market becomes more specialised, and as the economists want more and a greater variety of skills, the FIT Bill is a timely response to the needs of the vocational, technical and training service providers and users.  The Bill provides for a well-funded, autonomous, responsive and flexible body corporate that can chose to have its services monitored and controlled by international recognised determiners of quality standard and driven by market demand.

            Mr. President, Sir, I hope the FIT will be proactive in teaming up with overseas governments and reputable private recruitment agencies and training institutions to ensure that every graduate gets employed and that vocational qualification from Fiji is also recognised throughout the world. 

            Shared responsibility in nation building, Mr. President, Sir, would allow the Government to sign a pledge with the private sector, industrial unions and all companies, except very small ones must take on technical and vocational apprentices and display gender balance, ethnicity balance and balance in geographical representation in all skills and salary levels of their business organisation.

            Mr. President, Sir, this is a good Bill because it provides equal protection and equal promotion of interests and rights of all the stakeholders.  The Bill also clearly spells out the functions and nature of the relationship between the Board of Directors, Academic and Advisory Council with which the Board may operate to translate the vision and mission of the FIT into reality.

            Mr. President, Sir, this is a just and fair Bill that is enforceable and contextually appropriate.  It responds to public demands and meets the needs of all stakeholders.

            Mr. President, Sir, before I conclude, may I briefly make some observations on two clauses of this Bill.

            (a).      I refer to page 8, under the sub-heading: "Removal and resignation of members of the Board" clause 10(1).  It reads and I quote:

                                   "(d)      for any other good is unable to perform the functions of the such office."

            It appears, Sir, that the sentence is incomplete.  If we substitute the word "good", with

the word "reason", the sentence would then read and I quote:

                        "for any other reason is unable to perform the functions of such office."  

            That would make the sentence complete in my view, Sir.

            (b)        On clause 21(6), page 12, there are some missing words after the word "sub-section".  If the missing words are found, then sub-clause (6) should continue on to sub-clause (7) as part of sub-clause (6).  With this change, Sir, the numbering of sub-clauses should also change.  For example, sub-clause (7) will be removed altogether.   Sub-clause (8) to be amended to read sub-clause (7).  Sub-clause (9) to become sub-clause (8). 

                        Secondly, Sir, sub-clause (6) refers to members of the Council, whereas the new sub-clause (7), which replaces sub-clause (8), refers to members of the Board of Directors as stipulated in clause 4.  This is very confusing indeed, Sir.

(c)                Again, under the new sub-clause 7(a), there is no appointee of the Fiji Trade Unions Congress (FTUC) in the Board of Directors, but there is a nominee of the registrar of Trade Unions in that Board.

            Finally, Mr. President, Sir, I would suggest re-drafting of sub-clause (6) and a new sub-clause (7) to remove the ambiguity in its present form. 

            With that correction, Mr. President, Sir, I support the Bill before the House.

            HON. SENATOR RATU J.L.S. BOUWALU.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute to the debate on the FIT Bill, 2006. 

            Sir, I wish to inform this august House that this is the eleventh year since FIT was first granted autonomy by the Government under the FIT Decree in 1992.  I am given to understand, Sir, that the current Decree has outlived its usefulness and is more of a hinderance to any development at FIT, if it has to keep up with the fast changing landscape of the socio-economic arena.  Although, the current Decree spelt out FIT as a body corporate, most of the authority are still vested with the Government bureaucracy.

            Mr. President, Sir, the World Bank has pointed out that in successful economies, knowledge instead of resources has become the most important factor in determining the standards of living.  This knowledge based economy is based on clusters and networks in which competitors must collaborate for mutual benefit.  To this, knowledge hubs such as universities and technical institutions must work in co-operation with these clusters.  The growth of the knowledge economy in Fiji means that FIT must upgrade the level of training it provides as the demand for training will exceed the traditional levels of university graduates and skill trades of other workers.

            To this, FIT must be able to respond to these emerging needs, for example, by developing greater depths in building strategies and strengthening short cycle higher education such as diplomas and possibly some specialist vocational degrees.

            Mr. President, Sir, Peter Drucker, an Austrian author of Management Literature has argued, the growing demand is for what he calls knowledge technologists, and these are computer technicians, software designers, manufacturers, technologists whose work are manual, as well as mental, what he refers to as, and I quote:

            "They spend a lot of time using their hands, but the manual work is based on theoretical knowledge only gained by formal education - not an apprenticeship."

            Given the constraints and limitations, Mr. President, Sir, the FIT Council and Management must however, be congratulated and commended for the sterling efforts and commitments they have rendered to developing FIT to what it is today.  No doubt, FIT now ranks at the top echelon of the technical training institutions in the Pacific region whose equivalent full time student (EFTS) population I am told hovers 8,000.  This is equal to 20,000 students currently accessing any training programmes from FIT, from all its four campuses Fiji wide.  This number, however, does not include those students who access FIT programmes from the 40 plus secondary and vocational schools throughout Fiji.  If we compare this student population to the mere 5,000 enrolled back in 1996, when FIT first became autonomous, it can be concluded that although it existed under a constrained legislation, it has performed tremendously well and as I alluded to, the FIT Council and Management must be commended for a job well done.

            Despite these achievements, Mr. President, Sir, I wish to reiterate the view that FIT now exists in a competitive global environment in the education and training arena and it must be given the mandate to realise its full potential by allowing it to operate under a friendlier and enabling legislation.

            A well-known strategy in the advanced world today is to give autonomy to training institutions like FIT so that they operate in a more commercially driven and flexible environment away from the clutches of the social obligations as generally applicable to education in primary and secondary schools.

            Mr. President, Sir, training institutions like FIT are institutions for preparing skilled workers for the nation's socio-economic engine room, as well as educated and skilled people, who are regarded as nation-builders tomorrow.  Unfortunately, the current FIT Decree falls short of promoting such requirements. 

            Mr. President, Sir, I believe that we all know the largest slice of any government's budget every year goes to education, especially at primary and secondary schools level.  The reason for this, as I have alluded to earlier is that, it has always been regarded that general education (that is primary and secondary) is a government obligation.  Therefore, tertiary institutions like FIT must be autonomous in their organisational and management structure, as well as their capacity to be self-financing.  This will only be possible, if the institution is given a full autonomy to be fully corporatised or in other words, to be created as a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal and to have all the conditions, as spelt out in clause 3(1), (a) to (d) of the Bill, which reads and I quote:

            "(a)      sue and be sued in its corporate name;

            (b)       may, after consultation with the Minister, acquire and hold real property of any description and subject to the terms and conditions upon which the same is held, may sell, exchange, lease, mortgage, dispose of or otherwise deal with such property;

            (c)      acquire and hold personal property, including shares in any company incorporated under the laws of the Fiji Islands;

            (d)       borrow money, charge the whole or any part of its undertaking and assets, issue debentures, debenture stock and other securities, whether as security for any debt, liability or obligation of the Institute or otherwise."

            The above provisions including those given under clause 3(2) to (4) and others, as spelt out in the other clauses of the Bill, will adequately give FIT the necessary full autonomy and the proverbial legal key to the commercial world.  Unfortunately, the current legislation does not provide this opportunity, Sir.  In order that FIT becomes focussed in its operations and future developments, it must be allowed to exist as a fully autonomous body, as proposed under this Bill.

            I am sure that my fellow Senators are aware of the favourable expansion of this institution.  Currently, the vision for this institution is to provide first class skilled workers and tradesmen, technicians with entrepreneurial life long learning and sustainable socio-economic development.  The expansion of this institution, to incorporate the change and demand for skilled resources in graphics and other areas of creative arts must be applauded, but most of all, Mr. President, Sir, what we fail to acknowledge at times is that, this institution has challenged the minds of those within our community who required a different medium of teaching, to make learning an adventure that being the practicality of learning.

            Mr. President, Sir, the process of making the Fiji Institute of Technology into an independent commercial company, to operate in the market place under normal commercial conditions, has come at an appropriate time.  The Fiji Institute of Technology when corporatised, is expected to raise a much greater portion of the revenue, enter into business enterprises, acquire and hold investment portfolios, encourage partnership with other private business firms, compete with other institutions in the production and marketing of courses to students who are seen as customers and engage with the market for higher education.  FIT will have the characteristics of an institution committed to excellence, in the pursuance of technical excellence that follows a supplier/customer model of the basic education relationship.  FIT will also provide greater access to higher education for all, especially for disadvantaged groups, responsiveness to demands for more relevant courses and greater involvement with communities that surround the institution.

            Sir, I end with the words of Tom Friedman, who wrote the book "The World is Flat", and I quote:

                        "Money, jobs, and opportunity would go to the countries with the best infrastructure, the best education system that produces the most educated workforce, the most investor-friendly laws, and the best environment.  You put those four things together, with quality of environment that attracts knowledgeable people, investment laws that encourage entrepreneurship, education and infrastructure.  This is where the money is going to go."

            With those words, Mr. President, Sir, I support the Bill before the House.

            MR. PRESIDENT.- Honourable Senators, I intend to adjourn the House for morning tea now, however, before I do that, I believe, there was a Circular issued to honourable Senators informing that during tea break, which will be held in the Big Committee Room, a Dr. Narendra Singh, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Specialist Epidemiologist and a Dr. Ken Cokanasiga, Head of Animal Health, SPC will be speaking to enlighten honourable Members about the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness in the country, as well as on animal health aspect, particularly on the bird flu.

            Honourable Members, this means that our tea break this morning will most likely take an hour. 

            I will now adjourn the House for morning tea.

            The House adjourned at 10.57 a.m.

            The House resumed at 2.50 p.m.

            HON. SENATOR E.L. MALANI.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute to the debate on the FIT Bill, Bill No. 19 of 2006 before the House.  A Chinese saying states; "Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day.  Give him a fishing line, and he will eat fish forever."  I applaud the efforts of the Government in considering a fishing line for the future generation of our beloved Fiji.  I hope, Sir, that we will just not prepare them any line of any kind for grandstanding with superficial intent, but a real gem.  A gem that will offer quality skill development training programmes internationally compatible and recognised, accessible and affordable to our people, of appeal to employers and industries and most importantly, better equip our children to make a reasonable living from it. 

            Mr. President, Sir, while I share the sentiments conveyed by the honourable commentators in both Houses, and deeply value the importance of the intent of the Bill, it pains me to see the limited consideration by Government, and it seems clear that this is the second time in two weeks, that I have noticed two Bills being introduced without harmonising it with existing legislation; a case of one hand not knowing what the other is doing or it is perceived as a case of protecting your own turf and casually put, not doing things right.  This will come back to haunt us in future.

            Sir, as a wake up call, I wonder whether those in Government are aware of the existence of the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 before considering introducing Bill No. 19 of 2006.  Perhaps the honourable and learned Attorney-General and Minister for Justice can explain to this august House why another Bill, when there is adequate provision (in my mind) under the Public Enterprise Act, 1996 to serve the purpose of the FIT Bill, Bill No. 19 of 2006.  I also would like the honourable and learned Attorney-General to explain to this august House whether PART 2 Divisions 2 and 3 of the Public Enterprise Act 1996 has not been adhered to by Government and why?  Why has Government chosen not to pursue the re-organisation of FIT under the Public Enterprise Act, No. 35 of 1996? 

            Sir, the foregoing questions emerge from conducting a comparative analyses of the provisions of Bill No. 19 of 2006 against the relevant provision of the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996.  To go through some of these, I will enlighten this august House of the provisions which are as follows:

            (a)       The honourable Minister for Education introduced the Objectives of the Bill as:

                        -           to facilitate the functioning of the institute as an autonomous body;

                        -         to establish an administrative framework which is conducive to effective and efficient governance, and ultimately financial independence of the institute;

                        -          to position the institute strategically to anticipate, plan for and meet the demands for education and training in the global economy, driven by the changes in technology.

                        These objectives clearly fall within the ambit of PART 2, Division 1, sections 6,7 and 8 of the Public Enterprise Ac t, Act No. 35 of 1996 dealing with overview of re-organisation process.  

            (b)       Bill No. 19 of 2006 does not provide for an organised approach towards achieving the greater independence and autonomy the Minister outlined as the Objectives of the Bill.  The Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 clearly spelt out step by step, in an organised manner the approach the re-organised entity needs to take along with the roles the different Ministers responsible will play.  All these are laid out under Part 2, Division 4 dealing with Preparation of Re-organisation Charter of the Public Enterprise Act. 

            (c)       PART 2 of Bill No. 19 of 2006 deals with Establishment of the Institute, Board and the Council.  These issues are covered under PART 2, Division 6 dealing with Board of Directors, Chief Executive Officer and the Public Enterprise under the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996. 

            (d)       PART 3 of Bill No. 19 of 2006 deals with administration and finance.  This again, Sir, is covered under PART 2 Division 7 dealing with structural changes towards corporatisation of the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996.  This part of the Public Enterprise Act, 1996 addresses issues of assets and liabilities. 

            Mr. President, Sir, I am certain of these facts beyond any reasonable doubt, that the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 more than adequately provides for:

            (a)        the defined objectives of the FIT Bill, Bill No. 19 of 2006;

            (b)        the re-organisation of Fiji Institute of Technology; and

            (c)        the needed framework that maps out the way forward for FIT to gain greater autonomy and independence. 

I am totally confident that the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 is the right legal instrument to govern the re-organisation of FIT, moving it towards a corporatised entity first. 

            Mr. President, Sir, many times we hear our people complaining about having too many laws without the resources to enforce them.  Bill No. 19 of 2006, I am afraid, might be one of those laws if allowed to be enacted.  Is this a case of mere oversight by its learned advisors?  The Public Enterprise Act, 1996 will always remain the primary legislation for any re-organisation.  All other new legislation will be considered subsidiary therefore.  However, these is nothing that should stop Government from amending our laws to usher in new good practices and to incorporate new inclusions that are necessary therefore. 

            Mr. President, Sir, I draw the attention of this House to the global liberalisation of trade and services.  The proposed re-organisation of FIT must prepare itself to compete with other providers of education services worldwide.  It is critical for FIT to determine the market niche it will operate at because of its size.  However important is, FIT must not lose sight of its primary role of providing training for blue collar jobs for our people in Fiji and the Pacific, and the selected markets of the world.  Indeed, there will be social cost components attached to this and FIT and Government must determine these so that Government can continue to contribute this component as an annual grant every year, meeting FIT cost of that social responsibility. 

            In closing, Sir, we cannot afford to be wasteful under the current status of our economy, and we need to do things right in our work.  Allowing this Bill through is to me a very loose arrangement that can lead to enormous wastage and loss.  After all, the Bill is not needed when we have the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 to provide the framework for FIT's reorganisation.  While I fully support the intentions of this Bill, I wish to suggest that this FIT Bill be rescinded, but the proposed FIT reorganisation mooted under this Bill be carried out under the Public Enterprise Act No. 35 of 1996 due to the reasons I had alluded to in this presentation.

            HON. SENATOR A. KALOUMAIRA.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute very briefly to the debate on the Fiji Institute of Technology Bill 2006 (Bill No. 19 of 2006).  In order to draw attention, that powers, provisioned for in this Bill, may in the future, move the Institute into a full blown university completely disconnected from the original intention of this Institute, as a technical training provider geared to meet Fiji's employers' needs and to support initiatives for self-help and community entrepreneurship based on optimising and value adding to provisions from within our own ecosystem services that support all facets of development and growth.  In this, Sir, I like to align myself too with the astute observations clearly stated in the good contributions from the honourable Senator Ahmed and honourable Senator Malani. 

            I do not decry, Sir, the value of university degree qualification, but I believe that we have adequate coverage of this nationally through the University of the South Pacific (USP), University of South Queensland (USQ), Central Queensland University (CQU) and University of Fiji.  In contrast, Sir, we have only one provider of technical and administrative cadre training and that is the FIT.  The technical discipline is the engine room of growth in all sectors of our small nation either directly as in construction, transport, communication, aviation, tourism, sugar and agriculture to name a few, or as the essential support to the professions in medicine, education and engineering, also to name a few. 

            The point, Sir, is that Fiji is substantially a subsistence economy nation and we, as legislators, need to ensure, with respect to this Bill, that Fiji does not, in the future, lose its only provider of technical training that is much required to support our own national growth.  This situation can arise through due process and decisions of a Board that has visions, to quote the mover, the honourable Senator Dr. Baba, "to position the Institute strategically to anticipate, plan for and meet the demands for education and training in a global economy driven by changes in technology", and further in the context of securing strategic financial partners conducive to the financial independence of the Board.  Herein lies a competing scenario, a decision on which rests on the open-ended powers being given to the Board.  I will elaborate slightly in asking this august House to re-examine again the Bill in respect of putting a limit on future options to upgrade this Institute to a full university, that is quite divorced from the present day intention of this Bill, which is to strengthen FIT by making it self-funding and with an administrative structure that promotes this Institute as an effective and efficient technical institute.

            I support a vision behind the Bill that there is now an opportunity to develop human resources as an export commodity.  But at the same time, Sir, I urge we do not dilute efforts or lose focus on meeting the needs of our own national employment sector or the local employability of graduates from FIT.  As well as being substantially subsistence, our nation also constitutes a big number of small businesses that are not in themselves big players to significantly contribute financially in a meaningful way to influence Board decisions as regards scrutinising that the Institute stays on track, as a provider of technical training.

            Sir, the risks are that financial independence, which in this case is really getting out of "dependency to government" to "dependency on strategic financial partners", the risks are that perceptions tend to be swayed by the influence of the financial strategic partners to the exclusion of addressing our own employer sector needs.

            My point is, Sir, that we need to guard against a competing situation in future, where international consideration, backed with financial undertakings, will override our national needs to nurture capacity building in vocational and technical capabilities; the pillars that underpin our own national growth.  I make the final observation, Sir, that the voice of the employers, who are the key stakeholders in the employability of graduands mooted in this Bill are not represented strongly enough on the Board nor on the Advisory Council other than the engineers, whom I see more as professional service providers, and the Union of workers and students.

            In conclusion, Sir, to circumvent all the above, I like to recommend that the legislation be amended to clearly articulate either by provisioning for a Charter or actual entrenchment in the legislation that FIT should remain focussed as a provider of technical training.  This, Sir, will serve to plug the apparent loophole, which in future, can be exploited, as I have portrayed.

            With those remarks, Sir, I would like to thank you very much for allowing me to make a case for a need to amend the Bill, the actual wordings of which I leave to the next step, if this House supports the call.

            HON. SENATOR E. RANACOU.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to contribute to the debate on the Bill before the House.

            Mr. President, Sir, the Fiji Institute of Technology carries an iconic symbolic stature in Fiji over the landscape of technical education.  Graduates from FIT have indeed played a vital role in Fiji's achievements in the areas of technological development over a wide range of fields including engineering, information technology, manufacturing, civil aviation, mineral exploration, industrial and commercial management, marine transportation and the service industries to name a few.

            Mr. President, Sir, FIT's future responses to changing technological environment will very much depend on how adequately the Institute is managed and funded.  In this regard, Sir, and in the light of increasing financial constraints placed on Government to continue supporting the Institute, it is inevitable, that FIT finds alternative framework for appropriate governance, funding sources and relationships with other institutions.

            The FIT, Sir, must therefore, adapt appropriate governance structures based on appropriate enabling framework legislation.  In this regard, Sir, I support the Bill before this august House.  However, I wish to raise a couple of points which, in my humble opinion, relate to deficiencies in this Bill as it exists and I will submit respective proposed amendments to address the identified deficiencies. 

            Mr. President, Sir, in the Introduction to the Explanatory Note on page 14 of the Bill, three Objectives of the Bill are outlined.  Sir, I wish to point out that none of those stated Objectives directly states that the repositioning of FIT, as embodied in this Bill, is for the benefit of Fiji.  I think this is important for reasons that I will explain later.

            The silence on what I consider of crucial importance, Sir, that FIT and the repositioning of FIT are in the final analysis to benefit Fiji, can lead the Institute being driven or steered towards directions which may disadvantage Fiji.  Mr. President, Sir, the silence on this point in the Explanatory Note reflects the silence of the whole body of the Bill on the same topic.  Sir, FIT I must argue in the first place exist to serve Fiji's needs, before it serves the region or other parts of the world.  This silence may be intentional to provide the Institute plenty of leg room for flexibility in its future plans and choices of options to take.  However, I strongly feel that it is an important omission which needs rectifying.

            I believe that when FIT makes decisions based on Fiji's interests, interests of the region will in the process be addressed because we share common developmental issues with our neighbours.  It may be argued that as members of both the Board of Directors and Academic Council are likely to be mostly locals, deliberations these committees make will inevitably uphold Fiji's interests.  However, I can foresee the possibility of person or persons entering these bodies bringing in agendas that may not sit well or resonate with Fiji's interests. 

            In this regard, Sir, I wish to recall the comments by FIT's Director (Mr. Kolinio Meo) during his briefing on the Bill to honourable Senators, regarding the decisions recently taken by USP to drop low level courses, for example certificates and preliminary courses, which some honourable Senators had mentioned in previous debates in this august House as very important to many disadvantaged Fiji citizens.

            The FIT Director indicated in his commitment not to go in the same direction, but the USP has made those decisions, probably in-consideration of costs, USP's position as a regional institution and the need to raise international status.  If the enabling legislation for FIT contains clauses which stipulates that Fiji's interests will be protected in the Institute's future choices then no such decisions may be taken. 

            The FIT Director also mentioned during the same briefing, that he does not want FIT to develop into another university.  As he wants the institute to continue providing levels of courses currently offered and perhaps in partnership with other educational providers, offer courses which raise, broaden and increase the range and qualities of the current courses and future programmes.  Sir, I totally support his thinking, but I suggest, in agreement with sentiments stated by the honourable Senator Kaloumaira, that this point of view be embedded in legislation.  The Director wants the Institute to continue serving the interest of Fiji. 

            Mr. President, Sir, I am sure that this august House supports the idea that FIT's primary role is to serve Fiji's interest but of secondary importance also to take account of regional needs and interest of students from outside the region for purposes of regional co-operation and economic consideration. In this regard, Sir, I humbly suggest that an amendment to clause 12(2) of the Bill on page 9, which deals with the role of the Academic Council, be inserted and denoted on clause 12(2)(c) and may I suggest to read as follows: "...ensure that the direction that the institution takes with regards to course programmes offered, or activities taken serve the Fiji..." or words to that effect.

            Mr. President, Sir, the second point I wish to raise in this debate on the Bill is with regards to Chairmanship to the Board of Directors.

            On page 4 of the Bill, Sir, clause 4, under the heading of "Board of Directors", describes the membership of the Board of Directors.  Sub-clause (4)(1) outlines the selection process to be followed in the selection of the Board Members other than the Chairperson. The clause is silent on how the Chairperson of the Board of Directors is to be selected. 

            Sir, clause 8 on page 7, states that the Chairperson or in the Chairperson's absence, the Deputy Chairperson shall preside at a meeting of the Board.  Again, the clause does not mention how the Chairperson is selected in the first place.

            I humbly suggest, Sir, that the Bill be amended appropriately to clearly state the process for selecting the Chairperson of the Board of Directors.  This, I feel, Sir, is critical to the effective running of the Board for obvious reasons.  I conclude my contribution and thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the debate.  I state my full support for the Bill before this august House.

            HON. SENATOR RATU K. VAKAWALETABUA.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to give my contribution to Bill No. 19 of 2006, an Act to make provision for the establishment of the Fiji Institute of Technology as a corporate body, for the establishment of a Board of Directors to manage the affairs of the Institute and for related matters.

            The Institute, Mr. President, Sir, for the past three decades since its establishment, has grown to be one of the largest technical and vocational institute in Fiji.  With the diversity of its programmes, the FIT has not only served the educational needs of the local students, but also students from the Pacific region, as well as international students.

            Mr. President, Sir, the FIT has proved to be one of the finest, having produced skilled workers, tradesmen, technicians and entrepreneurs, that are successful in their respective fields and work places.  The success of FIT graduates have been attributed to the courses designed to have a part where students actually under-take its practicality.   This gives students the first hand experience of what they would encounter in the real world.  With the popularity and success of its courses, the Institute's campuses have been located all over the major centres for easy access to students from all over the country.  As a result, more and more students have enrolled for the programmes available every semester.

            Therefore, Mr. President, Sir, I believe that this Bill is very important.  Important in the sense, that by establishing a Board of Directors, the affairs of the Institute will be properly managed. This will enable the Institute to further diversify its programmes in order to meet the ever increasing demand of preparing our young people for the marketplace.

            Sir, the success of the above, will only be possible if the affairs of the Institute is well managed.  Therefore, it is important that the appointment of the Board of Directors be carefully considered.  The vision and aim of the Institute can only be fulfilled if the Board is able to take the pressure and make sound decisions, to meet the expectations of a large institute such as the Fiji Institute of Technology (FIT).

                        Thus, it is important to appoint Board members with expertise in the areas that they represent.  It is equally important that members appointed should have prior knowledge of the values of the Institute, in order to uphold what the Institute is known for.  Also, only then, the Management of the Institute's affairs, and the functions of the Board will  be successful. The same can be said of the appointment of the Advisory Council.  Since, this Council has a very important role to perform, the members should be appointed on the same ground as the members of the Board of Directors.  The effectiveness of the Council will result in the decision making of the Board for the administration and financial affairs of the Institute.  The role of each of these  Councils has a chain-reaction relying on one another for the well being of the Institute.

            I believe, Mr. President, Sir, that to-date, the Institute has fulfilled its goals to provide opportunities of quality and relevance.  I also believe that by reviewing and further developing its educational programmes, the Institute will be the major provider of skilled workers to meet the needs of industry and commercial companies.  Furthermore, the institution needs to diversify, update and introduce new programmes to suit students that turn to overseas for further studies.  This will also broaden the spectrum of educational opportunities for the institute and provide graduates with achievements that are both locally and internationally recognised.  This, I believe, will also be an answer for the demand we have for expatriates we employ from overseas.

            Before I take my seat, Sir, I would like to thank you for the time allocated, to give my contribution.  Therefore, Mr. President, Sir, I support the Bill before the House.

            HON. SENATOR H.D. KHAN.- Mr. President, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to speak very briefly in support of the Bill. 

            Sir, one thought that comes to mind is a statement made by a former Cabinet Minister in one of the previous governments, when he was officiating at a ceremony to commemorate the aid given by one of our friendly neighbours towards our various educational institute.  I recall the honourable Minister's saying "thank you for the money that you give us, to prepare our children so that they can come and work for you in your country".  That is what most of our students here are doing, they are migrating and working in other countries.  That is also what we are preparing them for. 

            Sir, FIT, as well as other institutions like the University of the South Pacific, but largely FIT and I think many speakers have alluded to it today and this morning, prepare a lot of our young people for the calibre and cadre of talents that enable them to have technical expertise, to have professional expertise, that is not only in demand here but very largely sought in our neighbouring countries that source a lot of new immigrants from these cadre of people. 

            It is not unusual that the points or basis on which people migrate now actually state in some of these countries requirements, as to how many points FIT diploma or certificate gets you.  Naturally, a lot of people prepare with the view that they will use this to migrate.  However, Sir, that is not a reason why we do not support or we should not support this, because we prepare our people for better life, whether it be better life here or elsewhere.  These are our children, that is what we prepare them for and if they be so minded and wish to migrate to another country, then that is our duty to prepare these children to do so. 

            Sir, many thousands of children leave school every year. We hear numbers between 15,000, 17,000 and 18,000.  Not all these people are prepared, or are ready or mentally attuned and even academically attuned to be entering universities.  Many of these people are average or marginally above average people, who perhaps, do not see the higher tertiary education as their vocation, because the job market is limited.  In many instances, the parents have little choice but to put them into a medium level of education institute, where they can better their technical skills or other academic skills. 

            Secondly, they prepare them first for a job market that is more conducive to the kind of education this institute offer.  Thirdly, many times, Sir, these children when they come out of high schools and are not highly prepared for universities or tertiary education, find themselves in a limbo situation, where they get groomed into tertiary mode of thinking.  Many times, you will find that this sort of marginal or average children who go to semi-tertiary education, to technical institutes like FIT or TAFE colleges find that they actually can inculcate in themselves this culture of higher learning.  A lot of them then move over and do university degrees and many people I know have done tremendously well and have multiple degrees after coming through such TAFE, FIT or Derrick type of institutes.

            This is one aspect of FIT that we are preparing ourselves through this Bill, but we must not ever forget, Sir, because this is the great emphasise that most parents would want to have their children attuned to.  Sir, at the same time, we must not forget that many institutes such as FIT and TAFE colleges, in particular overseas and other technical institutes like Auckland, Sydney, et cetera, have moved on and advance to start offering degrees.  It does not mean that they have downgraded or belittle the other certificates and diploma courses that they were offering. 

            Sir, it has provided an avenue for their own people who are coming through the system and also outsiders to move on, if they should so inculcating themselves the desire or the culture to become more tertiary orientated. 

            Also, Sir, very importantly, it earns a high respect or higher status through this institution and in so doing, it also gives them the opportunity to woo good quality students and good quality intermediate students who would perhaps not being able to go to them or may go off-shore elsewhere or go to the job market, to come in as in this limbo state as semi-tertiary education, to prepare themselves for a better future.   

            Mr. President, Sir, I see no difficulties should FIT tomorrow choose to offer limited degrees, that in doing so, it is belittling the key purpose or the crux of what it has been set up to do and that is to have diploma, certificate in technical and other semi-tertiary education.  I think it only adds that much respect and status through this institution. 

            Sir, I must say with the humblest of humility and great emotions that this is the only educational institution moving to a tertiary education now in Fiji that we can call as our own Fijian identity.  This is 100 per cent owned by the taxpayers and the proposal that we are being given continues to moot that it will be 100 per cent owned by the Fijian taxpayers.  The USP is not owned by the Fijian taxpayers.  It is owned and funded largely by Fiji but we have a very, very strong regional input there and we all know of the regional politics that play in anything that is regional.  We can have so much say but at the end of the day, we have to lobby with the rest of the region to make life sustainable in a regional environment where we are seen as a big brother in the smaller nation. 

            The other universities, University of Fiji and the University of Queensland have been mentioned, they are all owned either by private institutions or religious bodies.  The people of Fiji as such, the voters as such, the taxpayers as such can only call FIT as our own and that is a very important Fijian identity, which we must not let go.  I think this is only strengthening the purpose that has been struck for. 

            Sir, lastly on public enterprises charter that was suggested by the honourable Senator Malani, from my humble understanding of the Public Enterprises Act, I believe that the reorganisation charter was largely designed for those institutions of which the Government believes that they not only should stand on their own feet but should return a value and investment return to the taxpayer and the shareholder, particularly the Government, because of the large areas that they play in, for instances Telecom, FEA, the Media, et cetera.  Also because the investment has been dormant and Government expects money from it towards the taxpayers' coffers. 

            Sir, institutions such as the FIT, and I believe this is one of the reasons why this separate Bill has been mooted, the purpose as stated in one of those three areas that have been mentioned by the honourable mover of the Bill is to make it self sustaining.  Self sustaining does not mean that it will return any huge dividend or any dividend to the nation.  In fact, it may continue to be nurtured and to be cultivated and to be even soft paddled by the Government and our coffers to some extent.  Many institutions, USP is a fine example does not stand on its own feet, Government still supports it and the Fiji Government still supports it.  I think FIT will continue for many, many years to need support from the Government of Fiji and in doing this reorganisation under the guise of this Bill, it gives its autonomy to the fact that it can make a lot of indecision with outdated to interference and juggling by the Government but it does not take away the fact that the Government will still have to hold part of its purse string and continue to give it support. 

            With those words, Sir, I strongly support the Bill before the House.

            HON. SENATOR RATU J. YAVALANAVANUA.- Mr. President, Sir, allow me to make a short contribution on the Bill before the House.

            The Fiji Institute of Technology was formerly known as the Derrick Technical Institute.  The late Mr. Derrick was well known as an educator and a teacher of technical skills at Lelean Memorial School, Davuilevu.  So the early education of Fijians was mostly in biblical studies, and in the trades which enabled them to construct houses, become plumbers, mechanics, engineers and otherwise acquire necessary skills which made them very useful members of the community. 

            I can still remember the days, Sir, when our talatala, or church ministers were also qualified in a vocational skill from Davuilevu.  With the emphasis in the last 30 years in academic education, it was very sad to note that having a vocational qualification was looked down upon, with parents trying their best to qualify their students for matriculation so they could go to the university and get a degree.  The result is that, in the current boom in our construction industry, and with the demand for skilled workers in the international market, we have a drastic shortage in skilled workers locally. 

            Mr. President, Sir, some say that we have a high unemployment problem.  I beg to disagree, Sir.  We have an educational system that is designed for employment of our people in the formal sector.  We have been so successful in such a policy that our children, who graduate from universities and other statutory institutions, are finding it hard to get employed in the formal sector.  However, on the other hand, we have our land, timber resources, fishing ground and other resources.  Sir, our education system, I believe, should be helping our children to make the most from these God-given resources.  The education system should support our culture, and help restore the traditional controls so important in our society.

            Our education system should equip our children with the skills, so they may compete in the world of vocational employment market.  I, therefore, am very grateful that Government has introduced the Bill before this august House.  As previous speakers have stated, it will enable the Fiji Institute of Technology to provide skilled workers for our sustainable development. 

            Sir, in Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, there is a learning institution for the people called the grassroots university.  This institution assists the grassroots people at the community level in personal viability courses. It instills in people the moral principles, basic business know-how, and above all, the enterprising discipline that will enable them to utilise their traditional resources towards viable livelihood.  Instead of giving people fish that will satisfy them for a day, this institution teaches people how to fish, to satisfy them for a lifetime, and the results, in terms of successful indigenous enterprises in PNG and the Solomons have been overwhelming. 

            Mr. President, Sir, it is my sincere hope that in becoming independent and being economically driven,  FIT will look at and assist in the training of our grassroots people to live sustainable and viable lives through the use of their traditions, and their own resources. 

            With those words, Sir, I support the Bill before the House.

            HON. SENATOR V. NAIR.- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to make a brief contribution to the debate on the Bill before the House.  The Fiji Institute of Technology Bill will make provisions for the establishment of the FIT as a corporate body.  It will establish a Board of Directors to manage the affairs of the Institute and for its related matters. 

            Having established the Derrick Technical Institute in the year 1964 and changing its name to Fiji Institute of Technology in 1980, the Institute was first granted autonomy status through a FIT Decree, 1992 which was further amended in 1998 and for some years until 2001.  The FIT Management, with the guidance of a Council has been placing policies and systems to help guide the Institute.  However in 2002, FIT directed the Management to develop a five-year corporate strategic plan from 2003 to 2007. 

            Sir, currently, FIT enjoys a Government grant of $8 million per year, and developing an administrative framework for FIT, which will be conducive to more effective and efficient governance and will require much more assistance from the Government.  I suppose this area has been strongly looked at by the honourable Ministers for Education and Finance.  Sufficient funds are to be allocated in the next budget to see that our vision of corporatisation and autonomy of Fiji really serves its students, parents and the community at large and not increasing the fee to suit the needs of its running affairs.  This will further place students and parents into more financial constraints as they are already paying exorbitant dollars in terms of school fees and house rentals, especially for the Northern and Western students.

            Mr. President, Sir, many secondary schools around the country, with vocational centres are franchised with FIT, and FIT franchises with Australia and New Zealand, which offer courses in Engineering, IT, et cetera. This gives greater advantages to the underprivileged students, who are now able to complete their courses with minimum expenses, compared to the fee of the University of the South Pacific.

            Mr. President, Sir, a lot of collaborative effort and hard work is put in place by various stakeholders to make this dream come true.  At this juncture, I commend the Director of FIT, Mr. Kolinio Meo and Management to see that this hope is materialised. 

            Sir, with those few words, I support the Bill.

            HON. SENATOR L.W. PADARATH.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to make a short contribution and I go along with the note that I will not repeat some of the points that have been made earlier.  I only wish to highlight some of the points I still feel strongly about and perhaps have not been raised.  I like to compare this Bill, Sir, to a child turning 21 years, who has signs of maturity or growth as he or she goes out, to FIT becoming autonomous as a corporate body under this Bill.

            I like to refer to PART 2, clause 4 on membership, regarding the Board of Directors.  Firstly, I join the honourable Senator Ranacou with regard to the concerns that he has already raised because I too, had the same feeling, and only to add to that, the three-year term that they are being given, in addition to the three-year term, they should have added something in relation to reappointment and for how many times can they serve.  It is just a thought that crossed my mind on that Part. 

            I also like to raise the point that in regard to the appointment of the Board, we can see in clause 4, the Minister is empowered to make these appointments, and that the Board's appointment will be truly representative of the 10 schools that make up the FIT. 

            I also like to refer to clause 12 on the Academic Council and clause 13 in regard to the Advisory Council, that the same consideration will be given, that appointments will truly represent the different schools that make up FIT.

            I welcome clause 4(f), in regards to the functions of the Board, which states, and I quote:

                        "Where two members appointed by the Minister having regard to the achievement of balance in gender and race and geographical representation."

            I think this is a sign of good governance and that is the way that we should always follow.  I was pleased to see this in the Bill and I hope this will be followed.  While looking at the composition of the Board, I can see there will be 11 members, including the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for Education as the ex officio member. 

            Sir, referring to the different schools and going by my interaction with some past teachers, who normally fight for pay increases, I strongly support the need for teacher training.  Often in these different schools, the Management brings in electricians and mechanics, who do not have any teaching background to be teachers or tutors.  I am making this point, Sir, because I think that these electricians and mechanics will need to be effective teachers, so they need to be trained.

            Sir, lastly on clause 4, the Minister is being empowered to make appointments, and I hope this will strongly focus on the provision of the highest standard and/or best possible facility to cater for the most effective training programmes to meet our needs, as I had just alluded to, the manpower or human resources training that is the key role of this Institution.

            I also like to refer to clause 5(g), which states, and I quote:

                        "May engage in such joint venture activities as will enable the Institute to improve its provision of facilities including the provision of halls of residence to students."

            I greatly welcome that, especially for students who come from my Province of Lau and other outlying islands, as this is a chronic problem with our young people, who are always looking for accommodation.  I hope this will make a difference for students who come from outlying islands to study.

            Sir, I would like to make one last point.  As the Institute becomes a corporate body, I also hope that this will not affect the cost of accommodation for our students, and that the fees at FIT will remain affordable, not to say because it is becoming an autonomous or corporate body that the fees may increase at the cost of the students.  I hope this will not affect the students. 

            With this short contribution, Sir, I support the Bill before the House.

            MR. PRESIDENT.- Honourable Senators, I will adjourn the House now for afternoon tea.  The House is adjourned.

            The House adjourned at 3.45 p.m.

            The House resumed at 4.15 p.m.

            HON. SENATOR D. SEETO.- Mr. President, Sir, I rise to make a brief contribution to Bill No. 19 of 2006.  Firstly, I would like to declare my interest.  I was appointed a couple of weeks ago by the honourable Minister for Education until this Bill comes to effect to the Council of FIT.  As such, I have a very keen interest in the debate taking place in the House today.

            I believe that the system of education in Fiji must be harmonised and integrated into the system, where there can be multi-entry points leading to various levels of qualifications.  As such, the FIT, TPAF, USP and University of Fiji need to work in unison.  This is the system used in Australia and New Zealand, which the honourable Senator Khan spoke about earlier. 

            There must also be more consultation with the stakeholders.  Even after passing this Bill, the end result of education must be the focus, that is finding a job and building a career.  When we were speaking to some academics, they argued that the education establishments were only interested in producing academically excellent people and nothing else, but it is not only about that.  I think that is not the point of education.  These institutions must produce students and graduates, who must be prepared for their role in contributing to the productivity and process of nation building.  This will then result in social and economic progress. 

            Sir, for a long time, the Hotel Association has been asking for involvement in the FIT, without success, and I think the honourable Minister for Education, in appointing me, I guess has listened to us and I thank her for that, even though it is for a short time.  However, I believe that this should continue given the paramount importance of tourism to the economy, as it is by far the largest private sector employer now and also into the future. 

            The Hotel Association's involvement is meant to be positive and will result in input to improve the curriculum and the end result is a matching win-win one for the employer and the employee.  The Hotel Association also envisages to assist by providing attachment opportunities to supplement classroom training, which is just as important.

            The tourism industry will need more middle management and trade people.  We have talked about the migration problems and this looks likely to continue, which was alluded to again by my fellow colleague, the honourable Senator Khan.  It is good to see the Fiji Institute of Engineers' nominee on the Board.  I feel there should also be a nominee for the Ministry of Tourism, as there is one for the Union. 

            The tourism industry is now consulting more with USP and TPAF in its curriculum and training courses, and I am certain that the dividends will come also for the FIT.  I advocate a body involving the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Tourism to fast-track education and training for our industry, and this can be a future project for FIT. 

            The Bill that we are debating addresses many of the issues talked about previously.  Its autonomy in dealing with education activities and funding will go a long way to allow it the freedom to develop, compete and complement education available in Fiji.  I also advocate that the FIT which now has eight campuses in Fiji gets more campuses in other parts of Fiji and strength its regional outpost.  It should not just concentrate in Suva and Nadi but give equal training opportunities to other parts of Fiji.  By corporatising the FIT, it will allow the organisation to function similar to the private sector body.  Its Board will control and direct activities of the organisation and given the involvement of the various stakeholders already provided for in the Bill, it will see that the objective of FIT is carried out in a most effective manner and result in a properly trained labour force. 

            The Bill will also bring about achievement of standard and facility to further the aims of FIT and its ability to cooperate with kindred organisation locally and externally.  I stress "externally" and we should not be afraid of doing this to bring about standards.  We can also learn from our friendly neighbours which will add to its strength and capacity.  Its ability to compete is a good one, but harmonisation of education in Fiji is also an important factor to take into consideration.  I will now make some comments on specific parts of the Bill.            

            Clause 8 - Meetings of the Board:  Meeting once a quarter, I feel is too infrequent especially if the Board is to provide effective guidance and leadership to the organisation.  Normally, Board meetings should happen once a month especially in the infancy of this new Bill. 

            Clause 12 - Appointment of Academic Council:  The Academic Council is a good suggestion.  Again, it should include external advisers if possible and required as I had mentioned earlier.

            Clause 13 - Appointment of Advisory Council:  I just wonder if this might not conflict with clause 12, therefore, there needs to be a clear definition of the separate roles.  In case this does not happen, there can be duplication of functions.  I believe that the Hotel Association should be in one or both of these councils to give live industry feedback to shape courses and policies. 

            As with the Fiji Institute of Accountants and the Fiji Institute of Engineers:  The tourism industry is an important player to the nation's economy and its employee requirements and needs to be seriously taken into account given its capacity to employ and its great impact to the nation's economy.

            Clause 19 - Ownership of copyright, etc:  I also agree with the mover of the motion, the honourable Senator Dr. Baba that the intellectual property and various publications belong to the institute and this can be a source of revenue.  More importantly, it adds to the reputation of the organisation in the academic world. 

            Clause 20 - Minister may make regulations, etc:  I trust when the regulations are drawn up, this will be done in consultation with the major stakeholders as only then, I feel, regulation which brings about change and can do good, will result. 

            Mr. President, Sir, with those few words, I support the Bill before the House.  

            HON. SENATOR DR. T.L. BABA.- Mr. President, Sir, I seek the indulgence of the honourable Senators who ended up the discussion of this Bill.

            Firstly I wish to thank the many honourable Senators (I think 12 of them) who contributed to the Bill.  That shows a lot of interests and concerns with our own institution, the FIT in the attaintment of its autonomy.  It is attaining its autonomy in the very time we are celebrating the 36th year of our Independence. 

            Some of the comments are indeed very enlightening while some show the wealth of understanding and experience for which the Senate is noted for.  If I can guess, the number of interventions received is more than those at the other place when the same Bill was discussed.  There are some general and specific issues. 

            General Issues: The FIT is a national institution.  It is Fiji's own.  That factor is assumed in the Bill that the interest of Fiji's economy and its development will be up the most.  I think giving its autonomy, is the understanding of the framers of the Bill and the Ministry of Education which mooted this.  It wants to give FIT the benefit of the doubt to be able to go into the corporate world as an institution to provide for Fiji in terms of the current and future needs of its economy. 

            The last speaker, the honourable Senator Seeto had talked about the need to harmonise all our tertiary institutions and of course, that is a very important factor.  In addressing the other House, the mover of this Bill, the honourable Minister for Education had alluded also to the importance of creating a tertiary education which will coordinate all the activities of the tertiary institutions that are owned by Fiji.  They are not only in the Ministry of Education but are in the Fiji College of Agriculture, Ministry of Health, Fiji School of Medicine, Training Productivity Authority of Fiji (TPAF) under the Ministry of Labour and of course, institutions within the Ministry of Education like the FIT, Lautoka Teachers College, Fiji College of Advance Education and all the institutions funded by Fiji including the University of the South Pacific (USP) which is a Regional institution.  It needs to be harmonised so that they produce the returns for Fiji that we want and desire.  There has been some doubts about the return coming from the regional institutions which had been going on very well in the early days of the university.  In light of the money that Fiji is giving that institution (USP), some are beginning to question whether Fiji as a nation is beginning to have the return in terms of boosting the economy and developing Fiji.

            There is also a question that we, as one of the biggest players in the Region must also be concerned about the development of small countries, smaller than Fiji which are also part of USP and look to us for support in very important and expensive projects like the USP.  So, I had agreed, and I think FIT is a flag carrier for Fiji, particularly, in technical education.  It must focus its work to ensure the immediate needs of the economy as it stands and highlighted by the honourable Senator Seeto in the areas of hospitality and construction, industries and agriculture and processing.  Those are the current needs as identified in our last strategic plan and the next one, which we are discussing at the moment.  So, I support the move to ensure the harmonisation of all our tertiary institutions.  When you talk about tertiary, it means post secondary education that is beyond Forms Six and Seven.  Those are the domains of secondary schools, they have gone to colleges - post secondary and is called "tertiary".

            I also commend the honourable Senators for their ability to be able to see some things that were not identified in the other House and I will come to that later.  The honourable Senator Sadole identified a very significant point with regard to clauses 10 and 21 which I will touch on later.  Fortunately, that has already been looked at by the Solicitor General's Office and we will explain how those things can be handled later on.

            Sir, a number of issues were raised, firstly, there was a concern about the examination and assessment at the FIT, whether it is done independently and fairly.  I am assured talking to the Director and looking at the Bill, which provides for the Academic Council responsible for assessment and all academic process at the FIT that this is the case.  The Government of the day has delegated it the authority to carry out those kind of assessments as best as it professionally could.  Therefore, FIT's tradition, I think, in this field is well established.

            Some have talked about the entrepreneurial approach and activities that are being mooted in the Bill that is of course, in line with the Public Enterprise Act, which again, the honourable Senator Malani had indicated that that Act itself could be sufficient to cater and replace Bill No. 19.  Unfortunately, with all respect, the Public Enterprises Act carries general principles of what the Government is trying to do, breaking situations and bringing about making money for all Government entities, but when it comes to an educational institution, an educational institutional cannot be expected merely to make money.  The return from FIT will have major impact on the industry, on the economy of Fiji as such.  I believe that what FIT contributes back to the economy, to the nation, in terms of manpower, skills and supporting on going industries (the industries that I have identified before) will in many ways be equivalent to the amount of money that the Government continues to put to that institution.  It is slightly different because it is an educational institution, it will continue as Senator Khan had just said, the Government must continue to have a look at these institutions.  Even, in Australia and New Zealand, they continue to fund it, but the way they continue to fund their institutions is tailor made to ensure the institutions are serving the needs of the economy of New Zealand and Australia or whatever states in Australia because there are a lot of money poured in by individual States.  We in Fiji must make sure that whatever money we give to tertiary institutions, USP included, there must be returns in terms of our economy, our development that is the function of the Ministry of Education and the functions of various Boards that operate in these institutions.

            Therefore, Senator Malani, I feel that there is a need, for Bill No. 19 of 2006.  There are provisions in the Bill like specific areas of academic functions and other functions that are representations of industries in the institutions that are uniquely institutional, rather than just providing for organisations to make money for Government, which is the heart of the Public Enterprise.  Yes, all tertiary institutions must be allowed to get into entrepreneurial areas. It is there that they apply what they learn.  The skills that they learn.  They go into consultancies, they team up with outside organisations, it is provided for in the Bill.  They team up with private institutions, involving the principles of private and public participation to ensure they provide dormitories, various facilities that are needed by the institution.  So, the institution will have to do entrepreneurial activities, not only to ensure that the people coming out of there and the staff at the institutions are engaged in the application of the skills for which they are hired by the institution and research, but secondly, to enable the institutions to bring in resources and funding from outside to assist the development of necessary infrastructures to enable the operation of the institution.  However, the other day, we were talking to the Director or the CEO of the institution and I asked the specific question as to what extent are academic decisions swayed or influenced by these investments, the investors who are coming from outside.  He said and assured us that it is not the case,they only provide the facilities, but when it comes to academic consideration on results and examinations that is judged on its own merit, independently of whatever they bring to the institution.  I am glad that is so and that safeguards the standards and the quality of the institution.

            The call by honourable Senators for FIT to remain as a technical training provider; I agree.  It would be fool hardy for FIT to go into other kinds of academic activities well beyond its scope, the ability of its staff, the needs of Fiji, who has been supporting it all along, well beyond the needs of the students who want to go to FIT because that is where we are recruiting from.  Any institution that is not mindful of the needs of its country, students, the economy of its nation is committing suicide if it goes beyond that.  I think, that is best left to the Board, the CEO of the Institution, the relevant Ministry that is involved and looking after it to ensure that FIT remains there as is.  However, Sir, those are the needs of the present in terms of our current development or strategic plan, the construction industry, the hospitality industry and the agriculture industry.  The needs were different 10 and 20 years ago, we needed different kinds of manpower.  So, FIT will need to go along in terms of the needs of Fiji.  Similarly, we ask regional institutions that we fund, is it mindful of the needs of Fiji now when it closed its foundation studies?  Tertiary institutions must keep an eye on the needs and the level of the needs of its stakeholders of the country concerned and keep in touch with that. For those who are concerned about that and wanting some guarantees for these to be done and stated in the Bill, let me assure them that will not be necessary to have guarantees written into the Bill because that is the kind of action that is required by the Board, by all those who spend their time in the administration of the institution to ensure it continues. 

            However, FIT as said by the honourable Senator Khan cannot be at this level forever.  In the same way that the Auckland Institute of Technology, which has been there for the last 100 years or so, is now the Auckland University of Technology.  In the same way that the New South Wales Institute of Technology, which is now New South Wales University of Technology has changed overtime in terms of the demands and needs of students and the country. We cannot say that FIT will remain as is, it may become after harmonisation of all the tertiary institution part of the National  University of Fiji.  That is up to those involved when the time comes to make decision about it.  The honourable Minister for Education in winding up the debate in the other House, talked about the need for Tertiary Education Commission to harmonise our activities, which hopefully will become the basis that we can see the big picture of the kind of things that we have.  The expertise that is needed in Fiji, the expertise that we must continue to provide to service our economy and our development.  To service Fiji's economy and development, I think, it is time now for all of us in Fiji to be proud of our country and to begin to say that Fiji's interest must be served by all our tertiary institutions.  I have spent many years outside universities. I have just been at Auckland, in States in Australia.  I have spent almost my whole academic career in regional institutions, but coming back now I begin to ask is Fiji getting what it needs to get from all the money that it is spending on tertiary institutions?  From all the money that we are paying for fees for our students who we are sending to Australia because we cannot find in Fiji the tertiary education courses and quality that our students can take?  So these are the questions that are beginning to be raised but we cannot guarantee that FIT will remain as is, for ever.  It will have to grow in time and the demands of our economy will also change in time and those who made decisions at that time will ensure Fiji's interest is served by our tertiary institutions. 

            There have been some questions about the membership of the Board, the chairmanship of the Board.  As I indicated in my initial introduction to the Bill, bulk of the members are appointed in consultation with the Minister.  All important things are done at this institution, in consultation with the Minister.  The Board is appointed by the Minister, the Chairman is also up to this point, when I spoke to the Director, appointed by the Minister.  So there is that understanding, because bulk of the members are appointed by the Minister.  The Chairman is also appointed by the Minister.  That is not in the Bill and it need not be in the Bill, but it is understood. 

            There has also been reference by our Senators from the other side about the balance in membership and in gender. There has been an attempt to ensure some gender balance.  There is also the understanding that when you make appointments, you must ensure that it is balance in terms of institutions, in terms of schools, in terms of the various professions, so that not all the professions or sub-professions can be a member of the advisory council at one point in time.  I understand that they shift in terms of the demands of the industry and in terms of the new courses that are coming in.  All of them have the chance of being represented at the recommendation of course, of the Minister, in discussion with the relevant people in the council.  I am glad that the honourable Senator Seeto has indicated to me that the hospitality industry is being represented.  I am sure it should be represented, so as the construction industry. 

            I think the agricultural processing must also be represented, the engineers and the construction and so forth.  So, there is an attempt in the Bill for the relevant professions, the relevant industries to be represented, otherwise FIT will not be in a position to be carrying out the necessary training, to train people for those relevant industries.  There must be a continual relationship between the training and the experience in industry and so forth.  The industry advises the people at FIT, only then it will be able to have people skilled and experienced in the areas where they are trained. 

            I must then come to the other part which is really the part that has been raised by the honourable Senator Sadole.  There are a couple of areas where the Bill appeared to be suffering from.  I have the assurance from the Office of the Solicitor-General that with clause 10(1)(d) that the honourable Senator Sadole alluded to - there is an omission when it went to the Press.  However, that will be tidied over and has been taken over by the Secretary-General that the editing will be done.  It talks about any other good.  What went to the Press was "for any other good reason is unable to perform the functions of such office."  This is the removal of the people from being in that role.  It should have been "for any other good reason..." instead of what it appears here "for any other good, is unable to perform..."  So, that is a tidying part. 

            The other tidying part is clause 21, which was mentioned by the honourable Senator Sadole, where I will quote the letter from the Office of the Solicitor-General.  It says and I quote:

            "The rest of sub-clause (6) has now become a new sub-clause (7)."

That means sub-clauses (6) and (7) should be combined, sub-clauses (8) and (9) should be re-numbered accordingly.  That is the editing that is continued to be done.  It has been indicated by the Office of the Solicitor-General and also confirmed by the Secretary-General.

            Sir, in terms of the editing work that is needed in clause 10(1)(d) and also in terms of the editing that is needed in clause 21(6), sub-clauses (6) and (7) will become one and sub-clauses (8) and (9) have to be re-numbered accordingly.  I hope that satisfies the question that was raised.  Those are the main questions that were raised and there are a lot of other points that were raised and I agree with them wholeheartedly.  However, they should not lead to the amendment of the Bill.  They are understood.  In terms of the balances, as raised by the honourable Senator Padarath, these balances are part and parcel of the exercise that those responsible in the Board and administrators must bear in mind that for any institution to reflect the balance that exist in society, in tertiary institution that is debated very well, so that there is a particular balance - the balance of staff, balance of gender, balance of courses, balance of the areas represented and so forth. I did take my assurance that these matters are taken on board, although they may not be reflected in relevant clauses that you are expecting. 

            Finally, thank you for your contributions, I have spoken to the Director of the Institute and have highlighted to him all that have been raised.  He is very appreciative, he asked me why was it that we did not raise it on that particular day and we are now in a position to look at this in a far more detailed and he is grateful that this House is able to raise the anomalies that have not been highlighted before, so I thank you for your contribution.  Mr. President, Sir, I thank you for the time to enable me to respond to the various concerns and observations on the Bill.  Mr. President, Sir, I commend the Bill to the House. 

            MR. PRESIDENT.- Honourable Senators, I wish to acknowledge the presence of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Mrs. Mereseini Nacuva, the National Directors of the Family Life Ministry of the Campus Crusade for Christ and Mr. Howard and Mrs. Eileen Ostendorff, the International Directors of the Family Life Ministry of the Campus Crusade for Christ.

            On behalf of the honourable Senators, I welcome you warmly to the House this afternoon.  Although, we have a slight drizzle outside, we hope that you will enjoy your stay in Fiji and that the Good Lord will bless you mightily.

            Question put.

            Motion agreed to. 

            Bill read a second time. 

            In Committee:

            Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, Schedule and title and enacting clause agreed to. 

            The House resumed:

            Bill reported without amendments, read a third time and passed.  (Act No.      of 2006).

            MR. PRESIDENT.- Honourable Senators, before we adjourn for the day, I wish to enlighten you of tomorrow's agenda.  We have a very  interesting day organised for us tomorrow, so I request everyone to be here by 8.45 a.m.  The bus will depart at exactly 9.00 a.m.

            The House is now adjourned until 9.30 a.m. Friday, 13th October, 2006.

            The House adjourned at 5.00 p.m.