Opposition MP Faiyaz Koya has accused the Government of repeatedly preaching “consultation, consultation, consultation” while failing to adequately involve the public before introducing major legislative changes.
Speaking in Parliament last week, Mr Koya pointed to several pieces of legislation which he claimed demonstrated shortcomings in the consultation process.
“They stand here and harp about consultation, consultation, consultation. Yet they do not do it thoroughly,” Mr Koya said.
He cited the Tourism Bill, Crimes Decree and Criminal Records Bill 2025 as examples.
“The Tourism Bill was never thoroughly discussed with the people, the Crimes Decree was never thoroughly discussed with the people,” he said.
“The Criminal Records Bill 2025, we went out as a committee and when we spoke to the people, they said they were not consulted.”
Mr Koya also revisited changes to the Liquor Act, which reduced nightclub operating hours from 5am to 1am on public safety grounds.
He said while concerns about brawls, robberies and public safety were legitimate, the economic consequences for businesses should have been properly considered before the changes were introduced.
“There were businesses that were still recovering from COVID-19, but you shut them down,” Mr Koya said.
He said the Government eventually reversed course on the operating hours and claimed the experience demonstrated why meaningful consultation was important.
Mr Koya also questioned an earlier consultation cited by Acting Attorney-General Siromi Turaga.
“He even said when he was asked by me, where did you do the consultation? ‘We did the consultation in Levuka somewhere with respect to that’,” Mr Koya said.
“They have no nightclubs there.”
Mr Koya said he was not opposed to amending laws but argued consultation should identify potential consequences before legislation was changed.
“The experience should teach the Acting Attorney-General and this Government an important lesson — the purpose of consultation is to identify these consequences before we amend the law,” he said.
“We have no problem in amending the law, but you must look at its purpose properly.”
