Transcript
'AISAKE EKE: What the government presented in the budget was basically laying out the financial plan to go ahead with the hosting so that's why the motions for hosting came to the parliament. But the government distributed to the cabinet an estimation also but also a statement of vision to state clearly their decision to withdraw from the Pacific Games. So there's no indication of going back on their own decision.
DON WISEMAN: So there was money set aside in the budget but that's being re-allocated. Where is it being re-allocated to?
AE: You know in the budget statement - and that's what they informed the parliament, that they would like to divert the funding that's specifically earmarked for hosting and sport development. That's the way that the budget has been re-costed and redistributed to us today. But there is a legal impediment here: they have to change the law. For example, the official levy, because it was clearly expressed that the levy was put forward in the first place for collecting of money for hosting the Pacific Games.
DW: Explain to me again that levy.
AE: That's the foreign exchange levy that was part-implemented last year - in the current financial year. That is the half a seniti from the margin of the spread for any change that the financial institutions collected from all transactions for conversions of Tongan currency and vice-versa.
DW: And how much money did that bring in?
AE: I think the estimates now are for between 6 and 7 million Tongan pa'anga (US$2.7 million - $3.2 m), that's what I have. The numbers, the figures I looked at before I left was about 3 to 4. So I'm guessing that about 6 to 7 will be collected before the end of this year. But the estimate they put down was 25 million pa'anga (US$11 million). So the estimates that we put for the four years, this year and also the following year up to the end of the 1920 financial year is roughly about 25 million pa'anga, or roughly about 13 million US dollars to come from that means of finance.
DW: And you're feeling is that since this was specifically for the games and if the government doesn't go ahead with the games that tax should end and, I guess, the people all deserve a refund don't they?
AE: [laughs] Of course, people already think financial institutions come up with that option, because the purpose for which the levy has been collected has changed. But again, the government put forward a proposal to, instead of repealing of the act, they want an amendment. But I think it's really important for [the] government to discuss this with the financial institutions to convince them - get them to agree - that the diversion of the funding from the hosting, to support the government, is acceptable to them. I think that's what they should do before coming to the house but I think they choose to come to the house.
