Dr Sitiveni Halapua, is the vice chairman of the newly formed National Committee for Political Reform (NCPR), a parliamentary committee which is taking the first steps to map out a direction for political reform.

The Director of the Pacific Islands Development Programme at the East West Center in Hawai'i, Sitiveni, a Tongan from the Niuas, has a growing reputation in facilitating conflict resolution in the South Pacific islands.

He became prominent in Tongan in September when he facilitated a settlement that ended the seven-weeks strike of Tonga's public servants. The settlement MOU also agreed for Tonga to look at a political reform programme, and Sitiveni sees the committee as a continuation of his involvement in that process.

Sitiveni during the past years has developed an approach he calls Talanoa, for clarifying the main issues and concerns in disputes and also in helping to create reform programs.

He has worked on conflict resolution in Fiji bringing coup leaders and their former hostages together for Talanoa. He worked inthe Cook Islands to help formulate an economic recovery programme after an economic collapse. In recent years he has been working in the Solomon Islands helping to resolve an ethnic conflict.

The following are extracts from an interview with Dr Sitiveni Halapua, where he comments on the working program of Tonga's National Committee for political Reform, his process of Talanoa; and the revelation by the Minister of Finance that the settlement to the Public Servants' strike could bankrupt the government.

by Pesi Fonua

So far now the National Committee for Political Reform (NCPR) has been formally established, and a working program has been set in motion. How do you feel about the committee?

So far I am very satisfied that we have a very clear purpose and a process to be used in order to look at some of the issues that the people are concerned with in relation to the need for political reform and constitutional change.

Are you restricted by the mandate that was set out by Parliament? How broad is the scope of your working agenda?

I think it is very broad. There are two very important aspects to our working agenda, one is related to Political Reform, the other is about the constitution. So we have two very important dimensions, political as well as constitutional, and further than that it is so clear that whatever recommendation that the committee will come up with must be viewed in relation to the building of national unity in order to achieve social and economical development for the people of Tonga.

You have just mentioned National Unity, was that something that was defined by the Parliament or was it a proposal by the committee?

The House simply stated the membership issues, including the need to select a chairman, vice chairman and a quorum, and it was very clear that the House left the rest of the terms of reference for the committee to decide. I think without really knowing what was going on, before I joined the committee, I think that was why it took a little longer because they were working and trying to clarify and articulate the terms of reference for the committee.

But now you have got your plan and a direction for the committee is moving ahead?

Yes, it is very clear because if you look at this committee and compare it with similar committees used in other countries for similar purposes, in other countries parliament not only created a committee but also with a very clear terms of reference. So when people come together to work they have already got a terms of reference given to them. But it appears to me that because the parliament left major terms of reference for this committee to decide, I believe that may be that was the reason why it took a while to get things moving and that is why I am saying that now it is very clear, what the purpose and the objectives are and the terms of reference for the work of this committee.

So you think it was a good thing that parliament did not spell out clearly the terms of references?

I cannot make a judgment whether it was good or not but it is very clear that Tonga has a particular way of doing things. Other countries create a committee with a very clear terms of reference, Tonga has a difference approach, they created a committee and they have the confidence, I think this is something that is very unique to Tonga. They created a committee, but they also have the confidence in the committee to define their own terms of reference, and I think that is the beauty of it, and also it took longer to get to this stage.

With regards to members of the committee. Clive Edwards was supposed to be only a temporary member, and 'Akilisi Pohiva was supposed to make up his mind whether he was in or out. Has there been any definite decision made with regards to these two members?

Well, at this stage I think they are in. Again, as I said, this is something that is quite unique for Tonga. In other countries there is separation between the Parliamentary Committee and the commission of committee that is supposed to do the work. In Tonga they combined the two, but I think, that is the reason why, and I am only speaking that is why it took a while, because it is a mixture of parliamentarians and Cabinet members and independent members like myself. Clive and 'Akilisi are there by virtue of being the representatives of the people.

Another national committee is chaired by 'Akilisi Pohiva. The difference between that committee and your committee is that they have leaped forward, and while you are yet to start your Talanoa with the people, they have produced proposals for amendment to the constitution and other legislations. How do you feel about having these two members being members of both committees?

I am aware of the other committee, I don't claim to be fully informed about various aspects, but based on what I have read in the media as well as the booklet, I think there is a difference. The other committee is very specifically based on constitutional change and they are very clear about it, they believe in a constitutional change with a model to change now. Whereas with the committee that I am working with our terms of reference are for more than just constitutional change. As I have mentioned earlier on that we are also concerned with the political reform. I think one has to understand that these are two different things, political reform and constitutional reform are two different things. Fundamentally different. There are different aspects of what we are required to do on this committee, and therefore the process that we are putting in place to guide our work, hopefully will give us the information of what the people want, including the government, and there will be consultation with government, relating to political reform as well as constitutional reform issues. The other committee is very specific on its demands for constitutional change as well as a model of government.

The proposed amendment to the constitution and a model of government, according to this other committee was what the people want. Your committee on the other hand has yet to dialogue with the people and I presume that in the end you will come up with a proposed constitutional amendment and amendments to other legislations. Is that correct?

Yes, that is what I have heard and understood that they have been working on, this constitutional change, for about 20 years and that led them to say that this is what the people want and to be specific on their model and the type of constitution. Again, because of the nature of this committee we have to go and talk to the people, and it is not just about constitutional issues, there are other issues, the issue related to political reform as well as in relation to how to build national unity and to promote social and economical development, so I have to emphasize again that the work of this committee, yes, is about the constitution but in addition to that we also look at other issues, political, social and economic issues and that perhaps, hopefully would put any specific constitutional amendment into context of the social, political, economic dimension of Tonga. I have to re-emphasize that this is not just about the constitution, but with the constitution there is also social, economic and political development. I think these committees are complimentary and hopefully they will consider whatever they want this committee to consider, just like any submission or consultation with the rest of the country, the people in Tonga and overseas, and of course the government, the main stake holder of this exercise.

When you are talking about political reform, do you have any specific political structure in mind?

I do have understanding of elements or what you may call international standard, things like human rights, individual, group rights and so forth and so on. We also understand, the issue of transparency and accountability. There are international standards that people are aware of. I am also aware of different political system, around the world and more specifically with the Pacific Islands, yes I do. But if the question is if I have a preconceived idea of what is good for Tonga. The answer is no, but I am very confident that at the end of this exercise the committee will be able to come up with some recommendation to be put forward to His Majesty the King as well as to the parliament of Tonga.

Reform not Revolution

Taking into consideration the broad scope of your committee, the other committee's proposed amendment to the constitution is simply to make it possible for the people to elect all members of parliament, including Cabinet Ministers. With your very broad terms of reference is it possible that any proposed political reform your committee will put forward could bring in a more dramatic political reform, a complete flip. Is it possible?

I think the word is reform. The opposite of reform is revolution, to turn everything almost upside down. This committee is not about that, this committee is about reform, and reform to me simply means to amend and to make changes to existing structure and the system in order to achieve the objectives specify in our mandate, namely to help build national unity and to help develop social and economic development. It is very clear. I think I have to reiterate, that this is not change for its own sake. It is very clear in our mandate that whatever recommendation we make for political reform as well as the amendment it must be justified in terms of building national unity and promoting social and economic development. That is the objective umbrella under which we conduct the work of this committee.

Overseas Tongans

One thing I notice in your program that you are going to involve Tongans overseas, something that we have been talking about for a number of years. Is that going to be a reality or are you just going to get their views, or do you really want them to get involved in Tongan politics.

This is a very important part of the work of the committee. You know trying to reach out to the Tongans overseas, in the United States, New Zealand and Australia is an important aspect of our work and we are very serious about it. We try and you know this is not an easy task, mainly because of the diversity and the geographical distribution of the Tongans not only in the United States, a very huge country, in New Zealand to some extent, as well as Australia. There are many reasons for why we are doing this: one, these are important elements of the Tongan economy and society, we cannot ignore the Tongans overseas, they make huge and important contributions to the development of the country and they are part of what we call our Tongan kainga. Some of us live in Tonga and some of us live outside Tonga, but the connection is still very strong, and that is why we try to do this, and because this is the first time that an attempt has been made to do this, it is a challenge and we are very serious about it. For instance, to begin with the information, the terms of reference, the working program of the committee has been printed in our major newspapers and some of the Tongans overseas will have access and read them, and some of our members will be going overseas, next week to distribute this material and explain and answer questions from our Tongan relatives and friends in Australia, New Zealand and in the United States, and Hawaii.

We think this is very important, and yes it is going to cost us money, we cannot just say we need the voice of the Tongans who live overseas and that we are not going to spend money. No we have to do it. Next week, Clive Edwards, Fineasi Funaki, and Prince Tu'ipelehake who is already in America, will be responsible for the distribution of pamphlets and brochures, and hopefully answer questions and articulate the purpose, the reason and the objective of this exercise, so when the committee visits them next year, hopefully they will have a better understanding of what we want. We will be having Talanoa with Tongans overseas, and, yes, we are very serious.

Agenda a form of control

I think you were invited to join this committee because of your mediating role in making peace in the region, particularly with your approach with the Talanoa concept. From the little that I understand about Talanoa, I think through that process you are able to extract feelings and information from people, real feeling of what they want to do. Can you give us a brief summary of your concept of Talanoa.

I think the most important thing to know about Talanoa is to compare Talanoa with other forms of dialogue, and deliberation. Meetings, consultation, negotiation, deliberation, all these forms have an agenda, you decide the agenda you have a plan and you put it up there, and the agenda itself restricts the issues and draws up the boundaries the frame-work within which you carry out your meetings, you know. For instance, if we have a meeting, about the constitution, people start off with an agenda, first of all these are the issues we want to talk about in the meeting, but suddenly somebody starts talking about something else, normally in a meeting, we would say, eh, what are you talking about, it is irrelevant. In fact the agenda become a form of control. It is almost like predetermining the way the meeting is going and the way the consultation is carried out in order to arrive at what you already preconceived. That is the nature of dialogue, meeting, and consultation in a Western sense. Talanoa, in my way of thinking, and I have been working on this concept for many years, first of all it does not have a preconceived agenda, it is very open, you can tell your story. I think you have to remember that prior to the advent of the western civilization and the coming of the missionaries, the only thing we had was Talanoa, that was how history was created, that was how we knew we were Tongan, that was how we knew we own the land, that was how we knew our kainga, that was how we knew our hou'eiki, that was how we knew our Tu'i, because of the Talanoa, nothing was written, without a pre-determined agenda, it was very open. Any body could tell his or her story about what was important to him or her, what makes him or her feel good, happy and sad. So it is very open, but the trick about Talanoa, it must be facilitated, meaning I normally facilitate, so that in such a way that after the stories are told, I then extract what I see as the main points, the main issues that emerge from the Talanoa and take them back to the people who participated in the Talanoa. Then they say, Eh, that is what I meant, before we actually record it, ... it is done right there in front of the people who participated and they say that is what I meant, that is exactly what I have in mind, and so that when I record it the output of the Talanoa is based entirely on what the person is talking about, what the person is saying, and there is no agenda. I'll give you an example, if somebody wants to talk about the constitution, he can talk about it, somebody want to talk about politics, he can talk about politics, if somebody wants to talk about fishing, he or she should be allowed to talk about fishing. You can talk about whatever is important to you and your life, your family, your church, you tell your story. My role as a facilitator is to extract the important points and then put them back to the person, and if the person says, sorry that is not what I meant, then we have to change it again until we know exactly where the person stands on this issue. That is the fundamental feature of Talanoa. The reason I think Talanoa is not use is because it is not easy, it is much easier to run a meeting because you design your agenda to achieve what you want. Talanoa is very open, therefore it has to be facilitated, and therefore you have to work very hard to extract the main points, and the main ideas out of the stories that are told and that would constitute what I say the main issue, which will be the basis for this report, and that is the difference between Talanoa and the other forms of dialogue.

It sounds like it is a very democratic approach. People may have different ways of expressing their views, but fundamentally they all mean the same thing. Like different approaches to amending the constitution.

So far in my experience, in fact, often people are a bit skeptical, they say you know people won't tell you their story, I am amazed with what I have done in Fiji and in the Solomon Islands, Cook Islands, in their own economic reform. It amazed me, you give people the opportunity, and they know you respect their voice, they will tell you their stories, and that is a human universal phenomenon. Provided that they know that one you respect them. Two, you give them the freedom and you are not going to twist it around or whatever, people will share their stories with you, and to me that is human value, a very fundamental human value that we all have in Tonga, and you know very well, if you talk to five Tongans you will probably get ten different stories, and that is what it is all about.

In your experience in using that approach, do you find it takes longer or at the end is it the same as a meeting with a set agenda.

You know it appears to take longer because at the beginning it is all over the place, the people who do not experience this kind will say, eh this talk story, the way they say it in the Solomon Islands, Talanoa in Fiji, or dialogue in Cook Islands. This is all over the place. How can you do that, but they are always surprised, because at the end of the day when you sum it up and structure it, and everybody will say eh that is what we meant, it may sound and looks a bit chaotic, and sometimes it takes a little bit longer, but it is better to have two or three days to get it, than to try to rush the meeting in one or two hours, and no one says anything, you say now they all agree, then you find out later they didn't. So it may take a little bit longer, but don't forget you allow them to speak their voice. Meeting restricts people from telling their stories, because you would say, we have two hours to talk about this, and anybody else who want to talk about something else, no you can't talk about it, it is irrelevant, this is our agenda - and that is a form of control, it is a form of manipulation to get what you want.

Pacific Leaders summi

Talanoa has been around for sometime, but you have structured and used it very effectively, can you give me a brief summary of how it started.

It began in 1993, when the Pacific Islands Leaders met in Tahiti, and I presented a paper, interestingly on the concept of sustainable development, and the main point of my presentation that sustainable development must be looked at from multi dimensional views and not just the environment, social, economic and political, and international relations. It was called the seven dimensions, and some of the journalists made jokes about it, they said it was too complex, but some how Pacific Island leaders had confidence and some said to me, why don't you go and develop it further, because they liked the idea of having culture in this model. You know the western model is either economic, social, environmental, politics in a compartmentalized way, but what I tried to do was to bring them together and also culture was part of it, and the leaders liked it and they said go and develop it further. Dr Langi Kavaliku was in that meeting as well and he proposed that they should allow me to develop the idea. So as an academic I looked at the literature and I read and discovered that is a very good idea when you put it in a framework, but the process was not there. Either you have a market economic process or political process or culture process, they were all over the place, so I was searching for what is the closest that can bring this diversity together, OK let's have a look at our ancestors, because our ancestors must have done something right, otherwise you and I would not be here today. Then I said it must be something relating to Talanoa, because when you sit down and share your stories, some one will be talking about fishing, other person will be talking yam growing, another person will be talking about politics, another person will talk about religion and god, and everybody will be talking about different things, but don't forget that one process that allows the diversity, the way we live our lives, culture, then I started working on Talanoa to develop it because at the end of the day you have to articulate it because non Pacific Islanders will not understand the philosophy behind Talanoa. So I am kind of writing, as well as practicing implementing it, so it is a very interesting exercise because it is not just developing the theory and then testing it. No, the theory follows the practical application.

Cook Islands

The first time we tried the Talanoa was in the Cook Islands in 1996 when the country was economically bankrupt. The Prime Minister asked me to go down there, the Asian Development had already developed a model for economic development. The Prime Minister asked me, is there anything wrong with the model. If you look at the model there was nothing wrong, but let me ask you, but how would you know that the people of the Cook Islands will buy into this model, and he said, I don't know. What are you going to do. I said, let's have a Talanoa with the main stake holders, then I proceeded to organize a dialogue with various groups, women groups, environment groups, outer islands, churches, economists, you name it. They came together and they dismantled this model, then we reconstructed, and that was what the Cook Islands used for their reform in 1996-97, and that was what still is the basis for what is happening in the Cook Islands, and of course, after that, then the coup in Fiji in 2000, I went there and I used the Talanoa, and now we are working in the Solomon Islands and we are using the same model. It is a process, I think it is very important to note that Talanoa is not a solution, it is not an end result, but it is a process through which you are likely to achieve what is common to the people.

The Pacific Way concept, when at the end of a discussion they would all agree in one thing. Does it ends with consensus, the Talanoa?

Some say that Talanoa is building consensus. I don...’t like that, because consensus is a western concept, and too often you see the regional meeting of the leaders, the Forum and other regional meetings, some of our leaders just sit back and never say anything, then the chairman says, we have a consensus. Some times it is abused, that is not what I mean by Talanoa, because sometimes we have a meeting and we don't say anything and the chairperson would say, and now we have a consensus. This is not true, Talanoa is not about consensus, the outcome is not predetermined and you have your faith and trust and respect the people eventually there will be an outcome. If you respect and trust the people you are talking with you will get the outcome. To me ultimately base on respect and trust. That is what Talanoa is.

So how to you draw a conclusion. For example, in a meeting discussion about reform, and various people throw in ideas, then finally you decide that this is the way to go?

No, this is how it works. I listen to you telling me your story about political reform, what you like and don't like, the things that make you happy, I can listen to your story. After that I would say to you here is the main structure of what you have been saying, then you say to me that is what I meant, so that becomes the raw material. So that if I made a recommendation on what Pesi said, it becomes the basis, it does not mean that what you were telling me would become the recommendation but what you were telling me would become the information upon which the recommendation is made.

Talanoa, in the heart

So I suppose with the Talanoa, you have got the innermost feeling of the people?

That is what I am trying to do because there are two words to Talanoa, one tala and the other one noa, but you know noa to the the Tongans means nothing, talk about nothing. But my philosophical interpretation is noa lies in your heart, it does not have any bias or discrimination. What we want to get is that pure feeling that come out of your noa. The inner feeling of your heart, that is what we are looking at. It does not mean we will get everything, but if we get 10% that is better than nothing, that is what we are trying to get, right to the loto. What is the tala, the story of your loto. What is it that drives you that should be the basis of reconstruction of the recommendation. It should give us a sense of national unity, the basis for social and economic development. It must be the loto, because the Talanoa says that the basis of anything must come from your loto. Whether we are talking about constitutional change, political reform, or social, the only thing that counts is what comes from your loto, and only through Talanoa you can get into the loto. Very difficult for meetings, very difficult for negotiation, very difficult for deliberation to reveal the loto. Talanoa is the philosophical under-pinning of this exercise.

How are you going to get to the noa, when say for example you started by saying stating the objective of your discussion?

It is not going to be like that. It is going to be like this, I'll say Pesi we are we are doing some work and this is the nature of the work we are doing, and we will be interested to hear from you how you feel about the country, how you feel about things in your village, in your island, you know how do you feel about government, all sorts of things. It is very open. Well Steven, I am a fisherman but I will tell you about fish, but when you start facilitating, then you start to see that some aspect of your story relates to that. Facilitating is the main task to capture the main story.

Looking at the whole Tongan population, what percentage of the population do you think you can get to their noa?

Well, it is not a scientific survey. Say if we have a meeting at Lapaha we don't expect all the people of Lapaha to attend.

Later in this process if the committee deems necessary to carry out an opinion poll and then we will decide, but the most important thing is to hear the stories of the people.