Editor,

I think that it's time for a little truth-telling here, and the news is not good.

As a case in point, let me cite an article which appeared recently in Matangi Tonga: The article refers to the sale (for $1) of a "sub-standard . . . derelict and partially completed hotel" to the government of Tonga.

This news items points to "bad times" in the Tongan economy, for one thing. Unfortunately, it also points to a few fundamental problems for the Tongan government.

Regarding the "sub-standard" hotel, there are 3 obvious problems: One, the Westpac Bank of Tonga suffered a "multi-million dollar" loss, when the project developer "went into receivership six months after failing to repay its loan."

This loss could possibly result in an effect on the Tongan community at large, because the bank will have to "make it up" somewhere else . . . maybe thru higher fees for service, maybe thru higher interest rates on loans . . . something. The bottom line for the bank is making a profit . . . somebody has to pay . . . and it won't be Westpac Bank of Tonga, that's for sure. You and I are going to pay for it, one way or another.

Secondly, why was this loan funded in the first place? When occupancy rates in existing tourist facilities are so low, why did it seem logical to build yet another hotel? Only the lender can answer that, but the situation begs another question: Where is the "grand plan" for the continued viability of the tourist industry in Tonga? How many tourist facilities do we actually need? And who is "watching out" for that? Certainly not the Tonga Visitors Bureau, or any other aspect of government, for that matter.

There is no control or restraint on development of tourist facilities, especially in Tongatapu and Vava'u. Hotels, restaurants, bars, resorts, guesthouses, etc are proliferating . . . but there is simply not enough "business" to support them all, given the number of tourists who actually come to Tonga. There are far too many start-up enterprises looking for "a piece of the action". The problem is, there's not enough "action". This can only result in failed businesses and loan defaults. Development is good, but unrealistic expectations are not.

The third problem revealed by the failure of the Sopu hotel is this: although there supposedly are "strict building codes", this particular building went all the way to near-completion before it's construction was determined to be "sub-standard".

How did that happen?

There's only one possible answer to that question: it was not properly inspected during the course of construction. Either the inspectors were incompetent, or dishonest, or it was not inspected at all. That's a problem for government.

There is absolutely no point in having "strict building codes" if the codes are not enforced. That means that government must provide trained building inspectors, who are empowered to "shut it down" if code requirements are not met. And there
must be enough qualified inspectors to do the job in a timely manner.

A law "on the books" is not enough. Either the law means something, in terms of real outcome, or it doesn't. And, unfortunately, it would appear that it doesn't.

Now, this brings us to the greater issue of "the rule of law." Much has been said recently in this regard: "The laws and procedures are in place," for example.

That's fine, but if the government does not effectively provide for the enforcement and implementation of these laws and procedures, then there is, essentially, no law.

As we all know, from the tragedy of the MV Ashika, the consequences of that failure can be tragic.

P. A. Langi

Fanga Falikipako
Ha'apai