Fiji's Family Network
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Now that the dust have settled over Fiji's membership of the PIF, what happens to Kiribati's stand and the rest of the betelnut brigade? Will they get rewarded and have another free get together in Fiji?
I think whatever transpires within Fiji now, is totally 100% up to the Soldiers !
They created this mess and only they can put a stop to it.
With the end of the Peace Keeping now in sight, perhaps that will be the catalyst to get them moving in the right direction again.
Fiji cannot borrow anymore from the Chinese Banks, because it has no Capital and no substantial Investments going on in the Country and the $150,000,000 loan to the Yanks id due.
Aiyaz has his knickers in a twist because the Unions won't budge.
The FNPF is dying a slow death as unemployment and poverty continue to rise exponentially.
There is no longer fear of Frank and his goons, but contempt for them and what they have done to Fiji and its people and the way they have disrespected them and abused them.
The anger is rising now and soon will reach uncontrollable levels and that is the time when the Military should arrest Frank and Co.
Tic Toc, as the saying goes.
Questions raised over legitimacy of Fiji poll Radio Australia News
Fiji's Ministry of Information says a recent opinion poll shows the interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama is more popular than Australia's Prime Minister.
Permanent secretary Sharon Smith-Johns said a recent Lowy Institute opinion poll showed Commodore Bainimarama had a 66 per cent approval rating.
She said it showed he was almost three times more popular with people in Fiji than Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard is among Australians.
"Finally someone has taken the onus to come here, do a survey and find out what the people think," she said.
"The people of Fiji think we're doing a great job, [and are] supportive of this government and of the PM."
But the national secretary of the Fiji Trades Union Congress, Felix Anthony, told Pacific Beat he did not think the people who answered the survey questions were being honest.
"This poll, I think at best would only indicate how intimidated people are," he said.
The comment was echoed by the International Commission of Jurists in Australia.
The organisation's president, John Dowd, told Pacific Beat Fiji was operating under an illegal constitution and that the legal fraternity was powerless to take action.
"You'd have to say they are intimidated," he said.
"They can see the writing on the wall, they know that if any of them speak out in Fiji they will be targeted themselves and I perfectly understand the fear that there must be in the legal profession."
Lowy Institute has never had any Credibility. Its all propaganda. Beats all logic that Frank Lowy who is a capitalist and than runs a very left wing Institute, who are closely connected to the Unions in Australia. Yet, The Unions in Australia are against the Bainimarama Regime, while the Lowy Institute is more pro Regime. Defies logic. hahaha.. Weird Much.
September 9, 2011 12:12 AMTappoo Hater said...
The Lowry Institute survey findings is the biggest JOKE. The regime is getting closer to their demise with all this fraudulent polls. Long live democracy!The Oracle said...
Wadan Narsey's analysis is spot on. All Tebbutt Research surveys have a pre-determined agenda tailored to meet a desired outcome.
Just look at the questions!! How are ordinary Fijians expected to answer except by YES or NO.
Examples of past Tebbutt Research include:
Do you listen to FM96? (No options about other radio stations you may listen to or why you prefer them over FM96).
Do you drink Punja's Ceylon tea? (No options about other brands. And if your answer is NO, then they skip a section and take you on to another question - again, about Punja's products)
So, the desired poll outcome is evident - it's tailored to meet the expectations of the organisation footing the survey bill!!!
I don't know if Caz Tebbutt is indeed pro-Bainimarama but I do know her survey's are "stacked". I've had to point survey deficiencies out to her young and often apologetic "researchers" on several occasions. Now, I don't even bother answering their questionnaires!!!
What Lowy should ask is whether the people in Fiji know that Fiji has been denied $28 million euros for sugar because they don't accept the situation in Fiji. Caz should go take a poll with Cabinet and see how many of that bunch know how that affects the 22,000 families that rely on the industry. LOWY CAZ and FIJI Government - go live their life for a week only and tell me what you feel!!
And I forgot to add, now that Barrosa of EU has spoken that millions not coming because they can't accept the situation in Fiji, what has the mouthpiece to say LOL. After his jaunt to Africa, FB's mouthpiece released statements saying ACP would lobby for Fiji to get its share of the Euros....wishful thinking LOL
No one,absolutely no one can be in their right mind to believe anything this research is showing.My goodness after all we have been thru ,and after what we know first hand,the human rights abuses,the rise in poverty,unemployment,abuse of taxpayers money,nepotism,deteriorating health services,PER,shutting up unions...etc...etc.Why didn't the survey ask these questions???
Or may I suggest that if Lowy wants to get some credibility back they should do another survey on the issues I have mentioned .This survey really hurts us b'cos nothing like this can happen in Austrailia.We are a poor nation and have become more poor after the coup and these developed countries are having a field day doing such surveys.What is with the Austrailian people?Can't you see that we are sufferring.If you can't help then please don't damage us further.
There a few questions that need be asked about this survey. The first is was it carried out with the approval of the regime. With the tight censorship in place, it’s hard to imagine people being allowed to go around asking questions about the approval rating of a tin-pot dictator without formal permission. That’s not the way tin-pot dictatorships work.
Secondly, if the regime did approve the survey, what conditions did they impose? Did they supply any of the people administering the survey? It looks like the questions were translated into the two major vernaculars by the people conducting the survey. Was there an approved translation? If so, it should be presented with the report. If not, a lot of responsibility rests with the people entrusted to carry out the survey. If these have been provided by, say the Ministry of Information, there’s a lot of scope for the wording to be badly twisted.
So the final question is: was this study commissioned by the regime itself and published by the Lowy Institute or was it commissioned by the Lowy Institute?
The front cover, covered in a picture of the tin-pot dictator himself shows all the signs of having been approved by the regime. Besides,the 82 percent approval rating of the regime’s education and 71 percent for transport are simply impossible to believe. One egg too many for this pudding.
The Regime’s propaganda rag touts the survey as a poll by the Lowy Institute, but that’s NOT what it says in their report. They launched the report, which is attributed to Tebbutt Research.
Mr Lowy, is a Jew. How would he feel if 61% of people surveyed said that Hitler was good for the Jews?
So why come and tell us that another pispot dictator is good for us?
Tebbutt Research is obviously filled with people who are blinded by greed and money.
-Valataka na Dina.
NOTHING COMES OUT FROM A COUP IS CREDIBLE BECAUSE ITS EXECUTION IS WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE.
IF WE GET THIS RIGHT THEN WE CAN TALK POLLS.
NO COUP IS EVER RIGHT AND JUST - ALL COUPS ARE WRONG AND BAD AND DESTRUCTIVE TO HUMAN LIVES.
THANK YOU AGAIN PROFESSOR WADAN FOR YOUR COMMENTARIES.
YOU KEEP NAILING THEM ON THE HEAD LIKE THIS THE ILLEGAL REGIME WILL GO MAD AND ANOTHER 360 DEGREES ACHIEVING NOTHING.
There are a few fundermental issues you have to sort out before staring any form of research - or poll.
1. one is have the correct /right sample size so as to reflect the sum of the total of what you sampling!
THIS POLL DOES NOT DO THAT-TOO SMALL A SAMPLE SIZE TO MAKE ANY BENEFICIAL CONCLUSIONS! Almost boarders on heresay! You might have just stood outside the market in Suva & asked everyone that passes by the questions on the military with the hope that they will be honest in their opinion-Yeh in front of all the people! You must be joking.
2. In what language was the poll conducted -Just English? There are various language & dialets spoken in Fiji you may ask a question in English which totally means something else for someone whose mouth tongue is not English!
3.Was bias ever considered when taking this poll when it came to asking questions on the Regime or Bainimarama? Who were the supporters of Qarase ,Chaudry-which areas in Fiji did they reside in? Did they all get a chance?
4. Whats the racial breakdown of those polled? Whose paid for the Poll??
5.Too many issues or "comfounders" to say anything more but if any student of Statistics uses this as an assignent they will basically get a Pass mark of 1.5 out of 10. That is for wasting their time asking a 1000+ people(who also ended up getting their time wasted) answering the questions!For all you know the people answering were army personnel or retired army people??
6. But i would love to know HOW MANY PEOPLE DECLINED TO TAKE PART IN THE POLL AT THE ONSET WHEN ASKED! That single figure will tell me more than all the numbers they have PUBLISHED.
7.HOW MAY DECIDED TO WITHDRAW FROM THE POLLS-WHEN THE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED! That single figure provides more answers than all my questions they have setup for the polls in reagards to: Bainimaramas leadership, comparisons as PM, military involvement etc.
In conclusion these Aussies still think people who come from 3 world countries are dopes and this is a very good example where polls are used to benefit a CAUSE-done all the time, done everytime only people they fooling are the FOOLS!But the beauty of it not too many of our politicians have had the courage to ask-they all took the polls/research results and accepeted it as the TRUTH or squed it to suit their own means well you now all know difference!
Professor Narsey's analysis goes a long way to right the askewed findings of the Tebutt research. But really any of us in Fiji could tell it was meant to lift Frank up. Only the most naive would have accepted this sample survey as majority view of just a thousand people. Now if was100,000 that might be a different case.
When was this Tebutt survey carried out in Fiji? I never heard anything about it until it was mentioned by the international media.
It would be interesting to see the people surveyed and find out exactly who commissioned the Lowly Institute to carry out this survey.
Ni bula vinaka Naita,
The survey are only for military puppet, their family and those who could not understand the question so the Lowy Institute can manipulate the data to fit their purpose.
Ni bula Naita,
Yes we were surprised to hear about the survey because we hardly heard anything about it until the results came out. I will try to get feedback from Tebutt and the Lowly Institute because the results are highly suspicious given the time the results came out. What needs to be investigated is the people who funded Lowly and the Tebutt polls team in Fiji.
67% my foot! Ok, GO ALL BLACKS!..and Fiji too!
Auckland (AFP) - - European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said Thursday he saw few signs that Fiji's "repressive" military regime was moving towards democracy.
Barroso said Europe, which has suspended a total of 80 million euros ($113 million) in development aid for Fiji since a 2006 military coup, intended to maintain pressure on Suva to restore democracy.
The European Union cannot turn a blind eye to issues such as human rights and the rule of law when allocating its aid budget, the head of the EU's executive arm said.
"Today we see little, if any, positive developments (in Fiji), the repressive regime remains in place, the socio-economic situation has worsened," he said in a speech at Auckland University in New Zealand, where he is attending the Pacific Island Forum (PIF).
"Against this background there is an evident need for supporting the Fijian people but keeping the pressure on the regime.
"That is why we will continue our search for a solution that returns democracy to the people of Fiji."
Written by: Eurasia ReviewSeptember 6, 2011
By José Manuel Durão Barroso, President of the European Commission
Keynote Address at Australia National University
European Commission President José Manuel Barroso
It is a great pleasure to be here ladies and gentlemen. After a rescheduling in 2009 this visit is long overdue and one that I am personally very pleased to be undertaking.
Let me echo the earlier acknowledgement of the First Australians, and may I also recognise the hundreds of people joining today through internet live-streaming, not only in Australia but across Asia and the Pacific.
The modern links between the peoples of Europe and Australia are deep and well-known. 70 per cent of Australians have European ancestry and we host many of each other’s largest expatriate communities, quite aside from our deep economic and political ties. Even our hosts today, the Australian National University, were witnesses of the European Community from its inception, through Vice Chancellor Sir Douglas Copland, who led the Australian delegation observing our processes in 1951.
Since the last official visit of a serving European Commission President, 30 years ago, our world has changed dramatically and at an increasing pace. From Communism’s collapse to the rise of the global economy and spread of information technology, the backdrop to our relationship has transformed.
Amidst this transformation the European Union sees Australia a natural, solid and essential global partner.
We see much to admire in Australia. With a diverse and growing population, and an economy reformed to meet the challenges of globalisation head-on, Australia shows it is possible to combine economic reform with strong social protections and progress. Australia’s continued economic growth is testament to decades of policy innovation and discipline, helping Australia to its rightful role as significant actor in this dynamic region.
The European Union has responded to a different context and holds its own lessons for those who seek freedom, peace and prosperity. As Prime Minister Hawke noted in 1985, the EU is “a triumph of enlightened self-interest over self-defeating pursuit of the narrowest national interest”.
Though we are still building our Union, we have achieved a great deal. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, for example:
We have grown from 12 member states to 27, with more applying to join. Our Union today stretches from the Arctic to the edges of Asia and Africa.
We have built the world’s largest single market – some three times the size of China’s – and we are its biggest trading bloc.
We have created a common currency that increasingly acts as a global reserve.
And today we are actively improving our economic governance and foreign policy capabilities to match the new global realities.
If you have ever travelled to Europe you have experienced the benefits of our Union; from the visa-free Schengen zone to the convenience and efficiency of the Euro. And if you have not had the chance to visit, you still receive the benefits; from six decades of peace to the stability gained from the spreading of democratic liberal values.
To put that in an overall strategic context, the 27 member states of the European Union are sharing sovereignty. We do this because it is clear to us that in order to secure our social market model and global interests we must act as more than the sum of our parts, and be an effective participant in multilateral fora.
Indeed, that is why we value our relationship with natural partners like Australia, not only bilaterally but through forums such as the United Nations and G20. In a world as inter-connected as ours, we reject utterly the notion that geography might influence who our friends and partners are.
It is certainly true that the world is experiencing a great rebalancing of power, mostly centred on Asia. It is also true that Australia is ahead of the global pace in embracing this shift. We view favourably Australia’s increasing economic links and participation in Asian regional fora, and want to connect with your experience in the region.
Let me assure you that the European Union affirms the rise of Asia as a win-win situation for the world, which Europe wants to be a part of. These shifts do not mean Europe is irrelevant, either to Australia or global affairs. In fact the rise of Asia and other emerging economies is also directly linked to the policies of open economies, free trade, stability and development assistance that the European Union has championed over the years.
Geopolitical power and challenges need to be seen from increasingly broad perspectives. While the European Union’s geo-political power is not military in nature, it is not limited to soft and economic power. Foreign policy today goes well beyond trade and peace. It stretches from climate change negotiations to migration flows to counter-terrorism to food, development and aid. On issues as diverse as competition law, industrial standards and privacy, Europe’s influence spreads virally in a way that tends to encourage a global race to the top rather than a race to the bottom.
What is relevant to the European Union’s relationship with Asia and Australia is that these are all areas where the European countries have chosen to delegate all or part of their sovereignty to the EU institutions. The European Union is as deep and real as its Member States. And so the EU’s relevance as a global actor is increasing, even as the relative influence of countries in Asia and groupings such as ASEAN is rising also.
Recent substantial overhaul of our structures and institutions, primarily through the Lisbon Treaty, allows us to increasingly act with the coordinated and united voice that the world seeks from Europe. In coming years and decades this will enable the European Union to increase its global footprint – extending beyond its place as an economic superpower.
This does not mean that the solutions to Europe’s challenges can emerge overnight. The basic legitimacy of the EU comes from our Member States. This involves political constraints, and the obvious complications of co-ordinating 27 nations using more than 20 languages. We aren’t a super-state and we never will be. But at the same time we are much more than an inter-governmental forum.
This visit is an example of how the European Commission is determined that the current crisis will not force the European Union into an endless cycle of introspection. Europe’s future lies in adjusting its engagement and role in world affairs, not in internal squabbles. To that end we are moving towards convincing medium and long term approaches to both national budgets and Eurozone governance; the full impact of this progress becoming apparent over the next three years.
The European Union is fully aware that Australia is also adjusting its global engagement and is not content to play a narrow regional role. As an active middle power and an essential partner in international forums such as the UN and G20, and events from Afghanistan to the Arab Spring, the EU and Australia stand together on the global stage.
Let me underline my strong belief that our relations are on a firm footing. We appreciate that Australia is taking a pro-active approach to its relationship with the European Union. And we deeply appreciate working together around the world to defend and promote our fundamental values. These are values that Australians have twice come to Europe to secure, at severe cost.
Since the economic relationship between the EU and Australia began to take shape in the 1960s and 70s, the old notions of Fortress Europe and Fortress Australia have disappeared. In recent decades our collaborations have been ever closer and fairer across a growing number of fields. From higher education to science and technology; aviation security to development cooperation – even in agriculture where some differences remain. In fact, Australia and the EU have no fewer than 10 separate dialogues running.
Through our Partnership Framework, a welcome step forward in 2008, we are already giving significant emphasis to our shared global challenges in our formal relationship.
Building on this momentum the Commission, like the Australian Government believes it is time to go further – to open a new chapter in the relationship.
This is why I welcomed Prime Minister Gillard’s proposal to upgrade relations, made during the Asia-Europe summit last October. The European Commission has responded positively by recommending to EU Member States that we open negotiations with Australia for a treaty-level Framework Agreement: to govern and give impetus to our relationship.
Yesterday I had very productive exchanges with Prime Minister Gillard in this regard. We agree that we must anchor our relationship for the long term, and our challenge is now to transfer our shared interests into shared treaty-level commitments and action.
These processes naturally take time, but I believe if we can reach agreement on the far-reaching exchange of highly classified information, as we have done in July 2011, then we have good hopes of progress. I believe we have a lot to learn and gain from each other.
Such an agreement would provide a basis for closer cooperation on a wide range of sectoral policies. From education and science through to counter-terrorism and also the fight against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Cooperation in the Pacific is another key component of the strategic partnership between Australia and the EU that would be assisted by an updated Framework.
As by far the largest global development donor – taking account of Commission and Member States contributions – it is no surprise that the EU is also the second-largest aid donor in the Pacific after Australia. Together, by joining our political and financial forces alongside those of New Zealand, we can maximise the absorption of funds and our overall impact. Most significantly by promoting good governance – in particular Fiji’s return to democracy – and regional integration; while also mitigating climate change, and attaining the Millennium Development Goals. This would build on the enhanced forms of coordination foreseen in the Cairns Compact – such as joint programming and delegated cooperation agreements.
More broadly, Australia and the European Union share the objectives of enjoying peace, security and trade with Asia. The change taking place in Asia is unfolding at a rapid pace, and as I have said earlier we see these changes and Australia’s involvement in the region as positive.
The EU is building multi-dimensional relationships with Asian countries, determined that we should listen and learn from each others’ experiences. Such stronger relationships are essential to deal with global challenges. Though we were ASEAN’s first dialogue partner in 1972, in the past the EU’s relationships in Asia have been largely economic. We need to go beyond a purely mercantilist approach and engage politically to shape collectively a new global governance.
The direct dialogue offered through ASEM – the forum that gathers all 27 EU Member States plus virtually all Asian States – is essential for bringing about these improved relationships. I am grateful that after 15 years the forum is still characterised by a sense of momentum. We must make it more effective still.
The European Union believes the forum is stronger as a result of Australia’s participation, and also because of the broader scope of issues now covered. I am thinking of course of issues such as climate change which force us to address all the aspects of our relationship together, and the fact that security issues are now on the agenda of ASEM. The European Union is of course willing to play a role in regional security in Asia as it has done, in the role of honest broker, over issues such as Aceh.
We realise that our Union does not serve as a direct model for Asian regional integration. But at the same time it remains something of a catalyst and reference point for those working towards closer relationships in the region. Those relationships may exist from government to government, business to business or people to people. They will take time to develop, but I have no doubt the will to develop them is there.
Moving onto one of the most complex and lasting issues of our time. A new Framework Agreement between the European Union and Australia would also increase the scope for closer cooperation on energy and climate issues.
The green economy is the economic growth story of Europe’s future, and indeed the world. That is the only way to satisfy the aspirations of the nine or more billions who will live on this planet in 2050.
Our approach to climate change is therefore built on science but tailored to economic realities and possibilities. You could say Europe is pursuing green reforms and innovation for three reasons: science, self-interest and our sense of responsibility to future generations.
Australia must naturally define its own interests, and pursue them through the mechanisms of its choice. But it is clear that carbon pricing and trading is an opportunity for nations to firmly stake a place at the centre of the next great economic and political theme faced jointly by all of us. Those that create and dominate the new markets supporting this transition to the low-carbon economy stand to gain a great deal: competitiveness, growth and jobs.
The pricing and trading of carbon enables more efficient markets and forces us to allocate our resources more effectively, for example by increasing capital investment in new technologies in the manufacturing sector. In this way a carbon price helps us deal with the pressures of the globalised economy as well as the environmental threat. No nation which looks to trade as a means of to prosperity can afford to overlook this.
For these reasons the European Union welcomes the Australian Government’s efforts to tackle the carbon issue, and to develop a policy that will over time link to our own.
In saying this I must stress that our respective approaches to emissions reduction are not at odds with the need for a global agreement. In particular a global agreement that includes collectively measurable and verifiable emissions reductions from all major emitters.
Finally, let me conclude that the European Union – Australia relationship has huge potential, which we are only just starting to unlock. I have travelled here because I want Australians and the Australian Government to know that the European Union is committed to achieving this potential.
I also want to convey the message that despite occasional portrayals, the European Union works effectively. It has worked for sixty years as a driver of peace and prosperity through compromise.
It is these aspirations that we will bring to the table as we continue to deepen our relationship with Australia. We have long shared interests; we have been building closer relations; it is now time to build on that through sharing further action.
For a European, Australia is as far away as you can get. However, I must confess that so far, in particular here at the ANU, I have been feeling as if I were at home.
Please click on link below for statement:
File name: FTUC Press Release - 08.09.11.pdf:
Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/file/7n1dh8lv9db9vpn
The Fiji Trade Union Congress has called for immediate free and fair elections under the 1997 Constitution and return to democracy.
In a hard hitting statement issued by the FTUC, the National Secretary Felix Anthony stated that: "there is a general consensus amongst the people from all walks of life in this nation that Fiji must return immediately to democratic rule. Fiji cannot progress or develop without democracy. This is evident with the very low investment, high unemployment, ever rising inflation giving rise to unprecedented poverty in Fiji. The inflation rate in our calculation is hovering around 12%-15% and the cost of Consumer items have risen to 55%-60% within a year. The medical care in hospitals are pathetic due to lack of funds. Even the stationery cannot be bought since funds are not available. However, the bigger issue is that technical support services like laboratory and pharmacies in major hospitals lack basic items to function properly".
On the suspect recent Lowy Institute Fiji Poll 2011, Mr Anthony said that "the regime's plan for Elections and return to democratic rule in 2014 is not credible, not sustainable and therefore not in the best interest of Fiji. Now that the Regime is bloating with a recent suspect survey claiming 65% support amongst the citizens, there is no reason why it should not call elections immediately and seek the mandate of the people to continue doing what it is perceiving to do".
Scoring a direct hit and bruising the regime's nose, Mr Anthony added that "the The fact is that junta has lost the trust and confidence of the people of Fiji and therefore cannot and should not embark on a process and exercise of amending the Constitution or the electoral system prior to the next election. An essential role of the 1997 Constitution was to establish and consolidate a national consensus on how Fiji should be governed. It succeeded in its aim and helped to put aside the divisions and the bitterness of 1987 Coups and subsequent policies of discrimination. The 1997 Constitution provided a basis under which all of Fiji’s Communities had lived together peacefully under a system of government and governance. The Constitution must be reinstated as a first priority as its represents a consensus of all the communities in Fiji. We, therefore, must oppose any attempt by an illegitimate regime to change the constitution or the electoral process. The regime needs to now get a clear mandate from the people of Fiji to embark on this process. We therefore call for an immediate return to democracy and if the junta has faith in itself and the “Lowy Report”, it should seek the mandate of the people".
On constitutional changes, the statement added that: "any changes to the 1997 Constitution must involve the full democratic process including consultation without fear and intimidation with the people of Fiji. If this junta is sincere and believes that it is doing the right thing for Fiji then it should have no hesitation in going to the people and seeking the mandate from the people of Fiji. They should not have any difficulty in getting the mandate from the people, if indeed the people believe that they are doing the right thing. The only reason that we believe that this regime will not seek the mandate of the people is because they either have ulterior motives or lack confidence in themselves".
On elections and voter registration, the hard facts were stated with Mr Anthony adding that "we note that at the eve of the Pacific Island Forum Minister’s meeting in Auckland the regime issued a statement that voter registration for the 2014 election will begin in January next year. This is another ploy to bamboozle the public. There is not even a shred of evidence which shows that the regime is serious about holding election any time soon apart from misleading statements from various arms of the junta. People do not believe any more the propaganda put out for the public consumption. There is absolutely no preparatory work being done by the elections office and registration cannot commence unless the Constitution is in place which would include the electoral process".
The statement concluded with the following reminder to the illegal regime state that: "We the trade unions are democratic and legitimate organizations of workers who have the mandate to speak on their behalf" and that "we are, therefore, calling on the Regime to enter into immediate inclusive dialogue with all the political parties and trade unions to enable Fiji’s return to democracy as soon as possible".