Doing the right thing seems to be a very hard thing to do for many of our elected leaders. Look at the parliament proceedings for this week, Speaker Papalii Lio Masipau’s defiance of doing the right thing is almost legendary.

It has been a wasted week in parliament. No amendments or bills were debated. No decisions were taken that would improve the lives of people, instead the nation witnessed a circus created by some members who were attempting to bend the laws to push through their agenda. Everyone saw the demeanour of the Speaker in parliament. Was there a conflict of interest, was there bias and did the majority of the people want him removed?

The 18 members of the opposition and the 15 from the cabinet tell us that the majority wanted him to step down because of his inability to be impartial. Papalii argued that there were no grounds or provisions under the Parliamentary Standing Orders of 2021 or the Constitution to support a motion of no confidence against either the Speaker or Deputy Speaker.

He has also said that the parliament belongs to the people. Well, Mr Speaker sir, those 33 people represent 33 of the 51 constituencies and their voice is of the people. The people have spoken through their representatives. The people want the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker to step down.

The Constitution does not clearly state anything about a motion of no confidence against the two but their impartiality is now in question. It is an abuse of office and that is reason to step down.

The motion prepared by Minister Olo Fiti Va'ai outlines the grounds for the request with specific emphasis on the Speaker and Deputy Speaker’s involvement in political manoeuvres and decisions that go against the principles of a balanced and independent legislature.

The cabinet motion highlights a clear conflict of interest involving the Speaker and Deputy Speaker referencing a letter from 15 January 2025.

In this letter, the Speaker and Deputy Speaker were seen endorsing an attempt by the FAST party to remove the Prime Minister and five cabinet ministers. Olo stressed that this action undermines the impartiality of the Speaker’s office, raising questions about the fairness of the legislative process.

Furthermore, Olo argued that by engaging in these political moves, the Speaker violated the principle of separation of powers, which is crucial for maintaining the balance between the three branches of government. The Speaker's involvement in executive matters, such as endorsing a motion to remove the Prime Minister and Ministers, threatens this balance and could destabilise governance.

The office of Speaker is regarded as the highest honour that the House of Representatives can bestow upon one of its members. The Speaker’s authority is derived from the House. As the House’s spokesperson, the Speaker’s principal duty is to uphold the dignity of the House and to protect the rights and privileges of the House and its members. The most visible aspect of the Speaker’s role involves presiding over debates in the House Chamber, enforcing the standing orders adopted by the House and ensuring the orderly conduct of business.

The Speaker seeks to protect the rights of individual members to ensure they are treated fairly within the framework established by the standing orders. As a general rule, the Speaker does not participate in legislative debates or policy discussions.

What we saw this week was contradicting the way the Speaker should behave. There is no harm in admitting that there is a conflict of interest. This is doing the right thing. It looks like the only redress is going to the judiciary and as they have done before, they will solve this issue.

A happy International Women's Day to everyone.