Concerns are mounting regarding the Fijian government’s recent expansion of its Cabinet, marked by the appointment of new ministers and assistant ministers. Nilesh Lal, the Executive Director of Dialogue Fiji, has described the Cabinet as “bloated,” highlighting that never before has such a high proportion of Members of Parliament been appointed to ministerial roles, especially at a time when everyday Fijians are facing severe austerity measures, including a significant 66% increase in the VAT rate.

Lal contends that a more appropriate size for Fiji’s Cabinet would be between 12 to 15 ministers, suggesting that the current composition is disproportionate to the country’s population and economic challenges. He expressed skepticism about the roles being played by the assistant ministers, noting that it remains unclear how these appointments contribute to governance and address pressing issues such as poverty, the high cost of living, escalating crime rates, and deteriorating public services.

This sentiment is echoed by Opposition MP Premila Kumar, who has characterized the Cabinet reshuffle as a “sham,” asserting that it primarily serves to shield underperforming ministers rather than enhance governance. Kumar emphasized the contradiction between this expansion and the government’s previous commitments to reduce its size.

Former Prime Minister Mahendra Chaudhry has also criticized the Cabinet expansion as financially irresponsible, underlining a disconnect with the urgent needs of the populace.

Despite these criticisms, there is a silver lining in the ongoing dialogue surrounding the size of the Cabinet. The growing public discourse may compel the government to reassess its priorities, leading to greater accountability and responsiveness to citizens’ needs. As voices of dissent amplify, there is hope that reforms may be initiated that could realign governmental action with the aspirations of ordinary Fijians, ultimately enhancing public services and governance.

In summary, while the increase in the number of ministers poses significant questions about governance priorities, it also paves the way for constructive dialogue and potential reforms aimed at better serving the public interest during these challenging economic times.