I refer to the letter published in yesterday’s paper regarding last week’s column, with specific reference to the investments of Forney Enterprises and others up on Santo.
My response to the phantom writer will be very brief.
The column of 19th July 2019 the phantom writer referred to was very clear in its intention: the consequences of local consumption on “family finances, social issues and general health with observable linkages to NCD’s”.
I would ask the phantom ‘Concerned Citizen’ to go back and re-read the article in that light. In the article I quoted the words of one of our most senior medical doctors in Vanuatu to substantiate these claims.
Therefore, I stand by the contents of the said article.
Last week’s article was objectively from the point of view of foreign direct investment (FDI). And there was no value-judgement in the article as regards local consumption, which the phantom ‘Concerned Citizen’ appears to be entangled with. Obviously, he does not understand issues of objectivity and subjectivity. So, the phantom ends up making ‘Tanna Soup’ of content and intentions. I don’t blame him for his shallowness.
Regarding “Border re-opening” — that part of last week’s article was intended to contribute to the ongoing policy debate within Government. Policy is a messy subject, and policy discussions consider all arguments on both sides, etc before concrete decisions are made. Again, I don’t hold any grudges against the phantom’s shallowness here again.