Nilesh Lal, the executive director of Dialogue Fiji, has voiced significant concerns about the government’s recent proposal to revert the national fiscal year back to a January-December cycle. This announcement, made by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka during his New Year’s address, raises doubts regarding the rationale and practicality of such a change, with Lal suggesting it may be driven more by political motivations than by sound governance principles.
Lal pointed out that many effective financial systems consciously avoid concluding their fiscal years in December due to the disruptions caused by the holiday season, which commonly leads to lower productivity and slower decision-making across various institutions. He articulated that a transition back to a January-December fiscal year may lack a fundamental justification, as December typically sees a decline in institutional activities.
To strengthen his position, Lal referenced international fiscal practices, highlighting that countries like Australia and New Zealand operate on a fiscal year from July to June, while the United States federal government runs its fiscal year from October to September. These approaches are strategically designed to avoid the complications of holiday-related year-end closures, which can hinder planning, execution, and accountability.
Moreover, Lal raised concerns about the potential benefits this shift would bring to Fiji, warning against policymaking that is rooted more in nostalgia than in operational efficiency. He underscored that a desire to return to a governance style reminiscent of the 1990s overlooks substantial advancements in public finance management that have occurred since that era. Today’s governments should be focused on adapting and evolving rather than reverting to outdated methods.
In his concluding remarks, Lal asserted that any reform should be rooted in the potential for measurable improvements in fiscal management. He emphasized that change should symbolize progress and efficiency, rather than a regressive return to past practices. This perspective encourages a forward-looking approach to governance that prioritizes the advancement of effective management strategies over sentimentality.