ADMINISTRATION PROPOSES PESTICIDE BILL

Governor Lolo Matalasi Moliga has resubmitted new legislation regarding pesticide usage and the safety of the food supply. In a letter to Fono leaders, Lolo noted that this bill seeks to incorporate federal pesticide tolerances pursuant to 40 CFR 80 for regulating pesticides used by farmers, and setting limits on the amount of pesticides that may remain in or on foods marketed in the territory — called “tolerances”.

Furthermore the safety of the local produce grown in the territory is of utmost importance especially since most of the produce is consumed by the children through the ASG school lunch program.

“The United States Environmental Protection Agency (ASEPA) establishes tolerances for each pesticide based on the potential risks to human health posed by that particular pesticide. “These tolerances are contained in 40CFR 180 and serve to protect the public from unsafe levels of pesticide consumption.”

Lolo asked the legislature for their support for the proposed amendment, and noted that if adopted, it would serve as a guideline to which the farmers must adhere when treating crops with pesticides, as well as providing the territory with the mechanism by which to measure the safety of food prepared for human consumption.

BILL TO RAISE SMALL CLAIMS LIMIT RE-SUBMITTED

A bill to raise the small claims limit for banks, savings and loan institutions, and amend the local statute on the litigation of small claims has been resubmitted by Governor Lolo M. Moliga. In the 33rd legislature, House Legal Affairs Chair, Vui Florence Tuaumu Saulo tabled this measure noting that there were a lot of loopholes and a lot of questions posed about this bill, and therefore the committee agreed to table this measure. The Senate also tabled it.

In a letter to the Fono, Lolo stated that small claims courts serves as a useful venue for parties to litigate smaller claims of less than $3,000. “It provides parties the opportunity to have an impartial adjudication of their case in a less costly manner than in a traditional court, as the court fees are lower, the pleadings are informal and no lawyers are allowed to appear on behalf of the parties.

Lolo said the $3,000 limit however does prove burdensome to many defendants, particularly those who are being sued to collect bank loans. For claims more than $3,000 the bank must sue in District Court. This adds considerable expense to the cost of collection as the defendants become liable for the legal fees and court costs associated with proceedings in District Court.

It also delays the collection process, through management of the court’s calendar which increases the accrued interest at a higher, promissory note rate. Lolo pointed out to the Speaker the said reasons are behind the move to propose legislation to increase the limit for the proceedings of cases in small claims court on behalf of banks and savings and loan institutions from $3,000 to $7,500.

According to the letter the banks already process cases through Small Claims Court at the lower limit relying on their collection officers, and by raising the limit to $7,500 the banks can continue to do so without the expense of lawyers and higher costs being added on the amounts owing by their customer. “We believe this is a case where everyone involved receives benefits from the proposed change. It is more efficient for the banks and less costly for the customers.”