Whoever coined the term ‘political football’ must have done so in the months following an election.

The metaphor fits perfectly what we’ve seen from both sides of politics so far who’ve been circling each other but who are yet to engage.

Trying to distract away from public sympathy about asking a man to resign from his job? Instead of being transparent with the public about why this was a difficult decision but one that was always going to have to be made; instead we saw a vague statement; a kick into touch. The Minister redeems herself in today's edition by playing a completely transparent hand about the negotiations that preceded the C.E.O.'s resignation, treating readers and voters, as they should be, like adults.

Against the backdrop about an encroaching series of uncomfortable questions about the sudden holding to ransom of files relating to the previous Government’s dealings with the World Bank, we saw a long bomb on the front page of today’s paper.(“Fiame sidesteps same sex marriage debate”).

Rugby, of course, was invented by the Reverend William Webb Ellis, a man whose loathing of kicking was legendary. It did too much to take the game backwards, legend has him saying. The more we  see things playing out the more we agree. 

Let’s examine the latest long bomb put up by the opposition for seemingly no other purpose than distraction 

Making an issue out of gay marriage from thin air was nothing if not impressively audacious.

Tuilaepa is pushing the Faatuatua ile Atua Samoa ua Tasi (F.A.S.T.) party for its stance on same sex marriage? Why now of all times?

The last time the issue was revisited Tuilaepa definitively relayed the public opinion by saying that there were absolutely no plans to ever allow a change to the definition of marriage. 

“I pray that this is the last time that these issues are brought to the Government and my attention because it’s a useless waste of Government stationery and time to acknowledge or even to respond to such suggestions,” he said. 

And yet now it is Tuilaepa himself who is bringing up the issue, without any seeming pressing need to do so.

Samoa’s marital laws, of course, do not expressly ban same sex marriage per se. But the law on same sex relationships is beyond clear: they are simply not legal. 

Same sex couples are forbidden from entering the matrimonial bed, so is it a pressing issue whether we explicitly amend the marriage act to spell out that they cannot do so in black letter law?

If it was a particularly important issue, one which, say, we might have seen the slightest bit of public conversation about before, during or after the recent election campaign then perhaps it might be a reasonable point for public debate. 

The definition of marriage carries powerful weight as an issue of culture and custom. Raising it politically is a surefire means of gaining attention. But Tuilaepa himself has correctly identified the issue as a non-starter in Samoa and a waste of political time. Given it featured not at all in F.A.S.T.’s manifesto or has been raised by its Ministers since it is confounding that he would try to revive debate on what was a settled issue in national politics. 

Until there is a sign of a serious attempt to change the law or appetite for public debate on the issue then his statements about it remain an uncloaked distraction that cannot be read as anything other than a political maneuver. 

In fact, if marriage laws were so pressing Tuilaepa would have been in a perfect position to change this nation’s laws to strengthen the definition of marriage in law. In fact, he had over two decades to do so,

And yet we saw no movement on the issue during Tuilaepa’s time in Government.

These distractions, such as his alleged feminist conspiracy, in his calculations, do not reach the ears of whom he regards as his core constituents.

But they hurt our reputation on the international stage. His remarks about the New Zealand Prime Minister belittled the reputation of this nation not only in that country but they became top global news in nations such as the United Kingdom and Australia.

Does he care a hang at all about people’s respect for Samoa (already tarnished by issues such as being designated a tax haven), a country that rarely enters the international news cycle, for short-term political tactics. 

But moving onto the other side, as we have said before, the months after an election are not for nothing known as the honeymoon period. 

The nation’s budget came before the F.A.S.T. Cabinet this week for approval. We fully expect there to have been surprises uncovered.

One of the privileges of entering as a new Government is that, for a time at least, problems such as in the nation’s finances can be fairly attributed to the actions of the previous administration. The financially devastating decision to enter into a lease with Samoa Airways is proof positive of that. 

But there will be a time soon when F.A.S.T. will have to own decisions that have happened under its own watch.

Which is why we have been so disappointed that old political reflexes to provide the public with as little information seem to die hard even now when dealing with comparatively minor issues such as the finance chief’s resignation. 

The passage of the budget is the  start of our journey towards real politics again.

All we can hope for is that our politicians think of Reverend Webb Ellis’ when they engage with the public: the superior game focuses on moving forward, not distracting from play.