CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Freeport, Grand Bahama
9th April 2008

It is as usual an honour and privilege to be here in Grand Bahama this evening. It was quite an odyssey getting here.  Last night, I had to abandon my plans to spend the night here because the national flag carrier had only two planes working.  The carrier was unable to give a time certain for the flight.  It was simpler to cancel and try for the first flight in the morning.  I looked at the press this morning; there is nothing there about it.  But if the PLP had been in power, you would never have heard the end of it.

There are many problems, problems that seem easy to fix, but with a government busy looking into holes, rocks and caves to find something wrong, seeking to denigrate and sully the reputation of the PLP, doing nothing for ten months but seeking to line the pockets of themselves and their supporters, is it any wonder that the problems cannot be fixed?

Did you try to use your cell phone today?  If you did, did you get through on the first try and without delay?  In Nassau, even the land line quality seems to be deteriorating: between dropped calls on the cell phone system, all circuits busy signals both on the cell system and on the land line system, is there any wonder that a national frustration is setting in.

The country is supposed to be a modern, forward moving country, with e commerce and e government and e business but did you try to get on line today?  Whether it is BTC’s DSL or Cable Bahamas’ so called “blinding fast speed”, it seems that it is very much the luck of the draw.  The BTC DSL system that I have is off line virtually one third of the time.

The level of service to correct the problems both in BTC and Cable Bahamas is poor.  Long lines if you go in personally.  Staff overwhelmed if you call by telephone.

If you read the press, there is nothing said about it.  But if it had been the PLP in office you would never have heard the end of it.

If it is not the telephones and internet that are down, then it is the cuts of electrical power.  Ask the people of Harbour Island tonight if they have power and how their power is off sometimes six or seven hours per day.  This is a tourist Mecca in The Bahamas, reportedly the home of 11 billionaires, yet we cannot keep the power on consistently and without fear of a power failure.

The government promises relief not next week, not next month, not this summer but the summer after this summer, the year 2009.

I read the press this morning; I didn’t see a thing about it.  But oh, if the PLP had been in power, you would not have heard the end of it.

These are but a few examples of where we are, and since we are in the Opposition we have not responsibility to fix these problems.  It’s Ingraham's fault and Ingraham has to fix it.  That much is plain, simple and direct.  The other day, he stood in the House of Assembly and called all PLPs fools.  Of course, it takes one to know one, and he was advised before that he ought to stand up and look in the mirror if he wants to see what he is talking about.

But that is the FNM way, nasty, filthy, dirty up your name.  They are the repository of all that is good in the world, according to their story.  But we know better.

This morning, we read how the Attorney General ended the prosecution against the alleged murderers of   Keith Carey.  They then were immediately rearrested and recharged but what we ought to ask is, why is there a preliminary inquiry when this matter is ready for the Supreme Court?  It is not fair to the family of the victim.  This matter should go directly to the Supreme Court. The PI means delay and this is the government that accused the PLP of delaying justice.  We now know that the FNM has not been able to successfully surmount and tackle the back log of cases in the Courts.

I have asked this government not to sit back and let hunger, and high power bills, and the high cost of food and gasoline kill the Bahamian people with no relief in sight or assistance from their government.  All FNM Ministers have heath insurance paid for by the government but the FNM denies health insurance to the ordinary Bahamian.  They are straight if they get sick, but they don’t want you to get straight.
 
Cast your minds back to the pre 1967 years, there was man named Stafford Sands, he was a lawyer  and a Minister in the United Bahamian Party government, the UBP, the forefather of the FNM. He sat in his office and put on his hat as a lawyer and made an application on behalf of the Grand Bahama Port Authority to get a licence to  run a casino in Freeport.  Then he left his office went around the Cabinet  table, put on his hat as the Minister responsible for gaming and granted the licence to the Grand Bahama Port Authority.  That is called a conflict of interest.  Clearly, there was a conflict between his public duty and his private interest.

Fast forward then to the first Ingraham administration, you will remember that Prime Minister Ingraham caused the resignation of the now Deputy Prime Minister who was then Chairman of the Airport Authority because there was the award of a contract to a company to pave areas at the airport in Nassau. That was a company in which Brent Symonette had an interest.

That was then.  What about today?

It appears that there are special rules in the Ingraham Cabinet.  There is one rule for Brent Symonette, there is another rule for Zhivargo Laing.  Mr. Laing faces similar accusations.  Mr. Laing made admissions against his own interest in the House of Assembly.  We all  know the drink Mona Vie.  We all know how the duty was reduced.  We all know that one of the beneficiaries of the reduction is his sister-in-law and brother.   So inquiring minds must ask the question, it is in the public interest to know, was there not a conflict between his private interest and his public duty?

And then we revisit the story of the removal of the container port in Nassau from Bay Street to now we are told Arawak Cay.  The Leader of the PLP rose to his feet in the House to object when it became clear that the now Deputy Prime Minister was sitting in on meetings to move the Port from Nassau to Arawak Cay.  The PLP knows that the Port has to move.  We also know that the best place to move it is to south New Providence.  What we want to know is why is Arawak Cay suddenly the spot of choice?

Knowing what you and I know about the FNM that they do nothing unless it benefits someone of their number personally, it raises the suspicion that there is the likelihood of a conflict of interest.  Inquiring minds want to know.

Brent Symonette, the Deputy Prime Minister told the press this morning that there is no conflict because in his words he is merely a landlord, and that since he is not opposing the Port’s movement there is no conflict of interest.  With respect, that is not the rule.  Alfred Sears has told us in his well researched and written piece about Zhivargo Laing and why he must resign  what the rules are.

The Cabinet Manual of procedure signed by Hubert Ingraham in 1995 says the following:

“11. The most elementary qualification demanded of a Minister is honesty and incorruptibility. It is necessary not only that Ministers should possess this qualification but also that they should appear to possess it.

“Duty of Minister to Perform Public Duty Impartially Rule 34 of the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure provides that: “A Minister or a Parliamentary Secretary must perform the duties of his office impartially and uninfluenced by fear or favour or self-interest.”

“Duty to avoid Conflict of Interest Rule 36 of the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure provides that: “A Minister must avoid situations in which his private interest, whether pecuniary or otherwise, conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duties.”

“Duty to Avoid Nepotism and Appearance of Nepotism Rule 43 of the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure provides that: “A Minister must not engage in nepotism, i.e., the use of his office and power to secure advantages for himself, his relatives or associates to the disadvantage of others who would otherwise have received the advantage.”

“Penalties for Breach of Duties Rules 44 of the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure outlines the penalties should be applied when these Rules are broken: “A Minister who violates these rules (34-43) leaves himself open to discipline and depending on the seriousness of the breach, may be relieved of his ministerial appointment.”

Those are the rules. With respect then, whether Mr. Symonette is a landlord or not is immaterial.  The question is does he have an interest.  Whether he is opposing the Port’s move or not is immaterial, the question is whether there is an appearance of a conflict.  Let us look at it the other way, how do we know there has been full disclosure about the benefits or burdens, suppose the land stands to gain in value from the Port’s move because the Government intends as it must to redevelop the city of Nassau.  So does Mr. Symonette not have an interest to protect?  It is clear.

We have spoken extensively about Mr. Laing.  He has been asked to resign because of his actions with regard to the Mona Vie.  He has gone to court, there he finds shelter behind the courts from the public discussion.  He is mistaken.  This cannot remove the discussion from the public domain, and PLP’s would do well to read and collect copies of the PLP’s review on the Mona Vie scandal and the piece by Alfred Sears.

Mr. Laing has now gone further however.  Notwithstanding the allegations against him about the loss of revenue in the Mona Vie scandal, he went to the press last week and this morning to defend himself in the instructions for the Customs Department to go after the former PLP candidate and shareholder in Global United Ritchie.  Again, here you have the substance of the allegation against Mr. Laing is that revenue has been lost to the Treasury because of an action by him as a Minister and now he sees nothing wrong with going after a PLP candidate, the PLP being the Party who made the accusation and he does not see that as yet another conflict of interest and  something from which he ought to remove himself and which is a clear political witch hunt.

This time then for the PLP in Opposition is valuable time.  First, we must realize that with each day and each meeting of this kind we are building our way back.  Learning from our mistakes and we have the great luxury of not having any responsibility for what the government does.  They are on their own.  But we must prepare for government while in Opposition.  The next time around, we must lose our timidity to do what is good for us on some issues that we were afraid to touch while we were in office.  We must strengthen the roles of MPs, with a proper office for each MP, proper allowances for staff, equipment and rent, a proper salary for full time Members of Parliament.  In addition Ministers should have a legal counsel hired specifically to advise them on ethical and legal issues.  Mr. Laing finds himself in error because he did not adhere strictly to the manual of cabinet procedure.

Mr. Symonette finds himself in error today.

So 41 years after Stafford Sands of the UBP lost office because of a conflict of interest, the FNM  the successor of the UBP and its men Mr. Laing and Mr. Symonette still do not recognize what a conflict of interest is when they see one.

It is up to the PLP to say it again and again.  When there is a conflict between one’s private interest and public duty, you must not be involved in the decisions.  There is a clear case when it involves your relatives.  In summary then, the Ministers in the FNM must do the right thing and if they do not then the Prime Minister must act to remove them.  That is what the manual says.

I thank you all for listening.  I look forward to more of these discussions.  God bless you all!