The Speaker Aprobates And Reprobates At The Same Time

viagra usa times, viagra buy serif;”>It is unfortunate that what is a simple and straight forward matter of Parliamentary Privilege has been polluted by Fred Smith and number of other individuals into a matter about privacy of e mails.  This matter has nothing to do with privacy of e mails.  This matter has to do with an allegation discovered by Members of Parliament that Save The Bays is a front organization for a rich foreigner to destabilize the Government of The Bahamas.  The information in the emails buttresses that case.  Not even the Judge whose judgment will be found to be wrong in law, could come to the conclusion that there was hacking of e mails, although she went on to find that there was breach of someone’s constitutional rights. She is simply wrong.   So once there is a false premise, everything else falls away.  The simple fact is this that everyone overlooks that fac. The e mails were authorised to be in the hands of those who had the information.   Instead Fred Smith and his people keep talking about hacking emails.  Where is the evidence of that?  There is simply none.  It is therefore unfortunate that the Speaker of the House while standing up on the one hand for the unfettered right of Parliament to speak, now says that he would not have tabled the e mails had he to do it all over again.  The question is on what basis he would fetter his discretion in advance?  It depends on the circumstances.  The Speaker has in the future to run the same test of whether the prejudicial value outweighs its probative value.  On that test, an objective one, the e mails should be tabled.  In any event, the Committee on Privileges will get the full panoply of what is available to MPs and there is nothing that any court can do about it.    The Speaker has appointed Arnold Forbes as the new Chairman of the Committee on Privileges and MPs should get about their work quickly and put this Judge in her rightful place.