The Guardian Business reports Mr. Peter Turnquest (FNM), M.P
for East End Grand Bahama as having called the appointment of Mr. Bradley
Roberts (PLP), chairman of the party and the Water & Sewerage Corporation a
“total conflict of interest”.
Surely Mr. Turnquest is mistaken?
It is impossible for the PLP Government to have conflicts of
interest.
Doesn’t he know by now that all governments are virtuous?
It’s only which ever party is in Opposition at any point in time that is suspect.
Of course it's a rank conflict of interest, but it's only business people that are required by law – made by those that rule us "represent us" – to be above reproach isn't it?
Ever notice there's never a Bill to make Parliamentarians accountable to the same standards they expect of their minions?
To see this appointment in any other way than as a knee-jerk reaction to the ill-fated NIB appointment and its subsequent fallout, is to miss the point of the appointment.
As I went to great lengths to argue in: http://www.weblogbahamas.com/blog_bahamas/2012/12/the-nib-furore-seen-it-before-will-see-it-again.html the Government’s appointment of a neophyte to the top NIB post was ill-advised and has backfired.
Therefore, the pendulum has now swung and the PM is taking no chances by appointing one of his most experienced associates (both commercially and politically) to a major post.
Whether it amounts to a conflict of interest or not probably did not figure in the PM’s mind, unfortunately …
Dear S3S,
I’m sure your response is only to stimulate discussion.
To suggest that an issue so pertinent would not enter the Prime Minister’s mind is either mischievous or bogus.
Sorry to appear rude with my response, but Mr. Christie is a lawyer, and presents laws to Parliament on how citizens are “supposed” to act, and has probably stood in Parliament to object to other governments doing something similar, to say it did not figure in his mind is odd to say the least.
As the kids say, pleeeaaassseee.
No Rick, I wouldn’t possibly be so mischievous.
I believe sincerely that Politicians at home are really “too close to the forest to see the trees”, and consequently miss what may appear to be obvious decisions to the rest of us.
I think to assume that any of them have a capacity for rationale or logical thought pattern may be the flaw in any analysis.
Consider the way they bounce around and often contradict themselves.
Like dogs chasing their own tails, they will never catch the tail, or catch on!
Thanks S3S.
So that only allows them to see a conflict by other people then?
Love it Disgusted!
Disgusted, you hit the proverbial nail on the head. We cannot inculcate rationality into our Politicians.
Even under the best of conditions, the rationality of their decisions is ‘bounded’ due to lack of information, reduced capacity to process that information or lack of time to make appropriate decisions. A fact that neither mischief nor bogusness would possibly have contemplated.
So S3S how is ti possible for them to “see” conflicts of interest by other people?
Otherwise known as selective cognizance I guess :o)
The deft use of tribalism (us Vs. them) by politicians has served them well, in that it allows them to sidetrack scrutiny of personal failure with slight of hand almost immediately.
The moment the argument becomes partisan the principal is lost in the subsequent mud bath shared by both clans.
The fools in the equation are those who wear the colors without question, support without sensibility.
Quite frankly the situation has evolved into an acceptable economic prospectus for many, the “we will prosper for this 5 year period, then we go to ground until it is again our turn”.
At the rate they are going though………