Cables: FNM had 'hostile takeover' of civil service
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
When it came to office in 2007, the Ingraham administration was greeted by a recalcitrant civil service that was so bureaucratic and inefficient in its operations that the new government felt it was in the midst of a “hostile takeover”, according to cables obtained through WikiLeaks.
In several cables, the Americans highlight concerns about unhelpful civil servants, bureaucratic frustrations and inefficient operations.
In a 2003 cable, a U.S. Embassy official wrote: “The Bahamian civil service has honed sloth and delay disguised as deliberation and consensus-building to a fine art.”
In a 2007 cable, another official wrote that the new Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Brent Symonette had encouraged “informal back-channel communication” with U.S. Embassy personnel, apparently because he had little faith in civil servants.
“He explained that the new government was effectively in the midst of a ‘hostile takeover’ of the bureaucracy and that it would take time for them to get a handle on the machinery of government.
“He told the Charge that we should not assume that information provided to ministry staff — or diplomatic representatives abroad — would get to him.”
As a result, Symonette suggested weekly or bi-weekly meetings with the then Charge d’ Affaires Dr. Brent Hardt to review priority issues so he could ensure necessary follow up.
“The charge welcomed the suggestion and expressed his appreciation for the openness and commitment to action on key issues,” said the 2007 cable.
“The foreign minister also noted that in his role as DPM, [Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham] wanted him to be a troubleshooter who could delve into issues that cut across ministerial portfolios.
“In contrast to former PM (Perry) Christie's consensus-oriented government, PM Ingraham's government will be top-down, and Symonette has offered us rare access at the top. This access and the open lines of communication suggest that an already close bilateral relationship will get even better under Ingraham's and Symonette's stewardship.”
In a cable written in 2008, a U.S. Embassy official commented on restructuring efforts in certain public service departments, as well as announced Cabinet changes.
“The reassignment of so many senior civil servants along with the Cabinet reshuffle may indicate that the Ingraham administration is completing its hostile takeover of the recalcitrant bureaucracy left over from the previous government,” the cable said.
Those changes came as the global economic crisis began to take hold and The Bahamas was starting to feel the effects in a major way.
“The greater concentration of portfolios in the hands of the prime minister and deputy prime minister also indicates a firmer grip on the reins,” an embassy official wrote.
“High-profile new government initiatives on sustainable energy, tourism, and education, continue to reflect the key importance of the [Government of The Bahamas’] relationship with the U.S.
“They also come in the face of painfully high energy prices for consumers and a rapidly softening tourism economy, leading to increasing insecurity about jobs.
“Visitor arrivals have declined even more steeply than usual in the traditional off-season, according to newspaper reports and anecdotal evidence, leaving premier Bahamian tourist destinations nearly empty and hotels struggling to fill rooms.
“The fractious opposition lacks a coherent social program or a response to the current, unfavorable economic trends.”
Jun 27, 2011
thenassauguardian
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label bahamas wikileaks cables. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bahamas wikileaks cables. Show all posts
Monday, June 27, 2011
Friday, June 24, 2011
WikiLeaks: ...U.S. Embassy cables document the unsuccessful diplomatic maneuvers made over two administrations to get a go-ahead for liquefied natural gas (LNG) pipelines from Florida to The Bahamas
Failed diplomacy in LNG bid
By CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
A series of U.S. Embassy cables document the unsuccessful diplomatic maneuvers made over two administrations to get a go-ahead for liquefied natural gas (LNG) pipelines from Florida to The Bahamas.
One of the cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks said that in 2009 AES Corporation proposed constructing an LNG pipeline from Ocean Cay near Bimini to New Providence at no cost.
According to a former AES representative, when this idea was presented to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, the PM said he “wouldn’t be pushed into doing it.”
AES eventually decided to forgo this idea due to technological challenges and associated costs, the 2009 cable said.
The cables show aggressive steps taken by companies like AES in an effort to convince, first the Christie administration, and then the Ingraham administration to approve the project.
In 2005, AES representatives met with then U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas John Rood to discuss the status of their proposed $650 million LNG project.
“AES expressed its frustration at the inability to get a final decision from Prime Minister Perry G. Christie, whom they claim is delaying a decision in an effort to get them to withdraw so he will not be blamed for the project’s failure,” a U.S. Embassy official wrote in a cable.
“AES is the current front-runner to get the LNG project. Opposition has centered on the impact any possible environmental damage would have on the Bahamian tourist industry.”
The government at the time was also considering a pair of competing proposals for an LNG facility and pipeline in The Bahamas.
Both projects would have included an import terminal, a re-gasification plant, and an undersea pipeline to South Florida, in addition to other support infrastructure.
The AES project called for the construction of an LNG facility on Ocean Cay near Bimini.
The cable claimed the AES officials met with the ambassador “to provide an update on their LNG proposal and to request assistance in dealing with an indecisive Christie Cabinet.”
However, other cables show that AES officials were equally frustrated by the Ingraham Cabinet’s failure to make a decision on the project in a timely fashion.
At the 2005 meeting with the ambassador, AES representative Aaron Samson said the company had already spent more than $55 million on the project, and noted that an agreement in principle had been signed, “and the prime minister will not speak to them because there are no other requirements that AES must satisfy,” the cable said.
“AES officials are especially frustrated with Bahamians and complained that although they have visited an operating AES LNG plant and seemed to be convinced of its safety, they now fail to speak out in favor of an LNG plant on Ocean Cay,” the embassy official wrote.
The official said that at an earlier meeting, David Davis and Ronald Thompson of the Office of the Prime Minister said that in their opinion “LNG is dead”.
The cable noted that then Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller, the government’s chief proponent of LNG, estimated that the project would generate approximately $40 million in average annual revenues over the course of 25 years, for a total contribution to the Public Treasury of nearly $1 billion.
The project was also expected to create about 450 jobs during the construction phase and 25 to 35 permanent positions.
The cable noted that Minister Miller had alleged in a radio interview that the environmental group Re-Earth’s opposition to LNG was getting more media attention than it normally might because the group’s leader, Sam Duncombe, is white.
“Had this been a regular Bahamian of a hue like you and I, it would not have been tolerated or she would not have gotten the coverage that she has certainly gotten,” Miller was quoted as saying.
The cable also documented the nasty exchange on Cat Cay between Miller and Cat Cay investor Manuel Diaz.
A protracted debate
In the comment section of the cable, the embassy official wrote, “The consideration of the various LNG proposals typifies the slow and opaque decision-making process of the Christie government.
“Government ministers have been promising a decision ‘in a few weeks’ for nearly two years.
“Even for the consensus-driven society of The Bahamas, the LNG debate has been long, protracted, and increasingly bitter.”
The embassy official wrongly predicted, “In the end a cash-strapped Bahamian government may be forced to make a decision about an LNG facility so it can start collecting the revenue the project will generate.”
In another 2005 cable, Christie told Ambassador Rood he did not want the Cabinet to touch the LNG issue while he was recovering from his stroke.
“He acknowledged that certain Cabinet members — Foreign Minister Fred Mitchell; Tourism Minister Obie Wilchcombe and Transport Minister Glenys Hanna-Martin — were resolutely against LNG, but that many others saw the benefit the project would have for The Bahamas,” the cable said.
“The PM gave his assurances that LNG ‘would be dealt with’.”
But it never was before the change of government in 2007.
The Americans’ hope that LNG would be approved under Ingraham also turned out to be wrong.
After a courtesy call on Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Brent Symonette by U.S. Charge d’ Affaires Brent Hardt in 2007, an embassy official noted in a cable that Symonette was against approving any such projects.
In June 2007, Phenton Neymour, state minister responsible for energy issues, noted that the new government had not had time to address the LNG issue “but he signaled that the door was still open to eventual approval.”
“Views on LNG within the new Cabinet are quite diverse, with some ministers known to be strongly opposed and some in favor,” an embassy official wrote.
“Having provided the initial approvals for LNG development back in 2002, however, the FNM will certainly take a close look at whether to move ahead with what would be an important new economic direction that would help diversify the tourism-dependent economy.
“Energy prices are very high in The Bahamas and the embassy continues to encourage the government to explore alternative sources of energy.”
Recognizing though that LNG was not a priority for the Ingraham-led government, AES officials planned to review other ancillary projects on Ocean Cay including a rest stop for cruise ships and reopening mining operations on the island.
A source close to AES told The Nassau Guardian that while the project was never officially taken off the table, it is not now being aggressively pursued.
Jun 24, 2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
A series of U.S. Embassy cables document the unsuccessful diplomatic maneuvers made over two administrations to get a go-ahead for liquefied natural gas (LNG) pipelines from Florida to The Bahamas.
One of the cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks said that in 2009 AES Corporation proposed constructing an LNG pipeline from Ocean Cay near Bimini to New Providence at no cost.
According to a former AES representative, when this idea was presented to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, the PM said he “wouldn’t be pushed into doing it.”
AES eventually decided to forgo this idea due to technological challenges and associated costs, the 2009 cable said.
The cables show aggressive steps taken by companies like AES in an effort to convince, first the Christie administration, and then the Ingraham administration to approve the project.
In 2005, AES representatives met with then U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas John Rood to discuss the status of their proposed $650 million LNG project.
“AES expressed its frustration at the inability to get a final decision from Prime Minister Perry G. Christie, whom they claim is delaying a decision in an effort to get them to withdraw so he will not be blamed for the project’s failure,” a U.S. Embassy official wrote in a cable.
“AES is the current front-runner to get the LNG project. Opposition has centered on the impact any possible environmental damage would have on the Bahamian tourist industry.”
The government at the time was also considering a pair of competing proposals for an LNG facility and pipeline in The Bahamas.
Both projects would have included an import terminal, a re-gasification plant, and an undersea pipeline to South Florida, in addition to other support infrastructure.
The AES project called for the construction of an LNG facility on Ocean Cay near Bimini.
The cable claimed the AES officials met with the ambassador “to provide an update on their LNG proposal and to request assistance in dealing with an indecisive Christie Cabinet.”
However, other cables show that AES officials were equally frustrated by the Ingraham Cabinet’s failure to make a decision on the project in a timely fashion.
At the 2005 meeting with the ambassador, AES representative Aaron Samson said the company had already spent more than $55 million on the project, and noted that an agreement in principle had been signed, “and the prime minister will not speak to them because there are no other requirements that AES must satisfy,” the cable said.
“AES officials are especially frustrated with Bahamians and complained that although they have visited an operating AES LNG plant and seemed to be convinced of its safety, they now fail to speak out in favor of an LNG plant on Ocean Cay,” the embassy official wrote.
The official said that at an earlier meeting, David Davis and Ronald Thompson of the Office of the Prime Minister said that in their opinion “LNG is dead”.
The cable noted that then Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller, the government’s chief proponent of LNG, estimated that the project would generate approximately $40 million in average annual revenues over the course of 25 years, for a total contribution to the Public Treasury of nearly $1 billion.
The project was also expected to create about 450 jobs during the construction phase and 25 to 35 permanent positions.
The cable noted that Minister Miller had alleged in a radio interview that the environmental group Re-Earth’s opposition to LNG was getting more media attention than it normally might because the group’s leader, Sam Duncombe, is white.
“Had this been a regular Bahamian of a hue like you and I, it would not have been tolerated or she would not have gotten the coverage that she has certainly gotten,” Miller was quoted as saying.
The cable also documented the nasty exchange on Cat Cay between Miller and Cat Cay investor Manuel Diaz.
A protracted debate
In the comment section of the cable, the embassy official wrote, “The consideration of the various LNG proposals typifies the slow and opaque decision-making process of the Christie government.
“Government ministers have been promising a decision ‘in a few weeks’ for nearly two years.
“Even for the consensus-driven society of The Bahamas, the LNG debate has been long, protracted, and increasingly bitter.”
The embassy official wrongly predicted, “In the end a cash-strapped Bahamian government may be forced to make a decision about an LNG facility so it can start collecting the revenue the project will generate.”
In another 2005 cable, Christie told Ambassador Rood he did not want the Cabinet to touch the LNG issue while he was recovering from his stroke.
“He acknowledged that certain Cabinet members — Foreign Minister Fred Mitchell; Tourism Minister Obie Wilchcombe and Transport Minister Glenys Hanna-Martin — were resolutely against LNG, but that many others saw the benefit the project would have for The Bahamas,” the cable said.
“The PM gave his assurances that LNG ‘would be dealt with’.”
But it never was before the change of government in 2007.
The Americans’ hope that LNG would be approved under Ingraham also turned out to be wrong.
After a courtesy call on Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Brent Symonette by U.S. Charge d’ Affaires Brent Hardt in 2007, an embassy official noted in a cable that Symonette was against approving any such projects.
In June 2007, Phenton Neymour, state minister responsible for energy issues, noted that the new government had not had time to address the LNG issue “but he signaled that the door was still open to eventual approval.”
“Views on LNG within the new Cabinet are quite diverse, with some ministers known to be strongly opposed and some in favor,” an embassy official wrote.
“Having provided the initial approvals for LNG development back in 2002, however, the FNM will certainly take a close look at whether to move ahead with what would be an important new economic direction that would help diversify the tourism-dependent economy.
“Energy prices are very high in The Bahamas and the embassy continues to encourage the government to explore alternative sources of energy.”
Recognizing though that LNG was not a priority for the Ingraham-led government, AES officials planned to review other ancillary projects on Ocean Cay including a rest stop for cruise ships and reopening mining operations on the island.
A source close to AES told The Nassau Guardian that while the project was never officially taken off the table, it is not now being aggressively pursued.
Jun 24, 2011
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
WikiLeaks: A U.S. diplomatic cable described Bahamian culture as one that “celebrates heterosexual prowess”, while still proclaiming its “overt religiosity.”
Cables examine Bahamian views on gay rights
BY JUAN McCARTNEY
NG Senior Reporter
thenassauguardian
juan@nasguard.com
As many Bahamians remain divided on the issue of gay rights in light of a recent United Nations Human Rights Council vote, some of them may find U.S. diplomats’ views on Bahamian sexual attitudes telling.
A U.S. diplomatic cable obtained by The Nassau Guardian through WikiLeaks described Bahamian culture as one that “celebrates heterosexual prowess”, while still proclaiming its “overt religiosity.”
”Bahamians also wryly acknowledge their compartmentalized religious beliefs, commemorated in a popular Bahamian ballad recounting the shortcomings of the ‘Sunday Christian’ who weekly repents their previous six days of sinfulness,” the cable asserted.
Bahamians who came out publicly against gay rights were also described as more “loud” than “violent.”
This opinion was espoused shortly after plans were announced to protest the arrival of thousands of gay cruise ship passengers and their families in Nassau on July 16, 2004.
The passengers were traveling on ‘The Norwegian Dawn’.
When news of a counter-protest by gay rights organization Rainbow Alliance at the same time and location was also announced, U.S. officials asked Bahamian law enforcement personnel to commit extra resources to ensure the safety of American tourists.
But the cable noted that The Bahamas has a “peaceful culture where the fire and brimstone generally stays verbal rather than physical.”
However, despite the feeling that those planning to protest were merely posturing, the U.S. Embassy still prepared meticulously for any unrest, monitoring media coverage of the upcoming events.
In preparation, officials at the U.S. Embassy also made contact with the Ministry of Tourism, former Bahamas Christian Council (BCC) president Dr. William Thompson and now retired Anglican Archbishop of the West Indies Drexel Gomez.
“The newly-elected (BCC) had been taking a more modulated stance on many issues since taking office, including homosexuality, than did the previous administration,” claimed the cable.
“When contacted…on July 14, Reverend Dr. Thompson…said that he stands by his ‘don't ask, don't tell’ policy,” the cable reported.
The cable claimed Thompson said the council welcomed anyone to The Bahamas but did not want visitors to “push their beliefs” on Bahamians.
According to the cable, Gomez told a U.S. Embassy official that he saw "no advantage or benefit" to demonstrating against the visit.
The cable said that then Prime Minister Perry Christie found himself “between a rock and a hard place on this controversy.”
“He owes his election to the active intervention of the conservative end of the Bahamian Protestant religious spectrum. He also knows that 60 percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) depends on tourism,” the cable noted. “The (conservative) churches who were his main backers in the last election expect some payback.”
The cable further commented: “The Free National Movement opposition is enjoying watching him squirm and doing its best to tighten the screws by repeatedly calling upon him to take a principled stand.”
There was a moderate protest when the cruise ship arrived, but there were no notable developments.
The Bahamas recently came out squarely in favor of the right to choose sexuality being a human right and the U.N. decision to condemn discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
Jun 22, 2011
thenassauguardian
BY JUAN McCARTNEY
NG Senior Reporter
thenassauguardian
juan@nasguard.com
As many Bahamians remain divided on the issue of gay rights in light of a recent United Nations Human Rights Council vote, some of them may find U.S. diplomats’ views on Bahamian sexual attitudes telling.
A U.S. diplomatic cable obtained by The Nassau Guardian through WikiLeaks described Bahamian culture as one that “celebrates heterosexual prowess”, while still proclaiming its “overt religiosity.”
”Bahamians also wryly acknowledge their compartmentalized religious beliefs, commemorated in a popular Bahamian ballad recounting the shortcomings of the ‘Sunday Christian’ who weekly repents their previous six days of sinfulness,” the cable asserted.
Bahamians who came out publicly against gay rights were also described as more “loud” than “violent.”
This opinion was espoused shortly after plans were announced to protest the arrival of thousands of gay cruise ship passengers and their families in Nassau on July 16, 2004.
The passengers were traveling on ‘The Norwegian Dawn’.
When news of a counter-protest by gay rights organization Rainbow Alliance at the same time and location was also announced, U.S. officials asked Bahamian law enforcement personnel to commit extra resources to ensure the safety of American tourists.
But the cable noted that The Bahamas has a “peaceful culture where the fire and brimstone generally stays verbal rather than physical.”
However, despite the feeling that those planning to protest were merely posturing, the U.S. Embassy still prepared meticulously for any unrest, monitoring media coverage of the upcoming events.
In preparation, officials at the U.S. Embassy also made contact with the Ministry of Tourism, former Bahamas Christian Council (BCC) president Dr. William Thompson and now retired Anglican Archbishop of the West Indies Drexel Gomez.
“The newly-elected (BCC) had been taking a more modulated stance on many issues since taking office, including homosexuality, than did the previous administration,” claimed the cable.
“When contacted…on July 14, Reverend Dr. Thompson…said that he stands by his ‘don't ask, don't tell’ policy,” the cable reported.
The cable claimed Thompson said the council welcomed anyone to The Bahamas but did not want visitors to “push their beliefs” on Bahamians.
According to the cable, Gomez told a U.S. Embassy official that he saw "no advantage or benefit" to demonstrating against the visit.
The cable said that then Prime Minister Perry Christie found himself “between a rock and a hard place on this controversy.”
“He owes his election to the active intervention of the conservative end of the Bahamian Protestant religious spectrum. He also knows that 60 percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) depends on tourism,” the cable noted. “The (conservative) churches who were his main backers in the last election expect some payback.”
The cable further commented: “The Free National Movement opposition is enjoying watching him squirm and doing its best to tighten the screws by repeatedly calling upon him to take a principled stand.”
There was a moderate protest when the cruise ship arrived, but there were no notable developments.
The Bahamas recently came out squarely in favor of the right to choose sexuality being a human right and the U.N. decision to condemn discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
Jun 22, 2011
thenassauguardian
Monday, June 20, 2011
Perry Christie's response to a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks: ...he (Christie) never considered resigning as PLP chief over Kenyatta Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)
Christie: I never considered quitting over Gibson departure
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
KENYATTA Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party "meant nothing" to Opposition leader Perry Christie who told The Tribune he never considered resigning as PLP chief over the ordeal.
In fact, Mr Christie said he was relieved to turn over a "problem" Member of Parliament - whose notorious Cabinet "fight" hurt Mr Christie's image - to the Free National Movement.
The Farm Road MP's comments came after a newspaper claimed the veteran politician considered stepping down in the wake of Mr Gibson's exit - and an earlier election court case defeat - based on a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks.
Mr Christie dismissed the cable as mere speculation crafted around political fodder of 2008.
"This is absolutely a figment of someone's imagination. I never told that to my wife, my children, never told it to my best friend, never told it to the people in the political organisation that I lead," Mr Christie told The Tribune yesterday.
"No one who is close to me could say that," Mr Christie said. He added that he did not forge close relationships with American diplomats in 2008, the year Mr Gibson left the PLP, and did not discuss his political future with them.
Although he conceded Mr Gibson's exodus was a blow to the PLP and to his image, Mr Christie said he redeemed himself after he won 84 per cent of his party's vote in his re-election bid at the party's 2009 convention. He added that the PLP's victory in the 2010 Elizabeth by-election was another redeeming factor which strengthened the party.
"The whole Kenyatta Gibson thing meant nothing to me. In fact I thought I had transferred a problem I had to the FNM and I thought 'God bless them'. I went on to the (PLP's) national convention and scored a very successful victory and went into the by-election and won."
The PLP leader conceded he paid a "political price" for not demanding that Mr Gibson and former Mount Moriah MP Keod Smith leave the party after having a scuffle in the Cabinet room in 2006. Despite opposition in some quarters, both men were nominated to represent the party in the 2007 general election. Mr Gibson won over FNM newcomer Michael Turnquest while Mr Smith was defeated by National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest.
"At the end of the day there is no doubt that I suffered as a result of what people perceived to be my response to the fight in Cabinet. Clearly after the fight there was a body of opinion that felt Kenyatta nor Keod Smith ought to be nominated to contest the seats (in 2007).
"I paid a price on Kenyatta so when he left I would have been disappointed that someone I made that commitment for (resigned) but that happens in politics and we moved on to demonstrate that the party has grown stronger as a result of it."
The men were not booted from the party because Mr Christie believed in second chances. He claimed that the altercation was just a heated moment that was exaggerated by political opponents.
"The fight I think was intensely blown out of proportion. I had always had a commitment to the redemptive power of a second chance. (From all accounts) it was one of those sparks that took place and everyone moved on.
"Politics being what it is, it was near election time and the FNM blew it up. When we reviewed the matter our opinion was they should not be disqualified," Mr Christie said.
June 18, 2011
tribune242
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
KENYATTA Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party "meant nothing" to Opposition leader Perry Christie who told The Tribune he never considered resigning as PLP chief over the ordeal.
In fact, Mr Christie said he was relieved to turn over a "problem" Member of Parliament - whose notorious Cabinet "fight" hurt Mr Christie's image - to the Free National Movement.
The Farm Road MP's comments came after a newspaper claimed the veteran politician considered stepping down in the wake of Mr Gibson's exit - and an earlier election court case defeat - based on a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks.
Mr Christie dismissed the cable as mere speculation crafted around political fodder of 2008.
"This is absolutely a figment of someone's imagination. I never told that to my wife, my children, never told it to my best friend, never told it to the people in the political organisation that I lead," Mr Christie told The Tribune yesterday.
"No one who is close to me could say that," Mr Christie said. He added that he did not forge close relationships with American diplomats in 2008, the year Mr Gibson left the PLP, and did not discuss his political future with them.
Although he conceded Mr Gibson's exodus was a blow to the PLP and to his image, Mr Christie said he redeemed himself after he won 84 per cent of his party's vote in his re-election bid at the party's 2009 convention. He added that the PLP's victory in the 2010 Elizabeth by-election was another redeeming factor which strengthened the party.
"The whole Kenyatta Gibson thing meant nothing to me. In fact I thought I had transferred a problem I had to the FNM and I thought 'God bless them'. I went on to the (PLP's) national convention and scored a very successful victory and went into the by-election and won."
The PLP leader conceded he paid a "political price" for not demanding that Mr Gibson and former Mount Moriah MP Keod Smith leave the party after having a scuffle in the Cabinet room in 2006. Despite opposition in some quarters, both men were nominated to represent the party in the 2007 general election. Mr Gibson won over FNM newcomer Michael Turnquest while Mr Smith was defeated by National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest.
"At the end of the day there is no doubt that I suffered as a result of what people perceived to be my response to the fight in Cabinet. Clearly after the fight there was a body of opinion that felt Kenyatta nor Keod Smith ought to be nominated to contest the seats (in 2007).
"I paid a price on Kenyatta so when he left I would have been disappointed that someone I made that commitment for (resigned) but that happens in politics and we moved on to demonstrate that the party has grown stronger as a result of it."
The men were not booted from the party because Mr Christie believed in second chances. He claimed that the altercation was just a heated moment that was exaggerated by political opponents.
"The fight I think was intensely blown out of proportion. I had always had a commitment to the redemptive power of a second chance. (From all accounts) it was one of those sparks that took place and everyone moved on.
"Politics being what it is, it was near election time and the FNM blew it up. When we reviewed the matter our opinion was they should not be disqualified," Mr Christie said.
June 18, 2011
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)