“Judiciary should only interfere in Parliament when all else fails” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “A Judge was told of Friday that judicial interference in internal affairs of Parliament should only occur when all other avenues have been exhausted when an issue arises.

In a substantive hearing on a constitutional motion before Justice Indra Charles concerning her injunction relating to the recent disclosure and tabling of private Save The Bays (STB) emails in Parliament, Crown representative Dr. Lloyd Barnett stressed that Section 54 of the Constitution entrenched the powers and responsibilities of Parliament.

He said that the current action ‘would be a direct interference with proceedings and trespass on internal affairs.’

He said judicial interference could only occur in the rarest of instances when all other avenues have been exhausted which could not be said in of the matter presently before the court.”

The first and most obvious question, to me, here would be what other avenues was STB’s to take when their private correspondence was being tabled and read in Parliament, as we seemed to have reached a point wherein we still seek ‘someone’ to define what is the ‘worst of the worst’ as it pertains to capital punishment; who will now define when judicial interference becomes necessary in the ‘rarest of instances’ when all the avenues have been exhausted?  When we begin to get serious in this country in the protection of the basic rights afforded to our citizens by the very same Constitution that Crown representative says gives the governing party the right to deny citizens the right to privacy without recourse? 

In a variation of Bill#4, as proposed in the upcoming referendum on gender equality, a hand out from the “Yes” Campaign says “[The] Bottom Line”: Prevents Parliament from passing any new laws that discriminate against either men or women, so that our sons and daughters are considered equal under the law”, and here it is a Environmental group cannot seem to avoid Parliament from violating their constitutional right to privacy.

All this time the parties looking to reveal the private emails have yet to give an explanation as to how the material was obtained while the crown representative speaks to “Section 54 of the Constitution entrenched the powers and responsibilities of Parliament.” as if this government has every acted in a responsible manner.

Shame!

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

As Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Perry Christie presented his Budget Communication for the year 2016 to the people of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, a budget communication short on achievements but long on promises, a budget communication that could have only been scotch taped together; with so many parts missing i.e. the audits from various ministries and the progress of the newly formed government agency ‘Resolve Bahamas’, we would have expected those with the requisite skill set to refute it with fact, but sadly this was not to come because it would seem that some of these persons had ‘different agendas’.

“Cash: it is time for new leadership” – The Tribune 05.26.2016

Excerpt from this article; “Former Free National Movement (FNM) Chairman Darron Cash yesterday blamed FNM leader Dr. Hubert Minnis for the ‘dismal state’ of the Official Opposition and said it is now time for the party to seek ‘fresh, new leadership.

In a statement, Mr. Cash said Dr. Minnis and his entire leadership team must give a full accounting of his stewardship of the FNM.  He also said a full convention with all the accountability factors built in is the right way for it to happen and called for it to be held in the next 90 days.

Mr. Cash also lamented that the FNM has become ‘a shadow of its former self’ and risks being ‘sink by an anchor of leadership that has been found wanting’.

‘There are many people who share responsibility for this unfortunate position, but there is no escaping the harsh reality – the current dismal state of the FNM goes to leadership.’

‘More specifically, it goes to the leader Hubert A Minnis,’ Cash said.”

First of all, I will not sit here and say that I have applauded each and every decision that Dr. Minnis has made as Leader of the Free National Movement, nor would I say that he has been a stellar success as the leader but I will say that I have seen an improvement since he has been elected leader of the party.   I feel for anyone to claim that either Perry Christie or Hubert Ingraham were exemplary leaders when the first became leaders of their respective parties would either be looking to mislead the public and is probably delusional themselves; as Hubert Ingraham was a work in progress and Perry Christie, in my opinion, will never achieve the necessary skill set to ever be called a leader; lying to the Bahamian public constantly does not make one a great leader but I have the propensity to digress.

There is fundamental difference between the Free National Movement and the Progressive Liberal Party, in the way that we handle our ‘leaders’.  As poorly as Perry Christie has performed over the years, his party members seek to prop him up and pick up the slack even to the point of threatening those that would dear criticize him; as for the Free National Movement, we have the tendency to choose a leader and tell them ‘do it’ and if he falls we back away lending little to no support only to look at them with distain and then seek to share our distain to any and everyone that would listen, this I find very disappointing.

Now we have a former Chairman saying that “It is time for new leadership” as he says that Minnis and his entire leadership team must account for the party’s failure but wasn’t he a part of this party’s leadership as we began our decline, as he and other would put it?

We as a party have become our own worst enemy. 

END

“Minnis ‘failing’ to lead on vote’ – Former FNM senator says leader has not communicated position” – The Tribune Excerpt from this article; “Former Senator Heather Hunt has suggested that Free National Movement (FNM) Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis has not shown effective leadership because he has failed to communicate his position on the four constitutional […]

via My Morning Paper – May 25, 2016 – Disturbing Behavior — My Morning Paper

“Minnis ‘failing’ to lead on vote’ – Former FNM senator says leader has not communicated position” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “Former Senator Heather Hunt has suggested that Free National Movement (FNM) Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis has not shown effective leadership because he has failed to communicate his position on the four constitutional equality bills.

She told The Tribune yesterday that Democratic Alliance Leader Branville McCartney falls into the same category.

Mrs. Hunt is one of the co-executive directors of the YES Bahamas campaign and said that it was her hope that neither of these party leaders falls into a trap of using the equality bills as a political ‘football’

Instead, she said both Dr. Minnis and Mr. McCartney should use the opportunity to inform voters of what they plan to do differently should their party ascend to power.” 

Here Mrs. Hunt has me confused, while I do agree with her when she says that they “use the opportunity to inform voters of what they plan to do differently should their party ascend to power.”, this would come about only if they are in opposition to the bills and to this point I think only the Leader of the DNA has voiced opposition to the bills.

“Minnis: Vote your conscience – FNM leader urges voters to get educated” – The Nassau Guardian – 05.17.2016

Excerpt from this article; “Opposition Leader, Dr. Hubert Minnis is urging Bahamians to vote their conscience in the June 7^th referendum on gender equality.

‘With the entire referendum, I have said to the Bahamian public and I say again, listen to the issues, be educated, analyze, understand because you are voting for a future,” Minnis said.

‘Understand what you are voting on. You must be properly educated, then vote your conscience’ When asked how he intends to vote, Minnis said, ‘I said what I said.

 My vote in Parliament is on record’

Minnis voted in favor of all four bills in Parliament.” 

From this one can reasonably conclude that Dr. Minnis plans to vote ‘yes’ on the proposed bills but is not going to shove his opinion down the throat of the Bahamian people, much like the government is doing as it funds the ‘Yes Bahamas’ campaign. 

It is beyond me how this is perceived as weak leadership, to allow democracy work in the way that it should.

I gather from Ms. Hunts comments that she would have been more satisfied with Dr. Minnis telling 65,633 (give or take a few thousand) persons [the number of persons that voted for the Free National Movement in the 2012 General Election] to vote ‘yes’ and he should not encourage them to think for themselves.  I have been informed that this is the stance that the supporters of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has taken, the ‘no’ position to the proposed bills; so now 13,225 person (give or take a few thousand) are expected to follow suit?  Is this true democracy?  If it is indeed, then Branville McCartney would have been pleased with each and every decision that the Free National Movement made when he was a part of this political organization, so surely this cannot be the official party position or what they expect from each and every one of their supporters as this stance is utter foolishness and only expected of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), who now seeks to chastise the leader of the FNM to vote ‘YES’ as they seem to see that the entire referendum is indeed in trouble and maybe this is why Mrs. Hunt now seeks to attempt to do the very same, as she also sees that the referendum may be ‘Dead on Arrival’.

It is indeed disturbing behavior when citizens of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas wish to have their leaders to think for them and actually encourage them to.  It is disturbing behavior when a group of people would expect for their leaders to ‘make up their minds’ for them especially during such an important democratic process such as this one.   Maybe the criticism of Dr. Minnis and Branville McCartney have come about as those of the ‘Yes Bahamas’ initiative have failed in their efforts to properly educate the people as a lot of confusion still exists.

END

“Minnis hits out at Ministers who failed to table audits” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “Free National Movement leader Dr. Hubert Minnis has criticized Cabinet ministers who have failed to table audits of government institutions as required by law, saying the issue highlights the need for greater accountability measures in government.

Dr. Minnis was responding to revelations in a Tribune article last week about gaps in the public record concerning audits of the Public Hospital Authority (PHA), the Water & Sewage Corporation (WSC), he Bahamas Broadcasting Corporation, the Bahamas Mortgage Corporation (BMC), the College of the Bahamas (COB) and the Hotel Corporation of the Bahamas.

‘The Government has shown a wanton disregard for transparency, accountability and the rule of law’ Dr. Minnis said Friday.”

With the Budget Debate set to commence in very short order and while the country is being distracted by the Gender Equality Referendum, it is my person opinion that the present government is making an attempt to distract from their current fiscal failings; as has been seen in the audit of the Department of Social Services, the Road Traffic department and the Urban Renewal Program.  It must indeed be quite embarrassing when you had hoped to speak to the success of tax reform in Value-Added Tax (VAT), as you continue to claim that it is exceeding all expectations yet there has never been a repeal in any area to aid in the lives of the average Bahamian citizen; when you seek to speak to the ‘tightening of the fiscal belt’, the reigning in of public expenditure even to the point of cutting subsidies to the College of the Bahamas, the deficit reduction but yet each and every government institution that you audit shows an ‘unexplained’ loss of public funds.

How does one present a complete and concise economic picture of the country when a lot of the economic statuses of the institutions that make up the ‘bigger picture’ have just not been provided?  It is simple, you cannot provide a clear and concise picture, so with these glaring omissions to what should be the final Budget Debate before he next General Election; a reason for the present government to prove why they should remain in power, there seem that we will still be left with more questions than answers but this has been this governments way, to provide more questions than answers while expecting not to be questioned.

Now before I am accused of misleading the public, lest I be compared to this government, let me just clarify that just because audits have not been tabled does not mean that they have not been carried out but could it be that the ministers responsible have just failed, for whatever reason to table the audits?  The obvious concern by the rest of us is that maybe something ‘bigger’ is being hidden.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

On June 7^th, 2016 the Bahamas will go to the polls for a Gender Equality referendum that has been delayed for over fourteen years.  Many are of the opinion that some of the questions being asked are a waste of time and can rectified by Parliament and the money better spent on correcting other issues in our constitution.

Today, two branches of government, the Executive and the Judicial, are caught up in a legal battle and it would seem that the constitution is insufficient to offer clarification.

“Mitchell: Injunction is nonsense” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “As a Supreme Court Justice was hearing a constitutional motion from Save The Bays (STB) regarding private emails being read in the House of the Assembly, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Immigration Fred Mitchell was in Parliament yesterday, again blasting an injunction issued by Justice Indra Charles that prohibits MP’s from releasing those emails.

Mitchell dismissed the injunction as ‘nonsense’.

‘I want to make this clear,’ he said.

‘I do not consider myself bound by an injunction issued by any court in so far as it applies to any attempt to stifle what I say and do in this place.  I will act accordingly.’

STB members are seeking a declaration from the court that they have a right to privacy under Article 23 of the constitution and that it is an entrenched fundamental right which trumps parliamentary privilege.”

A line has been drawn; one side seeks to invoke privacy laws as laid out by the constitution and the other seeks to violate these same laws by seeking to use parliamentary privilege as laid out in Article 53 of the constitution but this is only made possible by “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the Bahamas (Article 52), which would tend to suggest that ‘good governance’ is a factor in the application of Article 53; so if the minister seeks to ‘act accordingly’ will he err on the side of caution by not violating article 23 of the constitution?

One of the main issues of these emails, beside them being private is the manner in which they were obtained.  The good Minister for Marathon, Jerome Fitzgerald claims that he found them in his political ‘garbage can’ and I can only feel that that he can only be referring to his mind when he uses this term but how did you obtain private emails of private citizens?

Mr. Mitchell actually makes a very relevant point when he asks, “You know even if we broke the injunction what was the court going to do?  How were they going to enforce it?, he asked” and this is where the constitution would have to make a clarification on which article actually trumps the other and what would be the possible ramifications for members of parliament violating the article.

Minister Mitchell goes on to ensure that all these emails are important because “When the facts reveal that there was, in fact a conspiracy to destabilize the government…..”, if this has not been proven to date and the minister has to violate Article 23 of the Constitution to do so then I would suggest that he has already lost this battle, but yet he forges ahead.

“Mitchell also sought to assure this constituents that he would not ‘blink or stutter’ and [he would] continue to serve unswervingly their interest in this place”, if only he had stepped forward in the Baha Mar crisis – serve the best interest of the people, but if by serving their best interest and ‘acting accordingly’ he seeks to act against the constitution itself, then what great purpose has he served?

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

“Halkitis: FNM playing politics with Road Traffic Dept” – The Nassau Guardian

Except from this article; “Minister of State for Finance, Michael Halkitis said he is not surprised that the Free National Movement (FNM) is avoiding responsibility for the ‘long-standing’ issue of fraud and malfeasance outlined in the auditor general’s report on operations at the department of Road Traffic.

The report found among other things, that a minimum of $10 million at the department had been lost due to a ‘severe lack of order and control around the safe guarding of assets, collection of revenue and reporting of the same.

The general audit covers the period July 1, 2012, to June 30 2015.”

I find it quite interesting that any minister of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) would seek to take any report produced by the Auditor General’s office and prosecute anyone based on same said report when they refused to take action when the Auditor General’s report questioned certain practices within Urban Renewal but now they seek to make claim that others are making matters ‘political’, this is shameful.

Looking beyond the fact of Mr. Halkitis claiming that this matter is being made political by the Free National Movement, he then goes on to clarify his government’s position on the matter, “I don’t expect to them (the FNM) to take responsibility, because this is political season and I can say that over the four years of this administration, we have had precious few constructive intervention from the Free National Movement on any topic,” Halkitis said.

Having said that; we know these things are long-standing – I’m not going into a, it happened under yours or it happened under ours; discussion – it is long standing.”  I recall a ‘when pigs fly’ comment by a PLP minister but also like to point out, Mr. Halkitis, this is what you just did , gotten into what you claimed you would not get into but leaving all of this alone; there is still is the matter of how the auditor general’s report are only relevant when this governments says and it seems to have become pretty relevant in what this minister calls ‘political season’, after he has openly admitted that his administration has had four years to deal with working on correcting the problem; the ‘long-standing’ one that he claims that ‘the previous administration failed to identify’ and only seems to have taken his administration four years to identify, even after claiming “….the prior Christie administration had made efforts to modernize road traffic, but the Ingraham administration didn’t continue the plans.”, I feel Mr. Halkitis is being a tad bit dishonest here but if one were to take him at this word one would question why they spent millions on Junkanoo-Carnival, re-vamped Urban Renewal but allowed the corruption to continue at road traffic for over four years, are they that incompetent and inept at governance?

In no way do I look to excuse the previous administration for not identifying the problem in this department and others but to have ‘work’ begin in them to ‘correct’ these problems one year before a general election just is a bit suspicious to me, especially when the auditor general’s reports are now being used to make this corrections in light of the way in which his report was handled in the Urban Renewal matter, may I remind the Minister of State for Finance that his government went out and commissioned an ‘independent’ report when the auditor general issued one on Urban Renewal, maybe someone at Road Traffic needs to request another audit done, this government has turned the system into a joke.

So, Mr. Halkitis, wishes to end his comments with, “The fact of the matter is that this administration has identified where the weaknesses are, and we’re addressing it, and that is the bottom line” and I continue to winder will this be the same bottom line with urban Renewal?

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

“DPM: PLP did nothing wrong in 2002 referendum” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “Following a call by former Chief Justice Sir Michael Barnett for the government to apologize for campaigning against the 2002 constitutional referendum, Deputy Prime Minister Philip Davis said the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) did not , so it has nothing to apologize for.

‘A person will only apologize when they accept that they did something wrong.’ Davis said”

Here I feel is the most critical problem with the Progressive Liberal Party and why they continue to fail, “A person will only apologize when they accept that they did something wrong”, it seems to be in their nature to continue to be unable to accept their wrong doings.

In 2002 a question was brought to the people in the form of a referendum, asking for the removal gender discrimination from the Constitution, the Progressive Liberal Party voted for the bills in the House of Assembly and then promptly went out and campaigned against them. At that time they claimed that they campaigned against it because the church was not consulted on the matter, I would like to point out that the church was consulted on the Gaming Referendum; the rest is history.

The Progressive Liberal Party, campaigning against the 2002 Gender Equality Referendum, actually set the progress of women’s rights and equality back my at least fourteen years but yet today, as they seek to bring the referendum back to the people, they would claim that, and I quote “I did nothing wrong when I voted against it.’  Philip Davis says today but what is the reasoning that he is now giving as to why he voted against the referendum against the advancement of women’s rights back in 2002?  Bear in mind they have already said that it was because the church was not consulted.

“Davis told reporters outside the House of Assembly yesterday, that in 2002, he was voting against the ‘process’ and not the bills themselves.

‘I didn’t vote against no because I did not believe in the rights of the sexes, but rather because it was included in a number of other amendments, that bred confusion’, he said”

The referendum questions of 2002:

1. The removal of gender discrimination from the constitution.
2. The creation of a national commission to monitor the standards of teachers.
3. The creation of an independent election boundaries commission.
4. The increase of the retirement age of judges from 60 to 65 (or 68 to 72 for appellate judges).

The Deputy Prime Minister acts as if the people are not confused today by the questions put forth by his administration but a major difference now is that the Free National Movement today is not encouraging a “no” vote in the upcoming referendum but rather that people become educated on the questions and the possible ramifications on the future of the country and vote their conscience. 

I feel that the deputy Prime Minister is either conceding to his ignorance or is calling the rest of the people of the Bahamas ignorant because he implies that the only way to have avoided any confusion in any of the questions in the 2002 Referendum was to vote ‘no’ to all of the questions instead of becoming educated to what were the ramifications of the each and every question and voted your conscience, the Deputy Prime Minister is being very disingenuous and misleading  in his present explanation.

As I read the questions from the 2002 referendum, I am quite mystified as to the ‘confusion’ that Deputy Prime Minister spoke to and how the present presentation of the questions has provided any clarification.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

“And Moses said unto the people fear ye not stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord: Which he will show you today. For the Egyptians who ye have seen today, ye shall see them again no more.”

Exodus, 14: verse 13 & 14

Michael Pintard shared this stricture verse with the audience at his, “This Change is Unstoppable” event last night and indeed the event, the talk that he gave was a very timely one, with one of the main focuses being the systematic manner in which this present government attempts to threaten and intimidate anyone that stands up against it and he went on to explain why Bahamians should come together to remove them from office.

“Pintard: I will not be intimidated.” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “Former Free National Movement Chairman Michael Pintard last evening declared that he would not be intimidated and forced into silence, asserting that the only way for Bahamians to socially mature, would be through a systematic change of the current political model.

Speaking at his “This Change is Unstoppable” event, the veteran politician criticized both the PLP, and to a lesser degree the FNM for what he described as the ‘disgraceful’ concept of governance perpetrated by successive regimes.

The former Senator contended that the masses are suffering while the elite are left to flourish at their expense. 

Mr. Pintard further implied that the ‘concepts’ being fabricated by those that wish he would step away from front line politics, have been used to ‘cover up’ the supposed sinister wrong doings by members of the Christie administration.”

Indeed, the government in the past four years has been involved in some of the most underhanded and sinister plots that have taken the country backward instead of forward, plots mired in some of the most corrupt practices that we have ever seen.  A road of corruption, mismanagement and poor governance.

During the Bank of the Bahamas (BoB) fiasco; a former Free National Movement Chairman and Senator’s home was searched and belongings seized as the government looked for ‘the leak’, which was never found, that was revealing the record losses at the financial institution and the manner in which they were being covered up. 

Of course this ended with the losses being ‘transferred’ to newly created government entity; Resolve Bahamas, which was charged with recovering the losses.  To date the BoB is experiencing losses and the works of Resolve Bahamas is unknown.  Just think about it, the government creates a debt recovery agency to transfer its losses to and to oversee the recovery of said losses; this is unbelievable.

During the Peter Nygard/Louis Bacon Sage, this government again showed its attempts to threaten and intimidate persons into silence and/or submission, as it targeted anyone ‘associated’ with Louis Bacon; whom they claimed was/is an enemy of the state.

It is interesting the lengths that this Progressive Liberal Party went though in this matter to protect ‘one of its own’, a foreigner that has been known to contribute greatly to their party; “if you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us”, one PLP MP once said, we just did not know how deep ‘we’ went with this party.

We have two foreigner fighting over Bahamian soil and the government decides to side with one of them and threaten any and every one that does not follow their lead in this matter, even a Court Justice, just because she would not allow them to break the spirit of the law by invoking ‘parliamentary privilege’ to violate another’s persons Constitutional right to privacy, this is unbelievable.

As far as I am concerned, the present government has shown it propensity for illegality and nothing can be incriminating than the Marathon Gasoline spill matter, as they continue to attempt to cover up their mismanagement of this matter through threats and intimidation, they should be shame of themselves but we have come to know that they know no shame.

“Permit me to define what may qualify as a conspiracy.  A gasoline leak that is eventually brought to the attention of the government and the government, despite the recommendation of the report they commissioned to inform the residents, then makes the decision to not tell the residents or public about the potential dangers; for a full year Ministers maintain a code of silence.

‘Imagine a member of Parliament visiting your home and sitting and talking about your future traveling possibly with his bottle of water and watches you as you drink from your contaminated well; and never bothers to tell you that you may be at risk.”, this is the type of government that serves the Bahamas today.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END

“Nottage: Vote Hurt by Same-Sex Marriage talk” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “With momentum ahead of the June constitutional referendum appearing to be with the ‘no’ campaign, National Security Minister Dr. Bernard Nottage said yesterday that talks of same sex marriage will negatively impact the vote on amendments to the Constitution.

‘It will impact the vote negatively because the question and amendments have nothing to do with that’ he told reporters during an interview following a House of Assembly session yesterday.’

‘The fact that these matters are being brought up now is a bit mischievous because it would appear as if there are very responsible people in our community who are prepared to suggest that (the bills have to do with same sex marriage) when they know full well they are not connected.”

Excerpt from [the] Prime Minister (Perry Christie) tabling of four Constitutional amendment bills.

Bill #4: The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill, 2004.

Finally, Bill #4 seeks to end discrimination based on sex.  This involves the insertion of the word ‘sex’ into Article 26 of the Constitution so as to make it unconstitutional to discriminate on whether someone is male or female.

It is for me to caution, however, that the bill makes it clear that the existing exception will continue to apply. In particular, this bill will not make same –sex marriages lawful.  Such unions are already treated as void under the Matrimonial Act and the genesis of this particular legal position pre-dates the Independence Constitution.  This will not change under the proposed amendments to Article 26.”

The Prime Minister’s clarification to this situation is about as clear as that of Dr. Bernard Nottage leading up to the ‘Gaming Referendum’/Opinion Poll, when asked to give clarification to the question, “Do you support the regulation and taxation of web shop gaming?”, the question was how do you regulate and tax something that is illegal but the answer from Minister Nottage at the time was that legalize was implicitly implied in the word regulate, this lead to unnecessary confusion, the failure of the ‘Gaming Referendum’ and of course the rest is history and the question now is, are we headed in the very same direction?

As the Prime Minister proclaims “Not on my watch”, implying that the success of Bill #4 will not lead to same-sex marriages on ‘his watch’ because as he put it, “Such unions are already treated as void under the Matrimonial Act”, I would like to ask if we change the Constitution to PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION based on ‘sex’ and two of the same ‘sex’ wish to wed, then will the Matrimonial Act trump the Constitution which will now say that you cannot discriminate based on sex?

Yes, Dr. Nottage is right that some mischief is being created by some people, but the minister must also admit to the fact that a lot of the negativity toward the upcoming referendum has come about due to the confusion created by an inept and incompetent government.

Then there is the issue of the distrust created by the overturning of the ‘Gaming Referendum.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END