The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

The recent verbal sparring matches in the House between PM Perry G Christie and those within the inner sanctum of the Cabinet and prodigal PLP MP Gregory Moss over the constitutional amendment bills, Valued Added Tax and perceived political threats are ironic.

Moss, whose days with the embattled PLP are numbered, accused Hubert Ingraham of being a dictator at a Gold Rust rally in early 2012.

In all likelihood, Moss back then as a political upstart and neophyte was only parroting what PLP political analysts and candidates were saying at their rallies.

It might also be safe to assume that Moss based his allegations of Ingraham being a dictator on his limited observation on the manner Ingraham handled rogue FNM MPs and his management style during his tenure as PM.

Whatever the case might be, Moss, if he is honest enough, would admit that there is an appreciable difference between Ingraham and Christie, when it comes to leadership.

While Ingraham was a strong and decisive leader who was in charge of his cabinet, Christie feeds the age old narrative that he is weak and indecisive and afraid of certain elements within his own government.

In its current state, the PLP government seems to be led by a quarternion: Perry Christie, Philip ‘‘Brave’’ Davis, Fred Mitchell and Obie Wilchcombe.

The Whistleblower is convinced that Brave Davis is the undisputed top gun of the quattuor, although some might argue that it is really Mitchell who calls the shots, due to the excessive latitude he operates under as minister of foreign affairs.

Be that as it may, Davis commands the full support of many within the PLP Cabinet, as well as some of the PLP backbenchers who are constantly at loggerheads with Christie.

Christie is nothing more than a grandfatherly figure whose post as PM is more symbolic than anything else.

The Whistleblower believes that Davis is the substantive PM. Christie is just the face of the party. His veiled and subtle political threats against Moss and Dr Andre Rollins may have born out of his frustration at having his policies challenged repeatedly by the two.

The PM made it painstakingly clear that the two would appreciate the political consequences of their decision to oppose the constitutional amendment bills.

This is clearly a threat, despite Christie and his backers’ language gymnastics in an attempt to redefine the meaning of the word. And so because an MP from the PLP expresses his grave concerns over a bill that will have enormous implications for The Bahamas, he is threatened.

If this isn’t vintage dictatorship, then what is? Christie has morphed into a subtle dictator, although his grip on the leadership is loosening.

He seems to have little toleration for differing views on the country should be managed.

Moss has endeared himself to many Bahamians who are wary of Christie and his government. And while some might attribute his opposition to Christie to his firing as NIB chairman in early 2013 by the latter, he should still be given a modicum of credit for fearlessly speaking out on behalf of the Bahamian people.

Contrast his approach to those within the Cabinet. The Whistleblower calls them the yes men. If either Christie or Davis decides to hand over Inagua and the southern Bahamas to the Republic of Haiti, these yes men within the Cabinet would give their full approval.

It’s my opinion that loyalty to their party means more to them than the welfare of The Bahamas.

THE WHISTLEBLOWER

August 20, 2014.