The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

MARCO City MP Greg Moss shocked the House of Assembly last night with the surprise announcement of his immediate resignation from the PLP, informing the Speaker that he would now have to assign him a new seat in the House at the next sitting.

Government’s failure to fulfil various promises and the leadership problems within the government were the reasons for his decision.

Mr Moss, who plans to remain a parliamentarian, made the shock announcement during his budget communication in the House of Assembly yesterday.

He said his letter of resignation would be sent to party leader Prime Minister Perry Christie and Chairman Bradley Roberts today.

The backbencher has spent much of his three years in office criticising the government over such issues as value added tax (VAT), crime and its proposed constitutional amendments to address gender equality.

Last night, he said his conscience prompted him to leave the PLP because the party no longer abides by the founding principles that prompted its rise to power.

He criticised the Christie administration for its performance in relation to such issues as crime, failed mortgage relief, Urban Renewal and the stalled development of Grand Bahama.

“By the time I come back to this House, Mr Speaker,” he said, “you are going to be required to exercise your discretion under Rule 23 Sub 3 (of parliamentary rules) regarding the seating of members in this House because tonight I’m going to resign as a member of the PLP. I cannot continue with this party in the manner with which it is operating. That resignation (letter) will be with you tomorrow and to the leader of our party (and) to the chairman of the party.

“I strongly encourage the party to look not at window dressing, but at changes. We clearly have a problem with leadership…both at the executive level and at (the) party level. I’ll follow my conscience on this, Mr Speaker, and I will ask to be reseated.”

During his contribution, Mr Moss was highly critical of the government’s recently unveiled “Stronger Bahamas” initiative and the Office of the Attorney General’s decision not to pursue legal action against MICAL MP V Alfred Gray in a judicial interference case that has attracted headlines.

“When we consider this question of whether the Bahamas is better today than three years ago, the answer is no,” he said. “That is not just me speaking. That is the whole messaging behind this Stronger Bahamas campaign – that something more needs to be done. Crime, mortgage relief, electrical rates, unemployment, education performance, work permits, taxes, transparency, law and order – it’s very difficult to stand up and say any of those have been worked out.

“What has our response been? To change our approach? To start to build a better structure? To make the changes within our organisation that need to be made? Or to just change the packaging? (The message in Stronger Bahamas is) that we are transferring the burden of governance in this place to the people. That’s transferring the responsibility of where we are right now, from us, to them. That’s (like saying), we’re not the ones who are responsible for making the streets safer; we’re not the ones responsible for dealing with education, jobs, and opportunities; we’re not the ones responsible for building a modern Bahamas for our children to have a brighter future. We’re not the ones responsible for building that momentum, the people are. But that’s not what they elected us for. They elected us to come in here with vision.”

As for Mr Gray, he said: “Do we remember that what we do in this House and what the members of this House who are in the executive do over there, that the people are watching and that it impacts the country? How can we be serious about saying we’re dealing with crime when we ourselves are encouraging at least the perception, not saying a reality, but a perception of lawlessness in some of our actions? I look at something like the…member for MICAL…I do believe that the executive does not interfere with the judiciary. I believe that is a fundamental tenant of our Constitution and it is a fundamental requirement of law and order in this country.

“When the executive is able to say the judiciary will not even have a chance to make a determination on an issue that involves a member of the executive and the legislature, why is that not alarming to everyone? When our attorney general is able to say we will not put any case before any court in the Bahamas where there is a conflict of evidence and that becomes the pretext for removing something from the domain of the court, what happens to the fella down at the court who hasn’t confessed to anything and therefore is involved in a conflict of evidence? Why is his case going forward and what is the standard and the message we’re sending to the world on what we do in this country? I believe in due process and I do not believe in the interference in the judiciary by simply not putting a case forward for the judiciary to consider.”

Mr Moss blamed the administration for failing to fulfil numerous election promises, including one to reduce the departure tax rate in Grand Bahama by 50 per cent.

He said a recently revealed plan to stop people from importing cars into the country that are older than 10 years is poorly thought out and questioned what impact it will have on poor people in the country.

Regarding mortgage relief, he hit out at Mr Christie for repeatedly expressing confidence that the government will successfully address the issue without having achieved anything concrete as the administration heads into its fourth year in office.

Mr Moss was brought into the PLP by Mr Christie before the last general election and was highlighted as part of the party’s new generation of leaders, a group that has since gone on to attract more attention for the harsh criticism some have directed at the Christie administration than for their willingness to tow the party line.

The Marco City MP first attracted controversy when he was chairman of the National Insurance Board.

However, Mr Christie fired Mr Moss from this post in 2013 because of “untenable” statements he made to the media about the prime minister at the time.