The Tribune

The Prime Minister will not reprimand any of his ministers involved in conflict of interest in Baha Mar. Malcolm J Strachan wonders why when the evidence is so clear . . .

The entire nation has been in an uproar since the unseemly emails from Minister of Education Jerome Fitzgerald attempting to solicit contracts from Baha Mar’s original developer, Sarkis Izmirlian, leaked last week.

This is a direct violation of the rules of Cabinet. Section 40 of the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure reads as follows:

“A Minister must not: (a) Solicit or accept from any person any remuneration or benefit for the discharge of the duties of his office over and above his official remuneration; (b) Solicit or accept any benefit, advantage or promise of future advantage whether for himself, his immediate family or any business concern or trust with which he is associated from persons who are in, or seek to be in, any contractual or special relationship with Government.”

When Mr Fitzgerald, along with Allyson Maynard-Gibson, the Attorney General, was questioned by the media about the allegations, he said: “I don’t respond to The Punch and social media, and I don’t respond to people that I can’t sue. I do not respond to any. I don’t have any contracts whatsoever, none, zero.”

As for Mrs Maynard-Gibson, she said: “It is a lie. I am not benefiting from anything at all in relation to the negotiations that we worked so hard as a government for the Bahamian people in relation to the Baha Mar transaction.”

She later confirmed that her husband, Maxwell Gibson, held leases for stores at Baha Mar, but maintains that there is no conflict of interest with her role as a negotiator on Baha Mar, citing Prime Minister Perry Christie’s awareness of the matter.

Perhaps we, the public, are the ones that are confused about the meaning of a conflict of interest. Our understanding of a conflict of interest aligns well with the Business Dictionary’s definition - “a situation that has the potential to undermine the impartiality of a person because of the possibility of a clash between the person’s self-interest and professional interest or public interest.”

That being said, both Mrs Maynard-Gibson and Mr Fitzgerald are involved in absolute conflicts of interest. Mrs Maynard-Gibson, by virtue of being in a marital relationship with her husband and her assignment as a negotiator when the project was in a deadlock in 2015, was implicated.

Mr Fitzgerald’s inappropriate emails to Mr Izmirlian stand as irrefutable evidence of his unscrupulous behaviour and total disregard for the rules outlined in the Manual of Cabinet and Ministry Procedure.

Both of these ministers’ responses in the midst of these allegations have been calm, as if they have no fear of the consequences of their actions. Days after the front pages of the local dailies were plastered with headlines of this scandal, the public has been calling for swift and harsh action from the Prime Minister.

On nomination day, Mr Christie practically scurried away from reporters asking for a statement on what course of action will be taken as a result of this scandal. On Friday, at the opening of Baha Mar, the Prime Minister shooed the press away and declined to comment - all while he has yet to make a statement on one of his Cabinet ministers being caught in a direct conflict of interest. Visibly frustrated, he said, “Today is a celebratory day and I am not speaking today. I am not speaking today. I am not speaking today.”

Mr Fitzgerald was also in attendance, exhibiting a certain confidence that he has satisfied the public with the statement he released regarding his actions.

“At the end of the day I have made my statement and I have been nominated and there is nothing much more to say about that. So we will continue to move forward with that. I have said what I had to say. I have sent a press release and that’s it. I am not going to say anything more about that. It is what it is,” he said.

What is particularly disturbing is that Mr Fitzgerald said that he could not break Cabinet rules to warn his constituents about the Rubis oil leak, but has no issue breaking them to serve his personal interest.

We should note that this is the same minister that Perry Christie appointed as lead negotiator in finding a purchaser for Baha Mar. We don’t know the level of contracts Mr Fitzgerald would have secured with the Chinese, but we can certainly imagine this may have been at play in his negotiations on behalf of the Bahamas government. We do know that he had motive in not supporting and advancing the proposal made by Mr Izmirlian, which was a better deal (admitted by Mr Christie among others) for Bahamians on all fronts (higher sale price, inclusive of an all-Bahamian labour force in construction phase, payment of all taxes on purchase). We also know that Mr Fitzgerald received work from China Construction America (CCA), which can explain why CCA has received multiple contracts from this current administration.

Perhaps there is a reason why Mr Christie can’t fire Jerome Fitzgerald. Maybe there is a reason why the Prime Minister won’t reprimand any of his ministers who are involved in overt conflicts of interest with Baha Mar. Maybe they know something that we don’t know about Perry Christie and Baha Mar.

From the moment the Bahamas government got involved, they have sullied the reputation of this resort. They want to divert our attention away from this terrible scandal. But the Bahamian public are unable to ignore this. This is a pivotal point in our country. We say we want a better Bahamas, but it must start with eradicating this kind of arrogant, self-serving style of corrupt governance.

• Comments and responses to insight@tribunemedia.net