The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Senior Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net 

SEABREEZE MP Lanisha Rolle unloaded about her experience as a Cabinet minister in the House of Assembly yesterday, using her contribution to the budget debate to defend her conduct in office, to discuss the sexism she experienced and to lament the Free National Movement’s decision to deny her a nomination in the next general election.

Mrs Rolle resigned from Cabinet in February. The Cabinet Office released a statement saying certain information had been brought to the attention of Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis.

Yesterday, Mrs Rolle said the statement caused her hurt and harm.

“In case anyone stands to assume that I was under some investigation and this is the reason for my not being nominated, I requested further clarification of the statement made by the Cabinet which incorrectly insinuated that my resignation was as the result of some investigation,” she said. “The good member for Killarney (Dr Minnis) clarified in a public statement to the press that there was no investigation concerning this member. I thank him.

“Sometimes, however, what you give to the world you cannot take back. Appreciating the hurt and harm this has caused me and I do not wish on any other, I will endeavour to guard my words here so as not to damage the character of any member here, to hurt their family, their livelihoods, their character or reputation. I have three children, I have a husband, I have a mother and I have a father like everyone else here. I say no more on that.”

Mrs Rolle insisted she did nothing improper, noting that neither the Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture nor her previous ministry, the Ministry of Social Services, “kept money.”

“I gave approvals only on that which were in accordance with the Cabinet’s manual of responsibility, the government of The Bahamas’ General Orders, particularly following sections nine and ten on the rules of conflict of interest and procedures specified in the Financial Administration and Audit Act as amended in 2010,” she said.

“Ministers don’t sign cheques, ministers don’t hold cheques. No ministry I kept held money. Every financial transaction of a minister is either based on a recommendation by the permanent secretary and, in the case of statutory bodies, on the recommendation of a board.

“Financial transactions in government are subject to a strict process and no ministry I held had large budgets to do anything. It was austerity for some. Nevertheless, what was spent on necessary projects were recommended by the relevant authorities, approved by this minister when or where I was satisfied that policies were followed and authorisation was given by the ministry of Finance and payments issued through and by the Public Treasury. I rely on the good auditor general to say if any transaction under my tenure and at my approval was contrary to the rules.”

Mrs Rolle said if there were concerns about transactions in her ministry, those concerns should have been brought to her attention.

“If a challenge arose with respect to any transaction of a ministry, which is expected in the operations of any business or administration…then the minister should be the first to be apprised to address the matter. One day in this Westminster system, I’ll say it while I can. . .we will show respect for each other as we do those of a different colour and gender in some instances. Pulling down, destroying each other, has no place in a better Bahamas and, as for me, I refuse to be a part of the nonsense.

“Criticism and unwarranted suspicion are clouds over every political and leadership office,” she added. “Every one of us are held in suspicion…we ignore some though and we make a mockery of others who we feel are not worthy of being protected.”

The Tribune understands that Dr Minnis ordered a lockdown of the Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture after people affiliated with the National Sports Authority expressed concerns to him about operations at the NSA.

Mrs Rolle said in performing her duties, she tried to ensure that projects were completed on schedule and on budget. She said she encountered many unexplained cost overruns at Urban Renewal and the National Sports Authority.

She said: “Did persons try to bully me as a young female minister? Nobody asked me until now. Of course. Was I protected against the bullying? Maybe not. But I stood my ground even if I stood alone and today I am where I am and it is what it is.”

When news broke about Mrs Rolle’s resignation from Cabinet, people circulated images of her house on social media and cast aspersions on her character.

Addressing this yesterday, she said: “I don’t know why all the members that sit in this place that have homes, cars and are building homes and other projects, why one would go so far as sending a drone over a house under construction and under mortgage. Ministers receive a minimum remuneration of $99,000 per annum and I am sure I was the least among the many. Some received housing allowance and additional allowance but surely one can use their funds and that of their family as they see fit without being unduly, unjustifiably accused.”

Mrs Rolle said she intended to continue as MP for Seabreeze and expressed confidence that she would have won if renominated. She said her party’s decision not to renominate her has caused turbulence in her constituency.

She said after she was not ratified by March 12, she wrote to the FNM to say she will not seek renomination.

“The constant humiliation and distraction were not helpful at a time when we needed to focus on the growing instances of murder and violent crime and joblessness and homelessness and other pressing issues and COVID-19 and vaccines and masks,” she said. “I told the party in submitting this letter to go and find your best candidate that can top 3,500 votes, to work for that, over the one woman that bore the burden to represent the female gender and agenda for our country in the Cabinet and outside for nearly four years under the most extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances. I don’t stand here to say I’m perfect, but the facts speak for themselves and so much work must be worth something.”

She told a story of a constituent who approached her two years ago and told her she was not given the support previous male MPs in that constituency had received.

“This was my maiden voyage and the help and support…I thought I would receive was not forthcoming, but I pressed on with the team and today I am proud of our accomplishments,” she said.

She called for an increase in salaries for parliamentarians.

“I sat as a senator and attending every event as a dignitary, drafting and preparing and bringing remarks, attending Parliament for days on end, etc. at a salary of $250 per week is a salary structure that requires urgent review,” she said. “Senators work hard too. As a senator, citizens also look for assistance similar to their requests for members of Parliament and it is no reasonable answer to say one knows the salary before they take the job. As a human resource specialist, it is standard practice that the salary be commensurate with the job and vice versa and national office should be held in more respectable regard in my view.”

Mrs Rolle also said the government should have increased the allocations to MPs given the challenge posed by COVID-19.

“To my mind, adjustments should have been made to operations in capital budgets to strengthen the direct assistance to constituents by members of Parliament,” she said. “The reality is most if not all members of Parliament had to spend of their own resources, whether directly or indirectly, to meet the great demand of the people during these most challenging and unprecedented times. If they were given the resources the MPs could’ve provided, to my mind, for the government a more personal touch that the people could feel and appreciate. “As it stands now, notwithstanding the government’s multiple assistance programme, including food assistance…the people’s cry is either that (the) COVID-19 relief programme is inadequate, not reaching the masses or the provision is simply not enough compared to their degree of hardship.”