The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

THE Organization for Responsible Governance said the revelations about “potential co-mingling” between government spending and partisan politics regarding Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis’ recent trip to Bermuda “opens the door” for speculation.

In an interview with The Tribune yesterday, ORG’S executive director Matt Aubry said the controversy surrounding the Bermuda trip does not speak to the nature of what good governance calls for, which is “transparency and accountability”.

Following calls from the press and the official opposition for the government to be transparent and reveal the documentation that showed who paid for the October 19 trip to Bermuda, the governing party released a copy of a $24,750 FirstCaribbean International Bank cheque to the Public Treasury, dated October 21, 2022, to reflect payment from the organisation for the trip.

Prime Minister Phillip “Brave” Davis admitted on Wednesday that the reimbursement cheque did not cover the total of the bills for the event, however he was adamant that “everything will be reckoned”.

During Wednesday’s House of Assembly sitting, Free National Movement leader Michael Pintard raised the issue, questioning as to who gave authorisation for public funds to be used to pay for the flight and other things associated with the trip, which has been described as a political event.

“When you might hear that there could be a potential co-mingling between government spending and political partisan work, it absolutely opens the door for lots of different types of speculation and that’s not helpful related to encouraging citizens to be aware, to be involved, to support a new initiative, or new policy like the Public Procurement Act or investment policy or anything,” Mr Aubry said when contacted for comment yesterday.

“So, the way information comes out and the way that it is presented is going to be important in terms of building trust,” he added.

Mr Aubry explained that the lack of transparency from the government contributed to citizens “questioning” and “wondering” the interest and intentions of the government due to the lack of access to information, whether it be through freedom of information or a more open disclosure about policies and spending decisions.

He suggested that moving forward the government should ensure that policies and decisions regarding public spending are ultimately geared towards the interest of citizens rather than the ruling political party.

He believes that this will allow the opportunity for governance in the country to “move forward” and allow room for the government to make mistakes, rather than falling into the “political back and forth”.

“The path forward if we’re going to be successful is that we have to ensure that policies and decisions on public spending are towards the interests of everybody and at the interests of government and party or second to the interests of citizens,” Mr Aubry said yesterday.

He also said the local governance culture in The Bahamas actively struggles with relaying information to the public “proactively”, hence why the organisation has consistently advocated for the full enactment of the Freedom of Information Act.

“You want to move forward with having proactive and clear mechanisms for governance and expenditures, so that there’s not a question related to if a trip is scheduled. Here’s the outcomes, here’s what’s to be achieved, here’s what we’re trying to achieve, and it does not become potentially co-mingling.

“Our culture (has) such a polarised focus on party and affiliation within that party, that you can see a lot of what is purported and put forward relates to the back and forth between the parties, and that that clouds sometimes what needs to be seen in a situation like this, which is that fundamentally the citizens should have access to information that tells them this is how a decision was made.

“If it’s not being made appropriately then they should be acknowledged, that there should be a capacity to be able to address it. If it is being made appropriately then there should be very clear and easy to understand situations that are provided beforehand, ideally, versus and after the fact where whatever is presented is going to be put through a political lens.”