By LEANDRA ROLLE
Tribune Chief Reporter
lrolle@tribunemedia.net
FREE National Movement (FNM) leader Michael Pintard said his predecessor, Dr Hubert Minnis, left behind debts that the party is still paying off, insisting that under his leadership, “we don’t plan to leave bills for anybody”.
During a meet and greet event at Breezes on Friday, Mr Pintard said his opponents were “crying for convention” and bad-mouthing his team about money matters.
“When I took this position in November 2021, the party had some legacy debts, some debts we met in place, and despite the other side’s conversation about who has the ability to raise money, we are paying their debts off right now,” he said.
“I want you to be clear, those who are talking money talks –– we just gon’ say it in a general way –– under my leadership, we are paying off their bills, and we don’t plan to leave bills for anybody else. We believe in shouldering our responsibility.”
Mr Pintard did not say how much the party owed when he assumed office, but an insider familiar with the matter told The Tribune that “hundreds of thousands” were owed.
“We are a different way than before,” Mr Pintard said.“Remember there was a time in the party when some folks wanted to challenge the leadership that I protected, and the leadership simply said, you want to join the fight, drop $100,000 on the table, and you could join.”
In 2016, under Dr Minnis’ tenure, leadership candidates for the FNM’s convention were required to pay $100k to host the event.
Mr Pintard said under his leadership, no one would be stopped from running because of their financial status.
“We didn’t ask anybody to drop money on the table,” he said. “Others were crying for convention. Oh, and look at God, they got it, and they’re still crying. Don’t cry. Man up and let’s do the thing.”
Mr Pintard called for unity during Friday’s event.
He urged FNM supporters to be cautious during this race, saying: “You don’t want to throw fatal blows because we will need those soldiers on June 2nd and beyond.”
“Be careful how you fight this fight. They are not the enemy even though they behave that way.”
Mr Pintard said although some party factions sued his team “not once but twice,” they are still family and must be embraced.
“Don’t engage in useless banter back in forth saying things that will injure, and it will take too long for people to heal so we can pull together, let’s just pull together,” he said. “In a short while, it will be over.”
Some members of the FNM’s Women’s Association recently took the party to court, claiming unfairness over the process for electing association leaders. Before that, FNM vice chairman Richard Johnson, a supporter of Dr Minnis, sued the party after he was banned from attending council meetings.
Comments
birdiestrachan 6 months ago
What does the Fnm papa papa Ingraham have to say to his little boys and girls no spanking I hope
TalRussell 6 months ago
Notes': (A). Where his "official residence" is. (B). How the official opposition leader is ever careful..how not to comment on this fight which the "Brave" premiership has ongoing within the GBPA. --- Yes?
sheeprunner12 6 months ago
Pintard is taking a page out of Gravy Davis book of lies ..... He should say what the bills were for, who racked up the bills & why it took him 2 years to reveal that to the public.
ThisIsOurs 6 months ago
I'm not certain I've heard any party leader in opposition or ruling party, on assuming the seat, calling a press conference to announce "y'all, we 200,000 in debt". Individuals dont even do that. You quietly work to pay off what's outstanding and restore yourself to the black.
rosiepi 6 months ago
Those ‘legacy’ debts Pintard is referring to date back to the days of Ingraham’s leadership.
ThisIsOurs 6 months ago
That should be easy enough to determine. Opening balance, revenue, expenses, closing balance.
TalRussell 6 months ago
To enter into Deadman's Cay, Long Island's major settlement, you enter through the sheep gate. --- To this very day that's where all the trading of sheep by sheep runners' still takes place. --- Yes?
ThisIsOurs 6 months ago
"no one would be stopped from running because of their financial status."
I havent resolved this issue in my own mind. Anyone who says that a seat in Parliament is not viewed by many who put their names forward as a gateway to riches is deaf and blind. It may be a fact that in reality only a few power brokers ever realize any bump in wealth while the pawns and those with true conviction just hear the sip sip about who get what. But Ive always thought that there is an inherent danger of putting a man with lack on top of a billion dollar pot of gold. But rich men steal too. And wouldnt it be discriminatory to exclude a talented individual or a man with conviction because they dont have the funds? I still battle with this. The answer is likely a truly transparent system that would tie sticky fingers of both rich and poor. But transparency appears to be a selective game ball. Alas we have a 25m contract for airport cargo handling to a gaming operator, no bid, approved by the cabinet/FS(?). Who told us a week ago(?) ~transparency takes time, we getting there.... while millions leak.
Having opening balance, revenue. expenses, closing balance of the ruling party doesnt seem like a bad idea
Sign in to comment
OpenID