By James Milnes Gaskell
More people have spoken to me about Part I of this article than about any other. Comments, with one exception have been favourable. “Everyone in Town is talking about your article. We’ve been telling the Leadership (of NRP) what you say, but they don’t listen. Is Mr. G. going to vote CCM next time?” And from someone close to the Government centre, “Why did you put this out in the Public? You could have come to us and it could have been sorted out. Mark and the CCM are having a field day.” I am grateful to one caller who said, “Excellent, well researched article, but you made one mistake. You took the figures from those the Media first put out, and the correct figures are for St. Pauls that the NRP has only a 30 vote margin over CCM.”
;
It is gratifying to hear that what one has written is being discussed. The purpose of my columns is to try to provoke interest and debate. It is not the function of a columnist to tell people what to do, but it can be his role to discuss courses of action which could be taken and what might happen if they are or are not.
All I said was, that in my opinion, if there was not a remake and revitalisation of the NRP at the top in order to put their case properly to the Media and the people then the NRP would be heading for the electoral Exit. I shall take this a little further. For some time senior members of the NRP, not in the Cabinet, have been telling me that they are not being kept informed. If a party loses its core supporters it is in trouble.
To the person who wished that I had not written and should have gone to the NRP leadership before writing, I say that you misunderstand the point of an independent Press. I am not a tame NRP hack, even if, for his own purposes, Mr. Mark Brantley refers to me as an attack dog for the NRP. My columns are not for that purpose. What I am saying, NRP, is that Mark and the CCM are going to have a field day at local election time unless you take certain actions now. Would you not prefer that he and they have their field day now rather than the day after people have voted?
How I vote is a private matter, but it can be no secret what I thought of the actions of the CCM Administration. I imagine that Premier Parry would not have referred specific matters to the Commission of Inquiry unless he had some information to show that they were matters worthy of inquiry. If a Commission finds nothing to comment on and that the subjects submitted for Inquiry had no substance, then the report of such a Commission might well reflect badly on those who set it up.
Voters have short memories. I can think of several instances in which the CCM Administration was not acting in the interests of the people. The piece of Island Road from the Airport to Jessups was built by a contractor at 35% more per square foot than the road built by a different contractor between Jessops and Market Shop. The more expensive contractor was given the job, as I understand it, without competition from others. Apart from being so much more expensive, that Airport to Jessups Road is patched, repatched and repotholed. Look at it. Drive on it. It is already a 50-year -ld road. There is no comparison between it and the other section. It is a CCM road.
No proper investigations of Nevis Express and its Alaska-based owner company were made by the CCM Administration before they guaranteed a loan of US$1.5 million to that foreign company. The company defaulted almost immediately. And we, yes you and me, were called upon to pay out of our Treasury US$1.5 million. A competent Administration would have made an assessment of Nevis Express’ business prospects, and discovering no likelihood of success, would have declined to act as guarantor.
Six hundred acres of the best land owned by our Nevis Housing & Land Development Corporation were sold by the CCM Administration just before the 2006 Election at a low price and with a scandalous give-away package to some Canadian real estate hustlers fronting a company already in financial difficulties. These developers contracted with us to build a 150 Room 5 Star Hotel, 400 Villas and a Golf Course. Five years later what has been accomplished? Zero. The bush continues to grow unimpeded. The only action taken by the developers has been to sue Lyndeta Martin/Double Deuce for vacant possession. What a start!
The matters briefly described were harmful to our interests. I see no reason why CCM if returned to office should not continue to exercise its powers to the disadvantage of the people. That is why I am anxious that the NRP Administration puts its case properly.
There is no such thing as a perfect government, and each one of us might have different priorities. I would have preferred that money be spent on school kitchens and cooks’ training and a food and nutrition Public Education campaign rather than on roads and a race track. But by and large the NRP has fulfilled its election pledges. That is more than can be said of most governments.
That sage and experienced politician Mayor Bloomberg of New York said that when you get in to office you should do the bad things first. In other words, do not wait until just before an election to do things that people don’t like and don’t appreciate. There is about 15 months left to this Administration. If there is anything damaging to their cause they should produce it now. There are under the radar reports circulating about unfortunate goings on at Land & Housing. I have not investigated. I hope that there is nothing to them. If there is any truth in these reports/rumours, you can be sure that the CCM Opposition will know about them and will be biding their time to use them to maximum advantage. History shows that political parties are harmed far more by attempted cover-ups of unsavoury affairs than by the actual conduct of the individuals concerned. The fact is that the Administration’s present Public Relations is not capable of handling anything seriously untoward. Another reason for bringing in some powerful characters who can. I get the impression that the Premier is very loyal to his friends. That is a fine personal quality, but if taken too far it allows weaker members of a team to stay on too long until they bring the whole edifice down with them. If the Premier wants to leave a legacy he needs two terms. Geothermal will be claimed by and will attach to the next Administration. The school meals programme, a necessary precursor to a change to a more healthy diet and lifestyle in Nevis could develop well in his second term. CCM, on the other hand, did not support it during their time in office and in the person of Mark Brantley they mock my interest and efforts. There are two national emergencies. One is crime. It is immediate and obvious. The other is the health of the nation as undermined by a fast food diet. That is a slow burning insidious crisis, difficult for everyone to grasp, but it could be brought more under control if the Administration rates it a top priority in all respects, and has money to spend on it.
During the January Election campaign, Mark Brantley, on his VON propaganda programme, chose to play a ‘clip’ or very short part of a speech made by Premier Parry. “We will go out with all guns blazing,” said the Premier. I did not hear the full speech but even hearing the clip it was obvious to me that he meant that his team was going to give the campaign all they had got. However, Mark Brantley chose to suggest that, in terms, the Premier was going out to fire a real gun. And when someone called in to say, “Have you not heard that as a cricket expression?” he said no, he had not.
My dictionary Thesaurus says: “If you do something, especially argue, with guns blazing you do it with a lot of force and energy.” I have found the expression used by footballers, cricketers and in motor racing. I have a quote from around the time the Premier was using the expression:
January 12th 2010. Australian wicket keeper Brad Haddin said of the Pakistani cricketer Kamran Akmal, “He’s played 50 Tests, so he’s a quality International cricketer, and I would be surprised if he didn’t come out all guns blazing in this next Test match.”
A good Media king would not have allowed Brantley to get away with his scurrilous suggestion. He might have said, “Mark Brantley is no longer young, he is Middle Aged Mark. He claims great intelligence and a superior education. He is asking us to accept that in all his years he had never heard this regularly used expression, that he did not quote it out of context trying to insinuate that the Premier and his Party espoused violence. Either he is not so clever as he tells us or he is lying and is delivering a sneaky attack on the Premier, unworthy of a serious contender for office, etc. etc.” The present PR Team is not up to the task of turning the tables in this way.
It was reassuring a week ago to hear Inspector Brandy, an honourable man, say that there had been no political direction before the police questioned a number of foreigners here in Nevis. Nevertheless, I have relevant personal experience in respect of a Guyanese employee whom I shall call Mr. X. Mr. X has been married to a Nevisian for about 10 years. There are four children of the marriage. He is still married to her. Every year in January he goes to the Administration Building to have his passport stamped, for a fee of $250, ‘Permission to reside in Nevis by virtue of Marriage’. This year the Permanent Secretary at the Premier’s Ministry declined to put in the Residency stamp, saying that she had received a letter from his wife (or his wife’s lawyer). I went to see the Permanent Secretary. She refused to let me or Mr. X see the letter she claimed to have received, and in spite of repeated polite requests from me to let me know the statutory authority permitting her to decline the Residency stamp of a Guyanese married to a Nevisian, she refused. After our meeting, (February 11th 2010) I wrote to her confirming my request that the Ministry now grant Mr. X’s application. I wrote also to the Legal Adviser asking him to give me the Statutory Authority empowering the Permanent Secretary to refuse an annual Residency permit in respect of a continuing marriage.
Neither one has answered or even acknowledged my letter. Does the Premier know the manner in which the senior Civil Servant in his Ministry is operating? Is this kind of thing widespread? I feel pretty sure that there is unlikely to be any parliamentary authority giving discretion to the Premier’s Ministry to grant or refuse residency status to a Guyanese married to a Nevisian. If there is, why don’t they tell me what it is? However capable a new Media king might be, he would find it difficult to defend the indefensible.
So my message is, put your house in order yesterday and import some seriously competent politically savvy Media-oriented persons into your inner circle to publicise your policies and get tighter control of your performance. Four times Patrice Nisbett has lost in St. James. The majority of voters there know where they put their X previously. It was not against the name Nisbett P. If you want to make a serious effort to win the crucial St. James’ seat you will have to find a good candidate whom the people have not turned down four times.
You have to reinvigorate your Party at the top. The figures of the last Election prove it. If it is business as usual and a lost election next year, who do you think your NRP members will blame?
Finally, and obviously, if there is a change at the top, it will be because the NRP leadership wants it. It is up to their Executive; no one else.
.jpg)