BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THEinappropriate tirade launched by Prime Minister the Right Hon. Denzil L. Douglas against fellow parliamentarian the Hon. Shawn K. Richards over “chalk” still weighs heavily on the minds of the people of St. Kitts-Nevis, especially with Dr. Douglas’ recent refusal to offer an apology.
The haunting incident took place during a two-day sitting of the Federal Parliament in February when Richards, having risen to make his contribution, said he was made aware that chalk, a teaching supply which was thought not to have been VAT-able, actually was.
In response, Dr. Douglas repeatedly shouted across the floor in Parliament to Richards and referred to him as a liar and in some instances, a blatant liar.
The Prime Minister – Parliamentary Representative for Constituency Number Six – rose again later in that session to renege, retracting his statements, having received information which proved that chalk was indeed VAT-able.
Richards had demanded that the Prime Minister deliver a public apology during the next sitting of Parliament.
Dr. Douglas fell short of that when – weeks ago – during his Ask the Prime Minister radio programme, he thanked Richards for ventilating the issue. But still, no apology!
During the Tuesday, March 13-edition of Ask the PM, a caller suggested to the Prime Minister that he feels he owes an apology to Richards – Parliamentary representative for Constituency Number Five - to the House of Parliament and to the nation.
The caller explained that Dr. Douglas’ behaviour might have left “a bad taste” in the mouths of, or may send “a bad message” to the youth of the nation - some of whom were at Parliament when the incident occurred.
He also expressed that a double message is being sent to the youth of this nation when “we as big people, we could do as we like but when it comes to them, they must behave a certain way”.
It is apparent, however, that Dr. Douglas has no intention of extending an apology. Or rather, it is possible he feels that retraction of one’s statement is equivalent to an apology.
“Owing Honourable Shawn Richards an apology and owing the nation an apology and Parliament, I don’t see it that way. When I got the information, while still sitting in Parliament that chalk was in fact VAT-ed, at the end of the Parliament session I got up and I explained to the Parliament that an error was obviously made on my part. I therefore wanted to withdraw my own statement because I have now had information sent to me from the VAT office, from the Ministry of Finance, that chalk was actually VAT-ed. And I said I wish to withdraw that statement because it was an inaccurate statement.
“I don’t see why I have to make an apology to anybody. I have already cleared the matter up on the House...I cleared the matter up in the nation. It is unfortunate that the Honourable Shawn Richards was not in Parliament at that time to hear the statement that I made. That is his problem. He should have been in Parliament. So I must now go back to the next Parliament and repeat myself? I am not doing that!”
