BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER Sam Condor, who also holds responsibility for Foreign Affairs, is sticking to his guns on the Dubai Consulate debacle, suggesting that a recent Cabinet-issued statement on that subject does not present an accurate representation of the truth.
The release was issued following an April 2, 2012 Cabinet Retreat held at the Marriott and was headlined “Cabinet Statement on the Opening of a Consulate in Dubai”.
In addition to giving a detailed account of the process followed in seeking to establish a consulate in Dubai, the release indicates that following statements made by Condor in Parliament and via the media, “Cabinet again considered the matter of the opening of a Consulate in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the subsequent visit of a delegation of St. Kitts and Nevis there.”The communique stated that these considerations were given on the day of the Retreat.
It explains that in 2009 while the portfolio of Foreign Affairs was held by Prime Minister the Right Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas, a recommendation was made that St. Kitts-Nevis establish a presence in Middle East especially in light of “the investment interest that originated from areas such as Dubai…”
According to the communication, the process of establishing a consulatewas already in progress when Condor assumed responsibility for Foreign Affairs and “the progress continued during his tenure”.
Condor – who has been very vocal about the issue since it was made public an approximate month ago – explained that that he takes issue with a number of portions of the release and with the publication of the release itself.
One, he explained, is a procedural flaw.
Condor – in a release he issued following the issuance of the “Cabinet Statement”, explained that the meeting of April 2 was a Cabinet Retreat not a Cabinet Meeting, and it is only from Cabinet Meetings that Cabinet statements can emanate.
He further explained that what emanates from a Cabinet Retreat is a report from the facilitator of that assembly and that report is still pending.
Whereas the purported Cabinet Statement indicates that the Dubai issue was considered by Cabinet during the April 2 gathering, Condor is adamant that the only reference made to Dubai then, surrounded whether or not his actions in speaking to the Press and making a statement in Parliament were appropriate.
“The Opening of a Consulate therefore was not considered; not discussed, in fact no statement could have procedurally emanated from said Cabinet Retreat for two reasons: it was a Retreat and not a Cabinet Meeting…”
The circulation of the “Cabinet Statement” - in Condor’s view – substantiates claims of usurpation and procedural violation which he had previously expressed.
“The purported Cabinet release serves to confirm my claim in Parliament and Press Interview that the move to establish the Dubai Consulate circumvented, violated if you like, proper procedures and protocols and excluded for whatever reason, the due involvement of the Minister with legal and constitutional responsibility. In other words, I was kept in the dark.The bottom line remains that the Submission to Cabinet must come from the line Ministry. Establishment of the Consulate must be undertaken by the line Ministry.”
