By: NevisPages Reporter
At the most recent monthly press conference hosted by Premier, Mark Brantley on Thursday, July 26, 2018 at the Social Security Building, Charlestown, the reporter posed several questions to the Premier that caused him to be visibly rattled. The questions involved members of the Commission that is to be established under the Integrity in Public Life Ordinance, 2013.
It was indicated to Premier Brantley that according to research conducted by this media house, it was unveiled that there exist very serious conflicts of interest involving the two Government appointed candidates for the Integrity in Public Life Commission in Nevis. The two men being Mr. Ricaldo Caines (Lawyer) -appointed by the Deputy Governor General; and Mr. Sydney Newton (General Manger of the Nevis Credit Union) – appointed by the NIA.
It was brought to the attention of Premier Brantley that such conflicts could compromise the ability of both men to perform in an impartial manner on the Commission. Further, that these conflicts contradicted several of the Code of Conduct provisions of the Integrity in Public Life Act and Ordinance, 2013. Premier Brantley was presented with the following facts followed by five questions:
FACTS:
- Sydney Newton is Head of the Nevis Credit Union which does a significant portion of its financial business with the Nevis Housing and Land Development Corporation (NHLDC), a statutory Body of the NIA.
- Further, the Nevis Co-operative Credit Union rents office space to the Federal Government to house the Electoral Office.
- Ricaldo Caines is one of the main, if not the only, lawyer for the Nevis Co-Operative Credit Union. As such he also benefits financially from the NHLDC relationship with the Credit Union.
- Also, the NIA provides another significant financial benefit to Mr.Caines by renting office space at his building at Jew Street, Charlestown.
QUESTIONS:
- Did the NIA do any due diligence on these candidates before they were appointed?
- If so, were these financially-based conflicts of interests considered before appointing them? For example, did the NIA consider whether it is possible for either man to be impartial while, for instance, adjudicating a matter involving NHLDC or the NIA when it might be to their personal financial detriment?
- If the NIA were fully aware of these conflicts, how did Premier Brantley and the NIA actually think that these men could carry out the impartial functions of The Integrity Commission when they may be called on to adjudicate matters involving public officials with potential conflicts of interest, when they themselves are severely compromised by their obvious conflicts of interest?
- Now that he, Premier Brantley has been made aware, and more importantly the nation is now aware of these potentially compromised commissioners, did Brantley intend to withdraw the names from consideration as commissioners, if the men did not do it themselves?
- If the names were withdrawn, how long would the process take to appoint new commissioners and have the office of the Integrity in Public Life Commission up and running?
Premier Brantley rattled by these questions, became both offensive and defensive.
Brantley appeared unhinged by the questions and in an offensive rant, produced a rambling incoherent response. He tried to attack the intelligence and professionalism of the reporter from this media house by suggesting that the member of the press core not only was not ‘smart’ enough to produce the questions, but that the reporter appeared to be advancing the agenda of other persons whom Brantley said should come to the Press Conference and “ask the questions themselves”.
Based on this unusual personal attack on a member of the press core, this media house anticipated the next words from Brantley to be “fake news”. This however, did not materialize. This personal attack was exceptionally amusing and was attributed to the signs of someone using offensive rhetoric as a defense mechanism by pivoting and deflecting, when his competence was being called into question.
Premier Brantley then went into a defensive mode. He stated that both men were of ‘sound character’ and as such there was no need for the NIA to withdraw their appointments to the Integrity in Public Life Commission. It appeared that Premier Brantley was attempting to equate being of ‘sound character’ as a justification for obvious conflicts of interest. This reasoning appeared illogical since at no time was the soundness of character, or personal integrity of either gentlemen were called into question by this reporter, merely the appearance of their conflicted interests.
Premier Brantley even tried to deflect blame on to the Deputy Governor General. When it was stated that Mr. Caines was appointed by the Deputy Governor General upon advice of the NIA, Brantley forcefully rebutted that Mr. Caines was entirely the appointment of the Deputy Governor General.
However, even in the unlikely event that such an appointment would have been made without the consultation or advise of the NIA, it is still does take any of the blame away from Brantley. Premier Brantley has a fiduciary duty as Premier, and implementer of the Integrity in Public Life Commission, to tell either the Deputy Governor General or the Leader of the Opposition if their choices for Integrity Commissioners could bring the Commission into disrepute.
It appears to this media house that Brantley relishes the accolades for implementing the provisions of the Integrity in Public Life Ordinance, but none of the blame for doing it badly.
Brantley then suggested that based on the small population of Nevis, it would be difficult to find competent candidates not affected by some degree of interaction with the NIA. If the populace of Nevis were to accept this flawed reasoning, it appears that Brantley is suggesting that it is perfectly acceptable to have conflicted candidates on the Integrity in Public Life Commission since the population of the island is small.
This begs the following question, what would be the purpose of having an Integrity in Public Commission if the Commission lacks integrity by having conflicted commissioners? Is Brantley asking the people of Nevis to believe that in an island of over 12,000 persons that the NIA could not take the time to do the proper due diligence to unearth two suitable unconflicted candidates for the Integrity in Public Life Commission?
Based on the responses by Premier Brantley, questions are being asked as to whether the NIA is serious about appointing an Integrity in Public Life Commission or just going through the required motions.
Finally, based on Premier Brantley’s recent amusing attempts at providing fashion tips on social media, and his child-like glee upon being complimented on his suit at the press conference, it appears that Premier Brantley has prioritized the trivialities of fashion over the serious due diligence process required to ensure that the Integrity in Public Life Commission is indeed one of integrity.