The Korean boats controversy was debated Wednesday, but Mr Russell reintroduced the issue Thursday, arguing that in discussing the FTRA, he wished to address “strange financial transactions” surrounding the boat situation. Coming up against objections from several PLP MPs during a near hour-long contribution, Mr Russell told the House he hadn’t expected to speak more than 15 to 20 minutes. Mr Russell spoke of special treatment being given to Netsiwell Holdings Ltd., the company at the core of the boat controversy. A formal application to import 15 fishing vessels duty free, said Mr Russell, was made to the Department of Fisheries on October 28, 2003; three days later, Netsiwell holdings received a certificate of registration granting the request.
“Three days – now that’s red carpet treatment! I just hope that this red carpet treatment can be extended to all of the developers who want to develop in this country – Bahamian and foreign – because if we’re giving red carpet treatment we could tell people up front that no, your development is not allowed, in a couple of days,” said Mr Russell.
“In order to cause the Bahamian public to feel good about what is to come in the future, the government must speak with one voice, and it must roll out the red carpet for everyone, not just Netsiwell Holdings.
This is probably a new record in the Bahamas for applications moving through government departments,” the High Rock MP continued. “The only time I know in the Bahamas when an application moved faster than this was back in the ’60s.”
Amongst those opposing Mr Russell was Fox Hill MP and Foreign Affairs and Public Service Minister Fred Mitchell, who called the High Rock member’s contribution irrelevant and repetitive. Calling for him to focus on the Bill, Mr Mitchell said government, with the opposition’s consent, had facilitated discussion on the Korean boat matter Wednesday.
Mr Mitchell also argued that the debate was dealing specifically with the number of unverified accounts outstanding as of December 31, 2003, objecting that Mr Russell’s contribution was in violation of the rule that contributions are to be relevant to the matter under debated. After being asked by the Speaker to submit his proposed amendments to the Act in the appropriate manner to allow the debate to move on, Mr Russell asked whether he was being prohibited from speaking. “I didn’t expect to be more than 15, 20 minutes . . . I do not understand why the government is trying to silence me on something that is so important, something that is a topical issue, something that the whole fishing community has concern for, that all environmentalists have concern for,” said Mr Russell.
After repeated requests from Speaker of the House Oswald Ingraham to wind down his contribution, Mr Russell said it was impossible to comply with a two-minute time limit on the remainder of his address – he needed at least another half-hour, he told the Speaker, commenting that other members speak for two to three hours on irrelevant matters on other occasions.
Debate on the matter closed following the chair’s decision that, with two hours and five minutes of debate by the government, and two hours forty-five minutes by opposition members, sufficient time had been devoted to the FTRA.
Earlier in his contribution, Mr Russell told the House that the agreement, which is to be enforced by January 1, 2004, is now being rushed by government, which had a year and a half to address it.
“If you’re going to take a year and a half to bring something to this House, that only gave us two weeks to debate, send to the senate, send it to the United States for their signature, and then go to the Governor General for signing and enforcement, then to be published – it sounds rushed to me. And for a government that said it would not rush anything – we could have been debating this Bill six months ago.
“I do believe that we can consider this Bill and all the Bills that have to be enforced by the first of next month, to have been rushed. No matter how long we sit on our laurels and do nothing, when we bring something in this place to be passed and enforced in two weeks, that, to me, is rushed, especially from a government that said it would not rush with anything when it comes to laws and when it comes to dealing and when it comes to things that affect the Bahamian people,” Mr Russell said.
Defending the government, Pinewood MP and Minister of Financial Services and Investments Allyson Maynard-Gibson argued that government engaged in extensive discussions with the private sector. “Since the forum has been established, there has been extensive consultation with the private sector about the content of this legislation and other legislation impacting the financial services sector and other sectors, said Ms Maynard-Gibson, accusing Mr Russell of untruths. “Parties did take advantage of the invitation to give input.
There was extensive input that resulted in several versions of the bill leading to the one that exists here today. The sector gave those comments being faced with the reality that we met in place in May 2002 . . . that an agreement was made in the United States of America.” Said Mr Russell, the agreement includes a clause that allowed the PLP government to get out of it with three months notice if it disagreed with its terms.
The agreement, he said, could have been cancelled.
By Janice Mather, The Tribune
