The publication of information showing that Minister of Labour and National Insurance Shane Gibson was receiving a monthly payment of $5,000 into his U.S. bank account from controversial permanent resident Peter Nygard has again underscored the need for clear laws and rules to govern campaign financing, and Cabinet ministers' financial dealings with investors doing business with the government or seeking any sort of government approvals.
The revelation was unsettling.
The information showed that Nygard International Partnership made direct payments of US$5,000 per month into Gibson's Bank of America account prior to the 2012 general election and into 2013 when he was a minister. Gibson -- a popular member of Parliament who won overwhelmingly after being embroiled in scandal in the first term of the Perry Christie-led PLP -- told us the money was used to fund important constituency projects.
The records provided to the media on the weekend show that Nygard International Partnership recorded the monthly payment to the minister as "professional services", not campaign contributions.
The minister is listed as the "vendor".
The earliest payment appears to have been made in July 2011. The last payment shown in the leaked records was in early 2013.
Gibson said in part in a statement on Sunday: "Golden Gates was able to run a successful election campaign in the run up to the 2012 general election.
"Following our victory at the polls, those contributions enabled me to pay off debt incurred during the campaign season."
The minister also said it is sad and unfortunate that those who oppose him would seek to tarnish something that has benefited so many people to grab headlines and win a seat.
In that statement, Gibson misses the point of the concerns triggered over the matter, however.
This is not about tarnishing the good he says Nygard's money has done. This is about ensuring clean and transparent government.
It is not acceptable for a minister to be getting monthly payments from a developer/investor seeking certain approvals from the government.
It does not look right.
It does not feel right.
It is not the kind of thing we want to see from our ministers.
A minister must at all times operate above board, and be seen to do so.
What are the professional services Nygard was getting or expecting from the minister?
The whole thing does not rest well with many people.
It follows revelations that Gibson's colleague, Jerome Fitzgerald, the education minister, was working behind the scenes to secure contracts for his family at Baha Mar.
That was a clear conflict.
The Gibson matter too might be.
It certainly appears that way.
Financier
Nygard is no ordinary contributor.
He claimed to be a major financier of the PLP. The prime minister has not denied he is.
Nygard also claimed that certain promises were made to him when he donated to the PLP -- a claim Prime Minister Perry Christie has strongly rejected.
On September 6, 2012, Sir Baltron Bethel, the senior policy advisor to the prime minister, wrote to the permanent secretary and copied the prime minister.
He said: "It is evident from the records and various building excavation and other permissions granted by various government agencies including Lands and Surveys, that Mr. Nygard has been occupying Crown lands for some time.
"In light of this and per the prime minister's instructions, the matter ought to be regularized as soon as possible by the government by way of grant/lease with respect to the land and seabed occupied and the accreted beach area...."
While the government has insisted that Nygard never got anything he wanted, Nygard has certainly behaved as if he owns The Bahamas and has government officials in his pocket.
Many people remember those tape recordings that went viral last year after members of Save The Bays filed an action in court alleging Nygard plotted to have them murdered.
In the recordings, Nygard speaks disparagingly of the prime minister.
Christie and his ministers dealt with that matter gingerly, obviously trying to be careful not to offend their major financier.
Back in 2013, Nygard's "Take back The Bahamas" video showing his flamboyant frolicking with Gibson and other government ministers, created a wave of controversy.
The video showed Nygard celebrating the Progressive Liberal party's 2012 general election win while Christie addressed a victory rally.
He proclaimed as he watched, "Yes. We got our country back."
Now, many Bahamians are concerned that records appear to show Minister Gibson on the payroll -- although, again, he has stressed the money was for community projects.
The money was not paid into any special scholarship account for Golden Gates, but directly to the minister's account.
There is a rule of Cabinet conduct that is intended to prevent such a thing.
We referred to it today as we discussed the Fitzgerald matter.
It needs to be repeated here.
Article 40(b) of the procedural code states that a minister must not "solicit or accept any benefit, advantage or promise of future advantage whether for himself, his immediate family or any business concern or trust with which he is associated from persons who are in, or seek to be in, any contractual or special relationship with government".
Gibson said that the money from Nygard was not an advantage for himself or for his immediate family. Not surprisingly, many find that hard to believe.
Free for all
There is need for a broader conversation on donations during election season, and donations made directly to Cabinet ministers during a term.
There is clearly a need for some sort of regulation, but more importantly there is a need for a prime minister willing to enforce it and ministers willing to adhere to it.
We are in the silly season now and there is evidence in every direction of money being spent.
There is no law that governs these donations.
It is a free for all.
For some, this is a time of personal gain.
The field is wide open for corruption.
There has been a lot of finger pointing over these matters in recent weeks.
Earlier this month, Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell highlighted the impact of money in elections.
Speaking at a political event, he urged PLPs to follow the money trail.
He said, "...there is a candidate in Freeport who is spending money like it's going out of style. When people spend money, there has got to be some visible means of support, where is the money coming from?
"In this country, there are only a couple of sources for political contributions - the white rich Bahamian, the people in Lyford Cay, the numbers boys, or your own money, or someone is contributing from outside the country, that's the last thing. So the question is when you start spending large sums of money and it doesn't come from one of those sources, you have to ask yourself where is it coming from?"
There remain widespread perceptions that ill-gotten gains are used to win elections.
This is a long-standing view.
In a November 2006 diplomatic cable, an official at the U.S. Embassy in Nassau observed, "corruption in politics is a serious but largely ignored problem in The Bahamas.
"This corruption is a product of a lack of transparency about the government's decision-making and financial dealings, a lack of any campaign finance rules regarding the origin of donations, the pressure to spend heavily -- and become heavily indebted to financial supporters -- during campaign season, and a culture of secrecy in Bahamian government and politics."
More than a decade after that cable was written, this remains the case today.
Apart from spending during political season, the Gibson matter raises the question of how investors and other financiers donate after an election, and how those donations influence or potentially influence any kinds of approvals being sought.
This is a very serious issue.
It would require a serious leader, and a cultural shift in government to address.
The good thing about this election season is it is blowing the lid off many questionable activities by ministers and others in public life that have before now remained in the dark.
The Gibson and Fitzgerald matters also highlight the need for an Integrity in Public Life Act, which was promised by the prime minister, but never delivered.
In making these observations, we of course recognize our country may not have the capacity and maturity to enforce such laws or regulations.
If we the people do not demand more transparency in these affairs, if there is no political will to address these matters, and if we have men and women in public life who operate in a shady and unscrupulous manner, we would get more bad governance, more corruption, which ultimately stunts economic and national development and damages our country's reputation.
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
