Skip to main content

PNP Campaign Funds Scandal: Horn(e) and Bulls....

The rub of the Horne Report is the debt collection; that it is somehow critical that "all of the Comrades who collected funds from private sector and other entities, to make a full, transparent, and confidential account of all of the funds  received to the Treasury and the Officers of the Party"

  • Given the lack of trust in both the Treasurer and the General Secretary, as noted by party historian Arnold "Scree" Bertram, there is no chance that the call would have been heeded.
  • Furthermore, Horne stated that senior members were involved in the diversion of funds intended for the Party, then it would be safe to assume that some of those implicated would be part of the officer core.
  • What would be the sanctions or incentives to those implicated to turn over the funds in a "full, transparent, and confidential account"?
  • Is there an inherent conflict/tension between "transparency" and "confidentiality"?
The stated purpose of this exercise is that such funds "can be applied to all outstanding debt". It is therefore essential that the validity of those outstanding debts be established. 

For example: 
  1. Was the appropriate authority given in the process of incurring such debt? 
  2. Are the debts in question properly documented? 
  3. Are the sums subject to interest and are the interest rates "reasonable" in all the circumstances?
  4. Is there any conflict of interest between those advancing the monies and those authorizing/approving?
There is no evidence provided that outstanding balances are in excess of the Party's debts. Accordingly, there is no guarantee that anything will be there to be applied to the budget for the Local Government Election which is overdue.

Aside from the election defeat post mortem and the pandering to polite notions of transparency, accountability, and integrity, this entire episode seems to be nothing more than a last ditch effort  to get the party ( the financiers thereof) to liquidate some of the substantial debt the Party is said to have incurred.

What on earth is "a financially independent PNP" that the Horne- led Treasury is committed to building? Bulls... 


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...
3 comments
Read more

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...
4 comments
Read more

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...
2 comments
Read more