By TANYA SMITH-CARTWRIGHT

tsmith-cartwright@tribunemedia.net

LONG Island MP Adrian Gibson yesterday addressed “vicious” allegations in Parliament surrounding his tenure as Water and Sewerage executive chairman.

Mr Gibson said that a previous statement he had released on the matter in August was issued on the advice of the Free National Movement’s election public relations team.

Mr Gibson was accused of facilitating a cleaning and maintenance contract to a company, Elite Maintenance, whose director had the same name as a woman previously identified as his fiancée. Yesterday, Mr Gibson said the woman attorney is “known” to him.

He was also accused of acquiring a vast number of businesses and properties in Long Island. He has denied all the allegations.

“Frankly, the last campaign was perhaps the most vicious campaign I’ve ever witnessed,” he said. “It is certainly the worst that I’ve been a part of. To my colleague, Mr Stephen Greenslade, who ran in Garden Hills, I want to thank you for securing my home as I campaigned in Long Island.

“During the campaign, I was asked to issue one comprehensive statement and not engage in a persistent back and forth and that may not bode well and drag out longer than the PR team or the party had an appetite for. I complied. Admittedly, given my history of quick responses to matters, that might not have been the wisest approach.

“This political concoction featured different documents from different matters – notwithstanding they concerned different things. It’s unfortunate that as we move on from that election cycle that politics would have descended to this point.”

Getting into the matter of the contract that involves the woman in question, Mr Gibson reminded his parliamentary colleagues that these are real life situations that involve reputations and careers.

“A few years ago, WSC issued cleaning memorandums for the provision of yard cleaning and ground maintenance services to a number of vendors.

“The corporation awarded a memo to a company whose principals engaged an attorney known to me, to provide corporate services. I am further advised that — having legal authority to represent her clients — the attorney signed a memo on their behalf for the provision of maintenance services and that was also accompanied by correspondence to the corporation’s general manager, advising of the same.

“I am advised that in the process of incorporating this company the attorney was legally authorised to act on their behalf. She was engaged by private individuals and it was upon that basis that the corporation interacted with her. Pursuant to Bahamian law, in order to incorporate a company... most times if someone comes to you to form a company you are a subscriber and someone is your office, some friend you know, family member,” Mr Gibson said.

Mr Gibson pointed out that the attorney was no longer acting on behalf of the said company.

“Sometime later there was a further correspondence issued stating she was no longer authorised to act on behalf of the company as agent and requested an amendment of the records to reflect the same,” he said.

Even after that another correspondence was issued.

“That bid went through the internal procedures and by the way this attorney was no longer involved. Shares had been issued to the beneficial owners. At the time of that engagement, I am advised that the attorney was no longer involved with the company in any capacity.

“As far as I am aware, she always operated in a legal and professional capacity. I can speak to the extent of that capacity, that is the legal professional capacity, and I can only speak to the corporation’s policy, which does not restrict any vendor’s discretion to choose who they wish to carry out their affairs.”

He defended the issuance of contracts by politicians to party supporters and attorneys who play the role of directors in the clients’ companies.

“During the campaign I remember my supporters telling me about receiving calls about contracts,” he said. “I do not know of any elected politicians who call contractors and supporters – ‘did you get a contract? How many from WSC? How many school repair contracts? So I heard you got one too? So you got the one to repair the clinic?’

“I don’t know any elected politician who has not ensured that supporters and constituents and others had opportunities to bid on or obtain contracts. And, every MP who has served at least one term can attest to that. There are many attorneys in this place who, today, are subscribers and nominee directors of companies.

“Does that mean that they are the owners or part owners? If that is the case, then many of us need to re-check our declarations. By that reasoning, nearly every lawyer here owns anywhere from 50 to a few thousand companies. It is not unusual for attorneys to form companies and act on behalf of companies or clients. None of this is out of the ordinary,” he said.

Mr Gibson maintained that he has no beneficial interest or any other interest in Elite Maintenance.

“The references to the joint bank account is a red herring. That account is and was at all times a personal account for which a rogue contractor placed $200 on it.

“The money was removed and the bank wrote me a letter of apology, which I have, after having conducted their investigation and discovering that someone internally would have released the account information. The matter is now before the courts.”

Mr Gibson also defended himself against other allegations made about him.

“It is time to be a myth buster and address all the lies and acts of intentional and criminal libel,” he continued.

“I do not own any plaza and/or gas station in Long Island. I do not own Harbour Breeze Villas. I do not own the bar/restaurant on Gordon’s Beach.

“There are one or two other pictures of my constituents’ properties that were taken; I don’t own them and will happily say what I own. Long Islanders know this, so the objective must have been to deceive the wider public. If anyone wanted to know what I own, I would happily tell them.”

He said generators that were at his constituency office in Long Island were purchased by him to be donated to the local government administrator.

As he tried to end his speech, the timer went off indicating his time had run out. Mr Gibson requested another three minutes from House Speaker Patricia Deveaux, but he was denied.

A back-and-forth followed over a matter that Speaker Deveaux instructed to be removed from House records and when Mr Gibson tried to explain it, she repeatedly asked him if he was “bombarding the chair.” She also asked several times if she “does not have the authority”.