THERE were some ridiculous political antics on show yesterday, with the leading figures of the PLP right at the heart of them.

Those antics began even before a word was said in Parliament, after Fred Mitchell, who juggles the roles of Foreign Minister representing the people and PLP chairman representing the PLP, sending out a voice note inviting “all PLPs to the public square this Wednesday and show Hubert Minnis who might get their a-- barked if he fools with Prime Minister Philip Davis on Wednesday as he promises to”.

The result? Former Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis was heckled by a group of PLP supporters as he walked into the House of Assembly. It also prompted a group of FNM supporters to come out as well – and led Dr Minnis to ask for more police protection.

Both Mr Davis and Dr Minnis are elected representatives, either one should be able to go about their business without groups of supporters being drummed up to heckle them. This lowers the standard of our political environment. Not long ago, the reason given by press secretary Clint Watson for barricades being put up to prevent the media interviewing cabinet ministers was that it was part of the RBDF’s security protocols. How is inviting groups of supporters to show up and “show Dr Minnis who might get their a-- barked” contributing to a safe environment?

The antics continued inside, where Mr Davis railed against the previous administration, talking about “disturbing” commonalities emerging from three separate investigations.

Here’s the thing, however – if you have an investigation under way, you let it continue without interference. You don’t go into Parliament to call the play by play as investigators are still gathering the information.

Might there be things these investigations uncover that proves to be disturbing? Perhaps so, but the Prime Minister putting pressure on from inside Parliament is far from helpful, and could call into question the independence of the process.

Looking at some of the accusations he did make, Mr Davis made much noise about nine percent of the National Food Distribution Task Force funds being allocated to administration costs.

He said: “I thought that this was something, they said NGO. When you say NGO I thinking it was something volunteered. That’s what I thought.”

What nonsense. It seems disingenuous to say the least for the Prime Minister to not realise that non-governmental organisations (NGOs) around the world have costs they have to meet, and therefore set an administration budget to cover such things. That can be everything from covering the costs of submitting accounts to putting fuel in trucks to carry the food to where it’s needed. It can be rental costs for storage, it can be paying professionals in the areas where that is needed to conduct the operation.

Charity assessment organisation Charity Navigator, for example, reports the average charity spends about 15 percent on administrative costs – significantly higher than the nine percent spent here.

It should not come as a surprise to the leader of the nation that you can’t do everything for free when trying to run a nationwide programme to feed thousands of people.

Mr Davis also continued to rail against the Bahamas Travel Visa programme – despite the Auditor General praising that scheme – and the Bahamas Public Parks and Public Beaches Authority.

Meanwhile, his predecessor, Dr Minnis said that the budget statement was one of the “most empty” ever.

Perhaps that’s the reason for all these antics. Why isn’t Mr Davis talking about all the great things his government intends to do and what this budget statement will mean for the nation? Why instead is he pointing the finger at those who came before him and making public findings of incomplete investigations?

Is it all a distraction? Look over there, not over here?

Let the investigations continue, Mr Davis, and act upon the findings when they’re done. Until then, tell us what you are going to do. You can’t get away with blaming your predecessors forever.