IT SEEMS almost inconceivable that Keith Bell will keep his job after yesterday’s developments in the ongoing row over issues at immigration.

Let us start with the first thing, Mr Bell himself – or rather his absence.

Last week, he said he would speak in the House to “appropriately answer all questions thoroughly, substantively and put this thing to rest once and for all”. His date for doing so was yesterday. He did not appear. Instead, there was a statement issued with a number of questions responded to – but not all, and certainly not putting things to rest once and for all.

To be fair, there was an extensive list of responses, point by point, to a number of the allegations put forward – but some of those answers, such as those stating an absence of arrest or detainee reports on file or in the system prompted new questions of their own.

The statement – which came from the ministry not Mr Bell - also admitted that his statements about being in Switzerland at the time of receiving a call regarding the situation that led to him administering a citizenship ceremony at a funeral was untrue – he was in Miami, somewhat closer.

What the answers do seem to show is a variety of ways in which discretion was shown or decisions were made based on incomplete information.

With regard to the issue of Chinese nationals being detained but then released after the intervention of the minister, the statement leans on the claim that “to avoid disruption to the major ongoing construction project on which they were working, it was considered futile to detain them overnight”. The statement says the issue was corrected the following day – which means that the disruption would have been limited to one night, presumably, hardly a matter of national interest, one would have thought, that required top-level intervention.

The statement says that the workers’ employers “were in the process of applying for their work permits”. There should be no occasion where dozens of workers are brought into the country and start construction work as in this instance without permits being in place beforehand.

So the statement is welcome – but the answers are incomplete.

Then we come to the second half of yesterday’s developments – in which the Prime Minister spoke on the issue.

Philip “Brave” Davis said the government would review how decisions were made and strengthen the processes.

He said that in many cases the Opposition’s questions were based on inaccurate information – but note he says many and not all.

He went on to say that he has “had a lot of conversations with Bahamians in recent weeks about immigration – and I want to let you know that I hear you. I hear your concerns about how things work in this country and intend to address them”.

The nature of the review has not been spelled out – whether it will be public, whether it will be independent, the timeframe it will take place in and when the public can expect a resolution.

But to review the events of the day clearly, the minister had promised to give answers in the House and he did not, his ministry issued a statement instead which included an admission of error by the minister himself and issues with a lack of information on a number of applications. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has moved to try to reassure the public that he will address concerns about how things work.

Ultimately, the minister is responsible for his ministry. If public confidence has been dented, it is on his shoulders. And in the face of this, he has not even kept his promise to stand up in Parliament and face the music.

So what happens next? At every public appearance, these questions are going to be waiting for Mr Bell. Does he avoid the public, the press? How does that affect the work of his ministry going forward if he still has these issues hanging over him until whatever date in the future any review concludes?

He promised to “put this thing to rest once and for all”. We are very far from that.