This precedent is a slippery slope. There was public outcry about the student at CR Walker who was scolded about her natural hairstyle(s). We have to be careful of holding persons accountable to another persons individual opinions. How is this any different from withholding service from a person because of their religious beliefs or political divide? The difference is one's moral compass/belief system. If this is a standard to be adapted then this needs to be upheld straight across the board. Otherwise, it easily looks like discrimination.
Section 21 of the manual states, “A parliamentary secretary is a member of the government. At parliamentary meetings or committee meetings he may play a full part by means of suggestion and criticism in the formulation of policy. Once the government has established its course of action, it is the duty of the parliamentary secretary to give that course his full support in public.”
How can I lend my support if I am hearing about it for the first time when everyone else is hearing about it? THE DPM it seems put everything together and presented to the PM who gave the ok and it became course of action.Even those that support the budget seems to have been blindsided when it was presented. It seems as though this was deliberate. Then dangle the PS positions to force the other members to go along with it.
The West Minister System is being used as a scapegoat to rally support for what those ministers are against. This isn't the first time members have shown disagreement with positions of the government. But a way to avoid issues like this would been for the FNM to practice the transparency sermon that they so often preach.
Had there been consultation from as simple as its own members, then it would be easier for these members to accept the position because they would have had their input and hopefully they came to a mutual resolve before presenting.
Whether the increase in taxes is for the best interest of the people or not, this is an opportunity for true democracy to shine through. True transparency would not censor any member through the threats delivered by Mr. Bethel. I would hope that the FNM government would allow the individuals to vote their conscience and then practice what they preach going forward. By allowing dialogue from those they wish to support any future endeavour.
SK says...
If you have information on cases like these, who do you contact?
On Deported - but Haiti sent me back to Nassau
Posted 15 February 2019, 3:52 p.m. Suggest removal
SK says...
This precedent is a slippery slope. There was public outcry about the student at CR Walker who was scolded about her natural hairstyle(s). We have to be careful of holding persons accountable to another persons individual opinions. How is this any different from withholding service from a person because of their religious beliefs or political divide? The difference is one's moral compass/belief system. If this is a standard to be adapted then this needs to be upheld straight across the board. Otherwise, it easily looks like discrimination.
On Properly dressed or it’s ‘don’t come in’
Posted 14 December 2018, 4:08 p.m. Suggest removal
SK says...
Section 21 of the manual states, “A parliamentary secretary is a member of the government. At parliamentary meetings or committee meetings he may play a full part by means of suggestion and criticism in the formulation of policy. Once the government has established its course of action, it is the duty of the parliamentary secretary to give that course his full support in public.”
How can I lend my support if I am hearing about it for the first time when everyone else is hearing about it? THE DPM it seems put everything together and presented to the PM who gave the ok and it became course of action.Even those that support the budget seems to have been blindsided when it was presented. It seems as though this was deliberate. Then dangle the PS positions to force the other members to go along with it.
On UPDATED: PM fires Robinson, Miller and McAlpine
Posted 19 June 2018, 2:53 p.m. Suggest removal
SK says...
The West Minister System is being used as a scapegoat to rally support for what those ministers are against. This isn't the first time members have shown disagreement with positions of the government. But a way to avoid issues like this would been for the FNM to practice the transparency sermon that they so often preach.
Had there been consultation from as simple as its own members, then it would be easier for these members to accept the position because they would have had their input and hopefully they came to a mutual resolve before presenting.
Whether the increase in taxes is for the best interest of the people or not, this is an opportunity for true democracy to shine through. True transparency would not censor any member through the threats delivered by Mr. Bethel. I would hope that the FNM government would allow the individuals to vote their conscience and then practice what they preach going forward. By allowing dialogue from those they wish to support any future endeavour.
On None
Posted 18 June 2018, 2:26 p.m. Suggest removal