E-Petition For UK To Investigate Government
Citing “allegations of corruption”, an online petition has been launched to “call upon the Foreign Affairs Committee to convene a Commission of Inquiry to investigate these grave concerns.”
The petition starter, whom is not named, says that they have called for the UK Government to investigate as the “Auditor General has found serious irregularities with the TCD Emissions testing centre project, and Ministerial Interference, combined with previous irregularites on the Police/Court building project.”
The listing says “the purpose of this petition is to protect the fundamental rights of every Bermudian and urge the Foreign Affairs Commitee to fulfill its responsibility in protecting those rights by convening a Commission of Inquiry.”
As of this writing [Oct 28, 10:30am] there are 28 signatures on the petition.
The full text follows below:
In recent years there have been many allegations of corruption by members, and affiliates, of the elected members of the House Of Assembly.
These allegations and more are exacerbated by a lack of information, transparency and accountability within the public sector; including intimidation of the Auditor General, media and anyone who dares to speak out on perceived irregularities.
With the announcement today that the Auditor General has found serious irregularities with the TCD Emissions testing centre project, and Ministerial Interference, combined with previous irregularites on the Police/Court building project, we call upon the Foreign Affairs Committee to convene a Commission of Inquiry to investigate these grave concerns. with the recommended terms of reference set out below.
Terms of Reference
To inquire into whether there is evidence of corruption in relation to the awarding and execution of Bermuda Government contracts by past and present elected members of the Bermuda House of Assembly in recent years.
- (a) Initiating criminal investigations by the police or otherwise
- (b) identify any indications of systemic weaknesses in legislation, regulation and administration
- (c) any other matters relating thereto.
- In relation to (a), the Commission is directed to refer such information and/or evidence it may obtain to the Bermuda prosecuting authorities.
How can anyone take seriously petition promulgated by someone who is not even prepared to put his or her own name to it?
If such a person does in fact exist then how can they put forward a petition casting aspersions against the honesty,integrity and character of others without having the strength of character and conviction in the righteousness of their cause to identify themselves with it?
How can they ask others to sign a petition that they themselves are not prepared to put their own name to?
Wendell Malcolm Hollis
Depends on how much they might lose. After all it would not be the first time someone’s name, wife’s name and place of employment is called over the radio for all to know. It would not be the first time the police when to someone’s house cause of a call from someone due to there opinion. It would not be the first time someone’s job was called and accused of having the same opinion as the employee. Definitely not who would have done that. Just Sayn that’s all.
LOL ps. not one of those signature on the list.
Good day Bernews,
I have just noticed that names and emails do not clear in the name and mail required lines at the bottom. Please let the public know that this can be fixed as I have just posted and SM came up when in fact it was I “LOL” tha t posted the above.
LOL
Sorry to be so dense, I am a touch lost? Any errors we have I’d like to get fixed ASAP, so sorry to be a pain but if you could please explain again and I will try and fix it today,
Patricia
Hi Patricia
Someone else email details and name in this case SM did not clear at the bottom where it say “Speak Your Mind” so when I submitted a comment their name came up as the poster. So 1 I now have their email address which if I was the harassing type I could. 2. people can also post as others 3. The post is now attributed to SM and I’m….
LOL
ps. thanks for the quick responce.:)
Ah, ok, got it thanks………tech guy is on it as we speak. We much appreciate the heads up….
Tried to sign… Got confirmation that it was sent but the number didn’t update nor does my signature appear :-S
Additionally, this petition is based solely on a report that constituionally SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND DEBATED IN THE HOUSE prior to its release to the general public. Everyone is forgetting that the Audit General’s integrity is now shot to nothingness as she can no longer be trusted to do her job without influence or favour.
Should’ve, Could’ve, But Didn’t… None of that really changes the fact that something has gone horribly wrong if a project initially quoted at $5m ends up costing $15m… Shouldn’t we be asking WHAT happened instead of asking why the Auditor General chose to release the information in the manner that she did. She answers to the public, no?
Another Young Black Mind
@Yng Black Male
Please site the constitution where this is stated due to the fact that the credit of all is up for grabs some more that others I might add as it is now two to one. Also I might add that yours depends on it as well I think I read in the Gazette that there is no such obligation your just repeating the Premier. Perspective.
LOL
Constitution? What constitution are you referring to? You mean, the one that has been ignored over and over and over and over and over and over in the persuit of “human justice”?
Surely you jest…..
The following quote appears to include verifiable facts…have you verified????….I can’t highlight so I’ve capitalized what I think are the important parts that you can go and debunk.
“Once our draft was finalised, a meeting of the Audit Committee, WHICH INCLUDED THE MINISTER OF FINANCE, was convened on October 6 to discuss the report and shortly thereafter the report was sent to printing.
“The week of October 18 was the earliest opportunity I had to release the report.”
While she said past Special Reports may have been tabled in the House of Assembly before being released, there is NO REQUIREMENT in either the Bermuda Constitution Order 1968 or the Audit Act 1990 to do so.
She said: “The Constitution makes no reference to Special Reports. However the Audit Act 1990 does — and it anticipates that an IMMEDIATE report be made whether the House is in session OR NOT.”
@ enough
Thanks. I was about to post that as my source after all I like my crediblity and integrity. Yng BLack Mind see the Monday addition of the RG it is a quote taken from the AG herself. Persective can open eyes and blind others. Unless you think she is another AG who hates a black Government.
Hence
LOL
Actually – that is a matter of interpretation and not factual – that is how all our laws are drawn up and one can eaily argue that it was in contravention of the law. Look at the Audit Act itself and not the Royal Gazette quotes. Only “ad hoc” reports fall under the proviso that allow for immeidate release – I think the Auditor should have labelled this an Ad Hoc report for it to stay clearly within the law. Check out Sections 12 and 13 of the Audit Act which clearly state that “Special Reports” must be issued in the same manner as an Annual Report. Why would one ruin a perfectly credible report by skirting the law? Why not wait until the House is back? As much as I loathe the waste and plundering of the island’s purse I am able to remain objective – which means I have no business commenting on here….
So if its interpertation how does one only choose one interpertation over another? Thanks for pointing out where to find it I would encourge all to read it. I will. Bermudalaws.bm correct?
LOL
seriously yng black mind???
firstly there is NO, ZERO, NADA requirement for this to be debated before released..
secondly, what exactly are they going to debate? what checks should be put in place next time?? the Checks were already there, and they were bypassed.
thirdly, it doesnt matter when she reported it, whether its political, media, whatever.. the fact is that 10 million has somehow factored into an equation that was meant to only have 5. Thats a big “oops” to just push aside because someone doesnt like the messenger.
Young black mind, grow up before you have no country left worth fighting for. Also, a mind really, truely, seriously is a terrible thing to waste. Good time to start thinking with that young mind for yourself. Get off the Kool Aid, bra..I hear that stuff is mind altering..
Hey bye, turn off HOTT and start thinking for yourself.
Yng Black Mind – where in the Constitution does it require Special Reports prepared by the Auditor General to be laid before the House prior to public consumption? If you’re relying on Dr. Brown’s opinion on ‘preferred’ procedure you may want to check the facts first before remarking that “she can no longer be trusted to do her job without influence or favour.”
Given that Paula Cox sits on the audit committee and had sight of this report before it went to the printer wouldn’t she be the first one to cry foul regarding the method of release IF it was IN FACT unconstitutional?
Section 13 – take a look. Only ad hoc reports can circumvent the procedure.
Well, your the lawyer Mr. Hollis and a good friend of Dr. Brown so tell us how to do it. I am sure the petitioner is know to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
My deflated two cents.
Easy
Have a look at the uS declaration of independence, it starts with the words ” We believe….” and ends with the signatures of those who promulgated it.
By adding their signatures they gave credence to their beliefs.
BTW proud to be a friend of Ewart Browns
Wendell
Actually it starts with the words “When, in the course of human events…”
or do you mean the second paragraph “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…”
Of course slavery was rampant at the time that was written, which basically makes me think, “who cares if they signed it or not?” They were hypocrites nonetheless.
PLease Wendell, your argument is tired, often used and weak. I am less concerned about who the orchestrator is and more interested in determining whether there are substantive reasons to ask for such an enquiry.
Surely, even friends of the good doctor have to be concerned about the numerous pungent deals associated with this Premier. Unless, unless they have personally benefitted by association. Even the most ardent fans have to, during quiet moments of reflection, agree( if only to themselves ) that any privately run business, mis -managed to this ectent, would eventually result in the board of directors recommending that the CEO be terminated and possibly investigated by the police.
The money that Doc and Co have been playing loose with belongs to me, and I, like the unnamed initiator of this petition, have a right to seek assistance from the UK government, without declaring who I am. Particularly when the PLP appear only to be interested in choosing another leader and not cleaning up the mess that he left behind. Particularly when this government have chewed up and discarded anyone that objects to their methods and philosophy.
I was a friend of the good doctor as well, well,maybe more someone that sat in his living room and discussed why Jennifer had to be replaced. Although I am remain convinced that she needed to be replaced, I have to admit that this current Premier ( Oops, most recent – whew … almost reinstated him., oh my!! ) is fifty times worse. I lie, 1 billion dollars times worse.
Can somone send me Jennifer’s address? I owe her a huge, massive apology and few dozen cases of Cristal…Oh, I will also throw in foot massages for a year.
Com’mon Hollis
All barristers know that there is no iron clad law nor fool proof constitution….there is always a back door workaround that can be justified….if you are smart (or learned) you’ll use it only when necessary. When we use words like “unethical but not illegal” or “for the common good of humanity” to explain one’s actions is a classic example of backdoor manouvering……, surely the AG is smart (or learned) enough to ensure her backside was covered…..
@enough…..spot on. Looks like the spin doctors are at work once again.
Anyone want a used ‘fiddle’ ………
Gents &/or ladies:
I stand corrected as the information presented to me via my sources within the legal fraternity stated otherwise. I do not negate that the report needs to be investigated; however, this “witch-hunt” mentality is were my unreadiness lies – - a “silent” petition demanding support to have the UK investigate government contracts is “mirco-management” and heavy handed at best. If there is any wrongdoing on the part if any civil servant, let the BPS, Audot General’s office get to the bottom of it – - you may be surprised who you find there – - – trust and believe.
agreed….petitions are useless if the author is “nameless” or hiding behind a cloak of anonymity……reminds me of the secret realestate trust funds being managed by some in the legal fraternity…..unethical and illegal.
Youngster – that sucking sound you hear is your future and the future of your children going south, via a certain vineyard..
Unreadiness after this mess is rather scary…
Ironically your comment that “a “silent” petition demanding support to have the UK investigate government contracts is “mirco-management” and heavy handed at best” … describes almost perfectly the type of micro-management Dr. Brown undertook to guarantee a preferred (and non-arms length) contractor would receive public funds for both the TCD & Dockyard projects.
please note – - as you all read my comments – I did not disagree with any of you – - I simply indicated that the “way” in which this petition is presented, in my opinion, is not the way forward.
Your “sources within the legal fraternity” may need to return to the basics
Oh come on Wendell. This is not about you and me. I know all about the “uS” Constitution.
This a mere baby step and not a Declaration of Independence from Britain.
I consider it a poll to get peoples feelings and see who and what numbers would back such a convention to assertain if something is amiss. It happens everyday in most free world countries.
Next you’ll say people can’t do it because it is not in ‘our’ constitution.
As for Doctor Brown being your friend, fine with me.
I wear a flea collar.
Looks like they fixed it as it worked for me!
32-64…are you on runway 12 or 32…you talking too me?
@ Yng Black Mind
Basic conflict resolution when there is obvious structural and cultural violence requires third party intervention from someone who has political, economic or cultural power over both parties. And since the British Government has all three, maybe the “heavy handed” way is the only real way to bring reform to this situation, since clearly there are snakes in the grass in Audot General’s Office…