When the Mary King scandal broke I, like many of you, masticated this sinewy prospect for quite some time. None of it made any sense. Why would she of all people sacrifice her reputation, even go as far as to implicate the Prime Minister in this apparent malfeasance, for such a paltry sum of money? Even if you are to consider the familial ties, it boggles the mind that an individual, who had for so long championed accountability in public life and good governance, would find herself in such a primitive snare. Perhaps if one considers not merely the value of the Web site contract, but the opportunity to lock in a long-term arrangement for the provision of services to the Ministry of Planning, then I can appreciate what played out.
Even so, it is clear that even Mary King thought that there may have been a conflict otherwise she would never have sought to have it green-lit by the Prime Minister. Additionally, I have always considered Mary King an intelligent woman, and that makes this issue that much more perplexing. Come on now! Even if the Prime Minister did, in fact, give overall approval for the contract, did Mary King really expect Kamla to take bullet along with her when the sh-- hit the fan? Mary King must also have been rubbing some people the wrong way because there was no shortage of evidence readily advanced to seal her fate. Only weeks after the Web site grenade would the population learn of a damning letter penned by then Senator King, appearing to bring her influence to bear on the HDC to ensure that her son got the particular luxury condominium that he wanted.
In the absence of some rational explanation for all of these events from the soon-to-be-dethroned King, the public was ready to deliver its verdict and implement penalty all in the same afternoon. So too it seems was the Prime Minister, clearly cognisant of the fact that the public actually took the anti-corruption bit in the Partnership's election campaign seriously. The minister was fired with breathtaking speed and her response some days afterwards was that her dismissal was "undemocratic." Well that would matter if it were part of a political process. It may have been a political imperative (to save face for the Partnership) but as far as the Prime Minister is concerned this was an executive decision.
The injustice we possibly face is if some subsequent investigation were to absolve Mary King of all wrongdoing, as by then it would be too late for repair to reputation. It is becoming obvious, though, that the woodwork was never treated, because the scandals that have been making their way out of it since King was sent home has been astounding. The CAL board is always great fodder for allegations of impropriety. Renegade board chairman George Nicholas is at the centre of the maelstrom again, having triggered demands for an inquiry into the award of a $27 million contract to an insurance company in which his family has an interest. For his part, Mr Nicholas has stated publicly that everything was done above board, explaining that as required by law he declared his interest and recused himself from deliberations on the award of the contract.
A spotlight has also been thrown on a not insignificant sum of money spent on marketing, much of it directed to WIN TV, which is owned and operated by board member Mohan Jaikaran. This is certainly curious, given that I have been told on more than one occasion by CAL marketing personnel that they, for the most part, do not do any television advertising. Again, these are just media reports and we must await the outcome of an investigation. Of course, there is the hobby horse which the Opposition is currently on-the award of a $40 million contract to the Prime Minister's best friends, the Gopauls, for fuel haulage services to NP. Much of the noise generated in the matter has come from CDS, a bid competitor who had previously secured contracts with the state company.
CDS has pointed out that even though they were the lower bidder they were not selected. In their information released to the media, however, their cost per truck per month is not more than $100 less than the bid submitted by the winning competitor. Additionally, it must be noted that the Gopauls never bid for fuel haulage services but "the tender by Gopaul and Company is to supply and maintain the tractor and tractor trailer units which would be attached to NP tankers." What made the bacchanal that much sweeter was the revelation that the Prime Minister stayed at the home of the Gopauls just about one year ago. The Opposition is demanding to know more about this relationship because of the contract that has been made public.
Although Dr Rowley raises the spectre of "a gift or reward" in exchange for a state contract, this is stretching it, to say the least. What gift could the Prime Minister have received? A stay in the Gopauls' house? The real story here, however, has been missed, and it is not likely one that will be written. More than ever before the country is crawling with whistleblowers when just a year ago the People's Partnership was on the platform talking about legislative protection for such individuals. We have Dr Keith Rowley and Patrick Manning to thank for what is obviously a heightened state of vigilance in this country. That is, perhaps, the greatest contribution that the Opposition Leader could have made to T&T. So relentlessly did he pursue corruption that it was done at the expense of his government but to the benefit of the nation.
It is the only thing that gives Dr Rowley the right to speak about corruption without incurring the ire of right thinking people who remember quite clearly that when it came to corruption, we only ever learned of it as a fait accompli under a PNM administration. By the time this nation had become aware of the extent of the rot, the perpetrators of these heinous acts had already flown beyond the heat of public animus and judicial retribution.
The Prime Minister has signalled with her firing of Mary King that no one is above the law and the promise made to the population, if not honoured, will become a cancer within the Partner- ship. The challenge is that even though the Government has raised the bar in matters of public accountability, it just means that there will be those in office who will simply limbo below it. That is just the nature of politics in this country. It is interesting to note that many of our citizens complaining are those who had routinely benefitted from the PNM teat not too long ago.
That is what is missing from the ill-informed discussions allowed to run rampant on radio talk shows by their equally ill-informed hosts; we are hearing about possible issues of conflict even before the cheque is written. That by itself is a quantum leap from the previous administration of broken honour.