PM pleased with conduct of enquiry

Commissioner Frederick Waterman.

The conduct of the Commission of Enquiry into the Alexandra School has so far made Prime Minister Freundel Stuart a happy man.

“If I must be very frank. I have heard nothing about the commission of enquiry that has caused me any disquiet. That’s about the commission itself,” Prime Minister Stuart told reporters at his official residence this morning.

Stuart however made it clear that he had deliberately refused to follow the daily revelations of evidence coming out of the hearing. His reason, he said, was that he wanted to wait for the official report of the commissioner.

“I didn’t want my mind in any way jaundiced by anything I read; or I didn’t wanted to form any particular impression about anything, so I steered very clear of what was going on at the commission of enquiry.

“I was more concerned, and my permanent secretary was a great assistance in this regard; to make sure that the administrative arrangements put in place for commission were functioning effectively so that the commissioner could get through with their work,” the Prime Minister insisted.

He said he would await any recommendations made in respect of the commission’s work “and thereafter we’ll take it from there”. (EJ)

2 Responses to PM pleased with conduct of enquiry

  1. George C. Brathwaite August 27, 2012 at 10:19 pm

    PM Stuart, your naivete and absurdities are truly the hallmarks of a man bent on supervision and not leadership. For some strange reason, your chorus is riddled with unconcern, no interest, did not see, have not read, will not comment, silence, and all other lyrical content that speaks to procrastination and vision-less caution. PM Stuart, I am a strong critic of yours because you made it that way, not because I am a member of the main opposing party. Your behaviour to my mind is a dereliction of duty and I am sure that Barbadians will make you pay for your incapacity to lead.

    Reply
  2. Michael Goodman August 28, 2012 at 3:02 pm

    Am I missing something, or is Mr. Stuart?
    If he has “deliberately refused to follow the daily revelations of evidence coming out of the hearing” because he “didn’t want my mind in any way jaundiced by anything I read; or I didn’t wanted to form any particular impression about anything, so I steered very clear of what was going on”, then how can he say, he has “heard nothing about the commission of enquiry that has caused me any disquiet.”?
    Of even greater concern is the fact that he intends to “wait for the official report of the commissioner.” Well, his record of reading Reports suggests we may have to wait many, many months until he does that, unless of course it is ‘stolen’ or in unofficial circulation’, in which case we will never hear about it at all!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *