Hamilton disagrees and warns of the implications of the Party’s move

Honourable Eugene Hamilton, the Minister responsible for National Health Insurance.
- Advertisement -

 

Government Minister and Constituency representative for constituency 8 has disagreed with the position taken by his party the People’s Action Movement and partner the Concerned Citizen Movement to write to the Governor-General seeking to oust Prime Minister Dr Timothy Harris as leader of the government.

Hamilton in a letter to his party’s leader Shawn Richards dated April 19 Hamilton said that he was not familiar with any supporting legislation that provides an option to the Governor-General to appoint a PM to replace the current without a resignation.

“If the question assumes that the PM would resign without seeking the dissolution of parliament, I don’t believe that he would ever do so and I don’t believe that you have advanced a case for him to do so. Your question would only be relevant if he were to resign without the dissolution of parliament. Therefore, given my previous statement, this matter should not even be contemplated under the circumstances.”

He added that the issue about the letter to the Governor-General is negated by his belief that the GG does not have that option available to him.
“Any such letter may only serve as pressure but our history has shown that it could bring no result without a MONC.On the question of whether or not the GG can unseat the PM based on a simple extra-Parliamentary approach from anyone, such a development can be described as a palace coup.
“Indeed, there is a well-respected convention that Her Majesty does not INTERFERE, INTERVENE, nor INTERCEDE in political wrangling and machinations at the level of those vying for power outside of any parliamentary platform. She responds only to the wishes of the electorate at the level of the body politic via the process of democratic elections and at the level of the representatives of the body politic via the inner workings of the Parliament. Hence, the principal time when the GG “has occasion to appoint” is following an election and secondarily following a successful motion of no confidence.”

Hamilton added that the third option of resigning from Cabinet is one which he will not contemplate based on the information available to him advanced by his party leader.
“It does nothing to preserve the livelihood of those who will be exposed by adverse outcomes. I speak about all of the PAM dominated Boards where some derive their only income like Dorita; I speak about those hundreds if not thousands who are employed and are in vulnerable disposition and can be easily removed; I speak about those who have financial commitment and could have their life disrupted, and the list goes on and on.”

Regarding the ultimatum that was given to the prime minister, Hamilton said he was not convinced the public would agree with the move.
“I am not convinced that the public would agree that we have done enough in the past and even now, to properly address the issues which confront PAM. True we should not have had to confront some of these at all but we have to deal with reality as they are.

He said he also sees no path for a return for some PAM elected representatives.
“Secondly, I see no clear path for a return of the PAM elected representatives to parliament if Parliament is dissolved now as a consequence of our resignations. However, I can see a path if we are strategic in our conduct of affairs even at this late hour and I have previously given you some suggestions which include your role on the Boundaries Commission.
“My view is that our resignation is like inflicting a death sentence on PAM. A proverbial mortal wounding of PAM by its elected representatives if we resign at this point without making some important strategic moves.”

Hamilton said he believed him signing the letter to the GG would have been the final nail in the coffin for the party.
“I shudder to think that by my signature I would have inflicted a mortal wound on the party to which I have given more than fifty years of unfettered service and in the process suffered greatly without a murmur
“I have survived being terminated by Labour twice in my life; the last termination costing me in excess of half a million dollars just to stabilize my life; denied my constitutional right to pursue my own business despite capitalizing the company with three times the statutory capital required; suffered a fractured jaw as a result of missiles thrown at a PAM public meeting; suffered unmerited humiliation by Bloom Cooper and his commission of inquiry, and believe me, Shawn, I am just getting started.”

Hamilton also noted that he was fearful that a PAM candidate would lose in his constituency and others if elections are called now and could end up with only one seat in the parliament.
“At a recent meeting, you and I listened to Linsday and Jonel clearly expressing trepidation about winning their seats while still appearing gung ho about dissolution. If they are uncertain, it is very likely that on the ground it is worse than they think because I would expect them to be the most optimistic about their constituencies than others, except it is that they don’t know their constituencies.
“I have not hidden my fears. I have told you and others where I stand and I am saying here again for the record that an election at this time is a loss of const 8 by any PAM candidate.”
“If you are satisfied given what both Lindsay and Jonel have said, then you are prepared to accept PAM just having one seat which is your seat. I do not understand your plan and I would be unwise to accept without more. I would have been happy to be there tonight to get a better understanding to allay my fears.”

He said this would equate to the party tantamount to driving a harpoon through the heart of PAM which I have given my life.”
Hamilton urged his party colleagues to be mindful that their behaviours and actions are viewed by a mixed audience.

“There is therefore the question of what strategies are being employed and what will be the fallout of such strategies when analyzed by the total audience.

“While it is easy to get carried away by the raucous support of the core of rabid supporters to whom we are the greatest thing since sliced bread, we should always consider the silent majority who is taking in our performance as well the performance of our opponents. They are the ones who will very rationally analyze our performance and at the end of the day make a big difference one way or the other; depending on how they interpret our performance.”

The full letter would be posted in a subsequent article.

- Advertisement -