PLP: Shane Gibson
FNM: Donald Saunders
Shane Gibson won with a big margin in 2002 - more than two to one. Outside of the Over The Hill seats, he had the biggest margin of victory in New Providence. So he should be safe, right? Wrong. Can you say Anna Nicolle Smith? I don't think that the unfortunate situation with the late Ms. Smith will damage the PLP overall very much, but Gibson himself has been badly hurt.
Let me say right off I don't think Mr. Gibson did anything wrong other than to be a little star struck and the fact his family clearly became close friends with Ms. Smith's family tends to prove that this was all on the level. Yes, he fast-tracked her papers and didn't follow up on them - not good, but hardly a huge offence. But in politics perception is everything and that picture of him being hugged by Anna Nicolle is likely to cost him a lot of respect. He had to quit the cabinet - and it seems unlikely he'd get re-admitted if the PLP wins the election. That makes him damaged goods and people don't like to vote for a damaged MP because he's less effective.
So does that mean the FNM has the advantage? Not really. This isn't a true suburban swing seat - there is some built-in tilt to the PLP. Gibson has an advantage in numbers, but it's a small one. He'd better work hard if he doesn't want Anna Nicolle to reach out from the grave and drag him down.
Ranking: LEAN PLP
1 comment:
Hello Victor,
Having read through your blog entries, I can see that you're a very astute political observer and you certainly know more about this than I do. I'm sure you're predictions are mostly correct, including the one for Golden Gates. However, I have to say I was surprised by your analysis of the Anna Nicole Smith affair. You say that you don't think that Shane Gibson did anything really wrong and that the fact that his family later became good friends with ANS seems to prove that all was on the level. Don't you think it must be correct that it is wrong for a Minister to fast-track, i.e. give preferential treatment to, the application of any person because of a personal friendship? Don't you think it's inappropriate for a Minister of government to allow such a friendship to develop with a person whose application his ministry is responsible for processing? Don't forget that when he was aked if he ever received a gift from ANS, he didn't actually deny it. He said he didn't recall receiving any gifts. That's just an obvious lie. Unless he has Alzheimer's, he knows whether he received any gifts from her. On the evidence, I feel pretty sure that he got the Rolex that everyone's talking about.
The problem, as I see it, is that PLP voters have never had a problem with this sort of thing. There's no real dispute about the facts, it's just that people who think like I do see this whole thing as an appalling abuse of power, they see it as no big deal. Witness Obie Wilchcombe's astonishing response to the allegations of vote buying against him. Even if it were true that the people lined up outside his headquarters to get money were just beneficiaries of his usual humanitarian generosity (a ridiculous story), it's alarming that he doesn't see it as wrong to extend such generosity just before an election. He's not even embarrassed!
So, Victor, I agree with many of your conclusions and I complement you on a good blog, but I think you're dead wrong on the question whether SG did anything wrong. What he did was completely wrong and we should all be quick to point this out and do what we can to improve standards of public behaviour in this country. I'm sure you'll agree that a vote for the FNM is one step in the right direction.
Post a Comment