JACK RESPONSE TO THE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

[weary1969]

STATEMENT FROM THE HON. JACK WARNER, MINISTER OF WORKS AND TRANSPORT
ON THE PRESS RELEASE BY THE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

I congratulate the Integrity Commission on its expeditious response to the Leader of the Opposition's request for an opinion on his statement that my positions as a Cabinet Minister and as a Vice President of FIFA are in breach of some ethic that he has conjured up in his turgid imagination.

The Integrity Commission has, properly, referenced the relevant sections of the Integrity in Public Life Act and the 1988 Code of Ethics.

Section 29 (1) of the Integrity in Public Life Act asserts, inter alia, that a conflict of interest is deemed to arise if a person in public life were to make or participate in a decision in the execution of his office and at the same time knows or ought reasonably to have known that in the making of the decision there is an opportunity either directly or indirectly to further his private interest or that of a family or any other person.

I am in full agreement with and heed the Integrity Commission's summary caution that Cabinet Ministers should so organise their affairs so that there should be no breach of either the Act or the Code; as I have meticulously observed.

This includes the divestment of pecuniary interests which I may have in any organisation.

Unlike a majority of other members of Parliament, past and present, I seek absolutely no pecuniary interest in being a member of the Parliament or of the Government.

I shall have more to say on this issue in the House of Representatives.

Respectfully submitted
Jack Warner

Minister of Works & Transport

(SA Time 2:45am)

June 10, 2010

[Blue]

I am in full agreement with and heed the Integrity Commission's summary caution that Cabinet Ministers should so organise their affairs so that there should be no breach of either the Act or the Code; as I have meticulously observed.

This includes the divestment of pecuniary interests which I may have in any organisation.

Unlike a majority of other members of Parliament, past and present, I seek absolutely no pecuniary interest in being a member of the Parliament or of the Government.

 

So apparently FIFA is not an organisation 

Even more hilarious since the man issued his response from South Africa 

[just cool]

I am in full agreement with and heed the Integrity Commission's summary caution that Cabinet Ministers should so organise their affairs so that there should be no breach of either the Act or the Code; as I have meticulously observed.

This includes the divestment of pecuniary interests which I may have in any organisation.

Unlike a majority of other members of Parliament, past and present, I seek absolutely no pecuniary interest in being a member of the Parliament or of the Government.

 

So apparently FIFA is not an organisation 

Even more hilarious since the man issued his response from South Africa 

You talking outa timin! read the ting again.

[Bakes]

You talking outa timin! read the ting again.

Exactly... I doh mind Jack getting lambaste fuh thing that he guilty of, but on this one this ent nutten but ah witch hunt.  As I have been saying all along, people could bawl "CONFLICT OF INTEREST" all they want, but clearly they don't understand the meaning of the term.  Jack stands in no way (reasonably foreseeable) to benefit in his role as FIFA VP, from his position in the cabinet.  Section 29(1), reading it for the first time, is classic conflicts language... and reads fairly easily even to the average Joe... hopefully people can see that Rowley just on some political nonsense now.

[weary1969]

Who is speaking of his precunary interest it is level of commitment as Min of Works when he has to be on FIFA business like even b4 he takes d sacred oath of Parliament. If dat eh a COI but then again I about 2 strt school in July/Aug.

In addition if we are 2 go by the legal defintion  of COI. A term used to describe the situation in which a public official or fiduciary who, contrary to the obligation and absolute duty to act for the benefit of the public or a designated individual, exploits the relationship for personal benefit, typically pecuniary.

I am 2 blieve dat JW eh go benefit financially from he being involve in both posts.  DAT IS D JOKE AH D CENTURY

[Dutty]

hopefully people can see that Rowley just on some political nonsense now.

de man doin he job,, he cyah just siddong and twiddle he thumbs
opposition leaders have to highlight damn near everything

besides if jack was minister of sports..and fifa vp..the conflict of interest woulda be obvious despite the legalese

It eh hard to make a connection as to how a man who can approve budgets in his private and public job can make those two budgets symbiotic....regardless of portfolio works, tourism etc.

[weary1969]

hopefully people can see that Rowley just on some political nonsense now.

de man doin he job,, he cyah just siddong and twiddle he thumbs
opposition leaders have to highlight damn near everything

besides if jack was minister of sports..and fifa vp..the conflict of interest woulda be obvious despite the legalese

It eh hard to make a connection as to how a man who can approve budgets in his private and public job can make those two budgets symbiotic.

Shhhhhh not so loud

[Rastaman]

hopefully people can see that Rowley just on some political nonsense now.

de man doin he job,, he cyah just siddong and twiddle he thumbs
opposition leaders have to highlight damn near everything

besides if jack was minister of sports..and fifa vp..the conflict of interest woulda be obvious despite the legalese

It eh hard to make a connection as to how a man who can approve budgets in his private and public job can make those two budgets symbiotic.

Shhhhhh not so loud

Yeah boy Dutty......Shhhhh. Some people just want to see what they want to see.

[Blue]

I am in full agreement with and heed the Integrity Commission's summary caution that Cabinet Ministers should so organise their affairs so that there should be no breach of either the Act or the Code; as I have meticulously observed.

This includes the divestment of pecuniary interests which I may have in any organisation.

Unlike a majority of other members of Parliament, past and present, I seek absolutely no pecuniary interest in being a member of the Parliament or of the Government.

 

So apparently FIFA is not an organisation 

Even more hilarious since the man issued his response from South Africa 

You talking outa timin! read the ting again.

Nah, I read it right....personally, I think Jack is de right man for the job. And I am not interested what his financial incentives are.  I eh really interested in the findings of the Integrity Commission either, or their wording, which legal students like Bakes will post at length on.

But there is no contesting that there is a conflict of interest. Rowley queried whether Jack is in a position to give both roles (or more specifically the ministerial role) sufficient attention. The fact is that Jack is in South Africa doing his "job" for the next few weeks - presumably this has an impact on the projects he can oversee and the decisions he can take as Minister of Works/Transport in Trinidad during that period. If WASA went on strike tomorrow (for example), who do we turn to?

Having said that, he would still do a better job, even on the phone from SA, than his recent predecessors would have done.

[Bakes]

Who is speaking of his precunary interest it is level of commitment as Min of Works when he has to be on FIFA business like even b4 he takes d sacred oath of Parliament. If dat eh a COI but then again I about 2 strt school in July/Aug.

Maybe you should reexamine the meaning of "conflict of interest" then.  It eh too late fuh summer school, since yuh repeating, all dem teachers done know yuh anyways.

In addition if we are 2 go by the legal defintion  of COI. A term used to describe the situation in which a public official or fiduciary who, contrary to the obligation and absolute duty to act for the benefit of the public or a designated individual, exploits the relationship for personal benefit, typically pecuniary.

I am 2 blieve dat JW eh go benefit financially from he being involve in both posts.  DAT IS D JOKE AH D CENTURY

Unfortunately for you it's not a subjective standard... is not about what you "am 2 blieve".

[Bakes]

de man doin he job,, he cyah just siddong and twiddle he thumbs
opposition leaders have to highlight damn near everything

Like I said... "political nonsense".

besides if jack was minister of sports..and fifa vp..the conflict of interest woulda be obvious despite the legalese

It eh hard to make a connection as to how a man who can approve budgets in his private and public job can make those two budgets symbiotic....regardless of portfolio works, tourism etc.

Really?  So since it obvious then that mean yuh should be able to provide examples, right?

Please explain how Jack can approve a budget as Minister that will be "symbiotic" to financial concerns in FIFA... and yuh free to choose either his real or hypothetical portfolio as you offered it.  Everybody making conclusory statements about what "obvious" and what not.  Nobody really offering examples.

[Bakes]

Nah, I read it right....personally, I think Jack is de right man for the job. And I am not interested what his financial incentives are.  I eh really interested in the findings of the Integrity Commission either, or their wording, which legal students like Bakes will post at length on.

"Legal student"?  Like everybody have ah opinion on my pursuits deez days boy, lol  I am but a humble court stenographer... but yes, I'm also a student of the law even in that modest role, lol.

All that said... people act like they never hear about "Permanent Secretary" before in dey life.  How do any of the other Ministries function when the Minister is away on travel... or out sick?  People have an overblown appreciation of what it is that Ministers do on a day to day basis... their jobs are simply to carry out the directives of the Prime Minister.  Permanent Secretaries are the ones who are involved in all the administrative heavy lifting.  Besides... juss now Jack hard wuk with FIFA go done... de timing works to his advantage.

But there is no contesting that there is a conflict of interest. Rowley queried whether Jack is in a position to give both roles (or more specifically the ministerial role) sufficient attention. The fact is that Jack is in South Africa doing his "job" for the next few weeks - presumably this has an impact on the projects he can oversee and the decisions he can take as Minister of Works/Transport in Trinidad during that period. If WASA went on strike tomorrow (for example), who do we turn to?

Having said that, he would still do a better job, even on the phone from SA, than his recent predecessors would have done.

Actually, Rowley queried the "propriety" of the arrangement... not the feasibility.  Whether is is proper for him to do both... not whether he could do both effectively.

Rowley explained that he had “no doubt that Mr Warner is a very capable and hard working gentleman, who has good vision and he is an asset to us in Trinidad and Tobago at the FIFA desk,” but he had “some serious concerns about the propriety of a minister of government of Trinidad and Tobago holding executive authority in an organisation, local or foreign.”

[weary1969]

Perception is aparently a subjective commission peeps perceive dat Manning do wrong in d church issue. NO PROBLEM but it wrong 2 perceive dat JW  could benefit from his dual roles.

[Bakes]

Perception is aparently a subjective commission peeps perceive dat Manning do wrong in d church issue. NO PROBLEM but it wrong 2 perceive dat JW  could benefit from his dual roles.

It's not wrong to think that... but you can't call fuh de man to quit his job simply because you believe he have ah opportunity to improperly benefit from it.  Yuh doh arrest people because yuh believe they have ah opportunity to commit a crime.  Yuh watch him like a hawk and see what he movements are.

[sammy]

this forum is like the twilight zone yes.

[Dutty]

Really?  So since it obvious then that mean yuh should be able to provide examples, right?

Please explain how Jack can approve a budget as Minister that will be "symbiotic" to financial concerns in FIFA... and yuh free to choose either his real or hypothetical portfolio as you offered it.  Everybody making conclusory statements about what "obvious" and what not.  Nobody really offering examples.
[/quote]

Um sure,,i'll play

Scenario uno

FIFA wants to hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure
Jack tells the oter fifa dons he happens to know a carribbean island that will be willing to lavish great sums to host the world….their per diems, perks and reputations as global ambassadors to the sport will be well rewarded.

It just so happens Jack is sports minister, so he has  a meeting with himself and through some shrewd negotiations the VP manages to convince the minister that spending millions on stadia and advertising will benefit his country,, although the limited budget should have been for other uses within the country

The obvious part is where jack benefits as a 3rd party  concessions for the tournament, perhaps tourism charters etc. y 'know wild scenarios that have never happened before


Scenario 6.5?

Fifa wants top hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure on infrastructure…expensive rails , newly built highways for teams to travel across the country etc etc

It just so happens Jack is minister of works……the budget should really go to fixing the countrys secondary and tertiary roads
But the fifa vp manages to twist his own arm and agree to spend lavishly on highways and light rails etc.

The not so obvious part is where jack simply aligns himself with any local or foreign contractor to build said roads and trains and negotiates a certain fee…IF the ministry awards the job to them.

Of course anybody who believes that wont happen probably believes vince carter could save any team he does play wit.

Ahhh,,I see what you did there BnS you put the word symbiotic in parentheses to underscore my use of the word….you're a shrewd one BnS nothing gets past you….clever clever

[Dutty]

this forum is like the twilight zone yes.

dais de problem,,we trapped we cayah never leave

[weary1969]

Really?  So since it obvious then that mean yuh should be able to provide examples, right?

Please explain how Jack can approve a budget as Minister that will be "symbiotic" to financial concerns in FIFA... and yuh free to choose either his real or hypothetical portfolio as you offered it.  Everybody making conclusory statements about what "obvious" and what not.  Nobody really offering examples.

Um sure,,i'll play

Scenario uno

FIFA wants to hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure
Jack tells the oter fifa dons he happens to know a carribbean island that will be willing to lavish great sums to host the world….their per diems, perks and reputations as global ambassadors to the sport will be well rewarded.

It just so happens Jack is sports minister, so he has  a meeting with himself and through some shrewd negotiations the VP manages to convince the minister that spending millions on stadia and advertising will benefit his country,, although the limited budget should have been for other uses within the country

The obvious part is where jack benefits as a 3rd party  concessions for the tournament, perhaps tourism charters etc. y 'know wild scenarios that have never happened before


Scenario 6.5?

Fifa wants top hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure on infrastructure…expensive rails , newly built highways for teams to travel across the country etc etc

It just so happens Jack is minister of works……the budget should really go to fixing the countrys secondary and tertiary roads
But the fifa vp manages to twist his own arm and agree to spend lavishly on highways and light rails etc.

The not so obvious part is where jack simply aligns himself with any local or foreign contractor to build said roads and trains and negotiates a certain fee…IF the ministry awards the job to them.

Of course anybody who believes that wont happen probably believes vince carter could save any team he does play wit.

Ahhh,,I see what you did there BnS you put the word symbiotic in parentheses to underscore my use of the word….you're a shrewd one BnS nothing gets past you….clever clever
[/quote]

Poor Vince 

[Blue]

All that said... people act like they never hear about "Permanent Secretary" before in dey life.  How do any of the other Ministries function when the Minister is away on travel... or out sick?  People have an overblown appreciation of what it is that Ministers do on a day to day basis... their jobs are simply to carry out the directives of the Prime Minister.  Permanent Secretaries are the ones who are involved in all the administrative heavy lifting.  Besides... juss now Jack hard wuk with FIFA go done... de timing works to his advantage.

Dat "permanent secretary is the real minister" talk is garbage so I not gonna dwell on it. But would you accept any other minister going to handle private business overseas for a month? And why do you think Jack's FIFA workload will end anytime soon?

Actually, Rowley queried the "propriety" of the arrangement... not the feasibility.  Whether is is proper for him to do both... not whether he could do both effectively.

Rowley explained that he had “no doubt that Mr Warner is a very capable and hard working gentleman, who has good vision and he is an asset to us in Trinidad and Tobago at the FIFA desk,” but he had “some serious concerns about the propriety of a minister of government of Trinidad and Tobago holding executive authority in an organisation, local or foreign.”

Yuh wrangling wid wording. If you think Rowley went and consulted his dictionary before releasing his statement, then I guess you win.

[WestCoast]

this forum is like the twilight zone yes.

ha ha
ya did ever hear about ah Agent provocateur myrmidon
is ALL ah that going on here

or is a test of the argumentum ad verecundiam theory

or could be some serious Conversation Hacking goin dong

or it could be self induced practise to try and help a future career choice

or it could be a new tv show like this

[Bakes]

Um sure,,i'll play

Scenario uno

FIFA wants to hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure
Jack tells the oter fifa dons he happens to know a carribbean island that will be willing to lavish great sums to host the world….their per diems, perks and reputations as global ambassadors to the sport will be well rewarded.

It just so happens Jack is sports minister, so he has  a meeting with himself and through some shrewd negotiations the VP manages to convince the minister that spending millions on stadia and advertising will benefit his country,, although the limited budget should have been for other uses within the country

The obvious part is where jack benefits as a 3rd party  concessions for the tournament, perhaps tourism charters etc. y 'know wild scenarios that have never happened before

Why would Jack go thru all of that when he could simply do so in his private capacity as "Special Advisor"... yuh know, like he did for the U17 World Cup and other international tournaments in the past?  And guess what... all the concessions, charters, TV rights... all ah dat was his to keep no questions asked.  Why would he have to resort to acting in his Ministerial capacity to do that when he could have Camps do it for him via the TTFF?  "wild scenarios" indeed.

Scenario 6.5?

Fifa wants top hold a tournament in some country that requires significant expenditure on infrastructure…expensive rails , newly built highways for teams to travel across the country etc etc

It just so happens Jack is minister of works……the budget should really go to fixing the countrys secondary and tertiary roads
But the fifa vp manages to twist his own arm and agree to spend lavishly on highways and light rails etc.

The not so obvious part is where jack simply aligns himself with any local or foreign contractor to build said roads and trains and negotiates a certain fee…IF the ministry awards the job to them.

Of course anybody who believes that wont happen probably believes vince carter could save any team he does play wit.

Ahhh,,I see what you did there BnS you put the word symbiotic in parentheses to underscore my use of the word….you're a shrewd one BnS nothing gets past you….clever clever

This is so far-fetched it's downright hallucinatory.  First off yuh could juss leff off the madcap FIFA involvement... Jack in his capacity as Minister of Transportation could arrange the same kinda insider bidding and kickbacks by "align[ing] himself with any local or foreign contractor to build said roads and trains and negotiates a certain fee…IF the ministry awards the job to them."  The issue then isn't one of a conflict of interest, because the FIFA job (under your scenario) isn't what creates the opportunity for graft... it's the public office.  Have a better one?

Also... I put the word "symbiotic" in quotes (not parentheses) because I thought it was an odd usage... so I quoted you verbatim.  Additionally, see my response to Ryan below regarding how the Ministry really functions.

[Bakes]

Dat "permanent secretary is the real minister" talk is garbage so I not gonna dwell on it. But would you accept any other minister going to handle private business overseas for a month? And why do you think Jack's FIFA workload will end anytime soon?

I never said anything about "permanent secretary is the real minister"... not sure where you fished that one from, but it explains a lot.  See I could only read and understand simple English and I assume the same of everyone.  You could call what I said vis-a-vis the Permanent Secretary's role "garbage" if you want... but it's really not up for debate, that is fact, not opinion... and only goes to underscore that you don't know what you're talking about.  To help you out I'll start with this simple description of how the role functions under the Westminster system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Secretary

I'm sure you'll come back with "dai'z 'perfect world' thing... Trinidad different".  No.  I can tell you from personal knowledge that this is how the Permanent Secretary role functions... the purpose is to foment stability and prevent disruptions to the administration of the Ministry's portfolio by the potential turnover at the top every 5 years.  It is deliberately delegated certain functions to ensure this continuity regardless as to whom the political appointee is at the top.

Yuh wrangling wid wording. If you think Rowley went and consulted his dictionary before releasing his statement, then I guess you win.

I am not a mind reader... maybe that is one of your other gifts.  I can only tell you what the man said... if you know that he didn't quite mean what he said then more power to you.  Call it "wrangling" if yuh want but I sure Rowley thought long and hard... and has a definite purpose for using the specific wording that he used.  You might be happy playing it loose and fast with yuh words but Rowley has a particular agenda which he's pursuing and he's no dunce.

[Blue]

Dat "permanent secretary is the real minister" talk is garbage so I not gonna dwell on it. But would you accept any other minister going to handle private business overseas for a month? And why do you think Jack's FIFA workload will end anytime soon?

I never said anything about "permanent secretary is the real minister"... not sure where you fished that one from, but it explains a lot.  See I could only read and understand simple English and I assume the same of everyone.  You could call what I said vis-a-vis the Permanent Secretary's role "garbage" if you want... but it's really not up for debate, that is fact, not opinion... and only goes to underscore that you don't know what you're talking about.  To help you out I'll start with this simple description of how the role functions under the Westminster system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Secretary

I'm sure you'll come back with "dai'z 'perfect world' thing... Trinidad different".  No.  I can tell you from personal knowledge that this is how the Permanent Secretary role functions... the purpose is to foment stability and prevent disruptions to the administration of the Ministry's portfolio by the potential turnover at the top every 5 years.  It is deliberately delegated certain functions to ensure this continuity regardless as to whom the political appointee is at the top.

But would you accept any other minister going to handle private business overseas for a month? And why do you think Jack's FIFA workload will end anytime soon?

[Bakes]

But would you accept any other minister going to handle private business overseas for a month? And why do you think Jack's FIFA workload will end anytime soon?

Hard to say really... because as much as I disagree with Jack on 99.9% of everything, and personally don't care for his ethics or lack thereof, TnT does stand to benefit from his involvement with FIFA, albeit only tangentially so.  So any other Minister going to arrange he affairs and ignoring his duty would be a tougher call, probably not.  Part of me feels Jack's role with FIFA too important to us to force him to give it up over politics.  I'd prefer they show clearly where the conflict exists first.

After the World Cup it would be easier for Jack to delegate much of his FIFA duties, this is really the only thing that ALL of FIFA gets involved in.  Aside from this... an executive meeting here and there is all Jack should absolutely be needed for.  CONCACAF matters might be a bigger drain on his time.  So yeah, I think his FIFA duties might wind down a bit after this.

[weary1969]

He only goin 4 d opening and goin back 4 d closing. He will b takin d sacred oath on fri

[Dutty]

This is so far-fetched it's downright hallucinatory.  First off yuh could juss leff off the madcap FIFA involvement... Jack in his capacity as Minister of Transportation could arrange the same kinda insider bidding and kickbacks by "align[ing] himself with any local or foreign contractor to build said roads and trains and negotiates a certain fee…IF the ministry awards the job to them."  The issue then isn't one of a conflict of interest, because the FIFA job (under your scenario) isn't what creates the opportunity for graft... it's the public office.  Have a better one?

Also... I put the word "symbiotic" in quotes (not parentheses) because I thought it was an odd usage... so I quoted you verbatim.  Additionally, see my response to Ryan below regarding how the Ministry really functions.

Yes yuh right quotes not parentheses....dais me again trying to ascend to lofty levels of Internet Ivory tower intellectuallism...but the air so thin it does make mih "hallucinatory" makin some of my wording seem "odd"

Nevertheless, that addendum you tagged on there refers to pure corruption or graft as you put it...the issue at hand is conflict of interest


Yes I saw your  "response to ryan below"so we'll take a page from your prove it tactic...other than wiki that any  monkey can edit,,,,,, you're not "really offering examples", got any?

[Bakes]

"Examples" of what?   If you want better proof of what a Permanent Secretary does then Google is your friend.

EDIT... was posting from my phone.

[Blue]

"Examples" of what?   If you want better proof of what a Permanent Secretary does then Googlers is your friend.

For the record, I don't see how this Permanent Secretary tangent that you have gone off on addresses the original argument that there is an undeniable conflict of interest in Jack palancing wid FIFA while business needs attending at home, which was the point Rowley was trying to make. Noone was ever under any illusions that ministers operate on their own.

And I think you are jumping the gun in saying that Jack's FIFA workload will go down after the World Cup...has he said this? Even if he did say this (which I'm guessing he didn't), do you believe him? World Cups 2018 and 2022 are being awarded later this year....nuff wining and dining needs to happen between now and then.

[Bakes]

For the record, I don't see how this Permanent Secretary tangent that you have gone off on addresses the original argument that there is an undeniable conflict of interest in Jack palancing wid FIFA while business needs attending at home, which was the point Rowley was trying to make. Noone was ever under any illusions that ministers operate on their own.

Oh so now the so-called conflict of interest is "undeniable"?  You get that from who... de Integrity Commission?  Oh wait... ah fuhget yuh say yuh not really interested in what dem have to say.  Too bad your conclusory statements carry no weight... heading you off at the pass, neither do mine, but at least I know to couch my statements as argument, not fact.

As for the bolded... if no one was under any such illusions then why yuh bringing it up?  Nobody said Ministers operate on dey own... just like no one said "permanent secretary is the real minister".  You seem to have a penchant for raising strawman arguments.  If we going to discuss it, how about we focus on what I actually say and go from there?

With regards to the permanent secretary talk... it stemmed from this statement you made

But there is no contesting that there is a conflict of interest. Rowley queried whether Jack is in a position to give both roles (or more specifically the ministerial role) sufficient attention. The fact is that Jack is in South Africa doing his "job" for the next few weeks - presumably this has an impact on the projects he can oversee and the decisions he can take as Minister of Works/Transport in Trinidad during that period. If WASA went on strike tomorrow (for example), who do we turn to?

You presumptively (using your own term) concluded that projects under Jack's portfolio would be neglected or that an issue like a hypothetical work stoppage could be disastrous in his absence... I mentioned the Permanent Secretary to illustrate that the Ministry will continue to function just fine.  Surprising that you don't see the link... but then again, more and more I realizing I need to lower my expectations.  And I doh mean that in a nasty way, I just assume people know these things, fuhgetting that I mihself only find out some ah these things in the last 5-6 years.

I can't help but notice another conclusory "no contesting that there is a conflict of interest" statement from you.  If the issue was so clear cut then there wouldn't be any legal debate taking place and there'd be no need to wasted taxpayers money on foreign consultants.

And I think you are jumping the gun in saying that Jack's FIFA workload will go down after the World Cup...has he said this? Even if he did say this (which I'm guessing he didn't), do you believe him? World Cups 2018 and 2022 are being awarded later this year....nuff wining and dining needs to happen between now and then.

How am I "jumping the gun"?  Do you understand the difference between opinion and fact?  It should be obvious that I have no idea what Jack upcoming schedule is... I just talking based on observations over the years, FIFA is busy throughout, but activity picks up on every level as the World Cup and World Cup related issues approach.  It wasn't meant as some literal statement of fact that Jack wrapping up his involvement with FIFA, or everything grinding down to a halt.  The kinda shit does end up getting debated here sometimes eh... lol

[Blue]

For the record, I don't see how this Permanent Secretary tangent that you have gone off on addresses the original argument that there is an undeniable conflict of interest in Jack palancing wid FIFA while business needs attending at home, which was the point Rowley was trying to make. Noone was ever under any illusions that ministers operate on their own.

Oh so now the so-called conflict of interest is "undeniable"?  You get that from who... de Integrity Commission?  Oh wait... ah fuhget yuh say yuh not really interested in what dem have to say.  Too bad your conclusory statements carry no weight... heading you off at the pass, neither do mine, but at least I know to couch my statements as argument, not fact.

As for the bolded... if no one was under any such illusions then why yuh bringing it up?  Nobody said Ministers operate on dey own... just like no one said "permanent secretary is the real minister".  You seem to have a penchant for raising strawman arguments.  If we going to discuss it, how about we focus on what I actually say and go from there?

With regards to the permanent secretary talk... it stemmed from this statement you made

But there is no contesting that there is a conflict of interest. Rowley queried whether Jack is in a position to give both roles (or more specifically the ministerial role) sufficient attention. The fact is that Jack is in South Africa doing his "job" for the next few weeks - presumably this has an impact on the projects he can oversee and the decisions he can take as Minister of Works/Transport in Trinidad during that period. If WASA went on strike tomorrow (for example), who do we turn to?

You presumptively (using your own term) concluded that projects under Jack's portfolio would be neglected or that an issue like a hypothetical work stoppage could be disastrous in his absence... I mentioned the Permanent Secretary to illustrate that the Ministry will continue to function just fine.  Surprising that you don't see the link... but then again, more and more I realizing I need to lower my expectations.  And I doh mean that in a nasty way, I just assume people know these things, fuhgetting that I mihself only find out some ah these things in the last 5-6 years.

I can't help but notice another conclusory "no contesting that there is a conflict of interest" statement from you.  If the issue was so clear cut then there wouldn't be any legal debate taking place and there'd be no need to wasted taxpayers money on foreign consultants.

And I think you are jumping the gun in saying that Jack's FIFA workload will go down after the World Cup...has he said this? Even if he did say this (which I'm guessing he didn't), do you believe him? World Cups 2018 and 2022 are being awarded later this year....nuff wining and dining needs to happen between now and then.

How am I "jumping the gun"?  Do you understand the difference between opinion and fact?  It should be obvious that I have no idea what Jack upcoming schedule is... I just talking based on observations over the years, FIFA is busy throughout, but activity picks up on every level as the World Cup and World Cup related issues approach.  It wasn't meant as some literal statement of fact that Jack wrapping up his involvement with FIFA, or everything grinding down to a halt.  The kinda shit does end up getting debated here sometimes eh... lol

Lol....u love dis permanent secretary talk eh. its irrelevant.

And Jack's schedule...I know your statements weren't fact...but they weren't even a sensible opinion. They were a guess. Given how speculative it was, I don't see why you had any reason to start pontificating.

Buried in all that dross is your admission that your statements carry no weight. That's as close as I've ever seen you coming to admitting you were wrong.