The Tribune

LADY PINDLING took to the podium at the PLP’s Clifford Park rally Friday night to set the record straight. Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, she declared, was not chosen by the late Sir Lynden Pindling to be his heir. Rather Perry Gladstone Christie was the heir apparent.

However, she did admit that in his farewell address to Parliament Sir Lynden did refer to Mr Ingraham as his “most illustrious protégé.”

“But what I really came here tonight to tell you,” she told the yellow flag wavers, “is that it’s completely untrue that Sir Lynden chose Ingraham to be his heir. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is that Sir Lynden put Hubert out of the PLP! He disowned him! He cast him off! ”

That is where she ended her story. But the story should not have ended there. Both Perry Christie and Hubert Alexander Ingraham were cast out by an angry Sir Lynden. One stood by his principles and refused to go back, the other remained mute until the time came for him to return to the Pindling fold as a Cabinet minister. In answer to a critic’s accusation that by accepting the Cabinet post Mr Christie was like a “dog returning to his vomit.”

Mr Christie’s never forgotten reply to his critic was: “For the love, for the emotional support that these people gave me, I will swim in the vomit.”

In June 1982, Messrs Christie and Ingraham were the two youngest ministers to be added to the Ingraham Cabinet — one was “the most illustrious,” the other was “energetic”. Between their Cabinet appointments and 1984, there was a Commission of Inquiry into drug peddling. It left in its wake a trail of scandal that found its way into the Pindling Cabinet.

The fall-out of the Commission of Inquiry was the resignation of Deputy Prime Minister AD Hanna, and cabinet ministers George Smith and Kendal Nottage.

A rumour started to spread that several others were about to bolt the stables – among them Messrs Christie and Ingraham.

Before they could make their move, Sir Lynden got wind of their plans, and sent a police officer to each of their doors with a letter announcing their dismissal. Christie and Ingraham were out of the cabinet.

It did not come as a surprise to Mr Ingraham, although he did find it interesting because he said only a month before Sir Lynden had offered him a position of Minister of Health in addition to his Minister of Housing and National Insurance portfolio.

And then he added: “I know him well, and he knows me well, and I am certain he knows I am not for sale.”

And that is what Mr Ingraham has lived by — he was never a man for sale, and he was vocal in letting the world know it.

Shortly after the Sept 5, 1983 NBC allegations of corruption in the Bahamas Government, Mr Ingraham told a PLP constituency conference that he didn’t care if an investigation led to a Cabinet minister “or anyone else.”

“Yes, let the chips fall where they may and let any and all corrupt persons be exposed and punished so we can get on with the business of governing this country.”

He declared that the PLP government had absolutely no interest in protecting, aiding or giving comfort to anyone, including Members of Parliament.  “If any such persons are involved, we want to flush them out, expose them and punish them to the maximum extent possible for bringing shame and disgrace upon the good name of our government, country, and people.”

Those words were spoken in August, 1984 — two months later, October 9, 1984, a police officer delivered him his marching orders from Sir Lynden — and out of the Cabinet door both he and Mr Christie were tossed.

Eventually, they were declined the PLP nomination and decided to run in the next election as Independents.

According to Lady Pindling: “Perry was also Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield’s choice to be the Leader of the FNM, not Hubert!”

There is not a scintilla of truth in this statement. None of the newspaper articles of the time will support her statement. However, we do know that there was heavy canvassing from the Pindling camp to get both men back in the fold. It was no secret that of the two, Sir Lynden would have preferred Mr Ingraham, instead he got Mr Christie.

We shall now let Dion Foulkes, FNM candidate for Yamacraw, take the story from here.

At the time, Mr Foulkes was Secretary General of the FNM. It was Mr Foulkes who issued Mr Ingraham his membership card when he joined the FNM.

At the time of the election— before Mr Ingraham had joined the FNM, and was standing as an Independent for North Abaco — the FNM decided not to contest his seat — “because to the end he remained vocal on condemning corruption even on the floor of the House.” It was Sir Cecil who had to convince his party not to contest Perry Christie and Arthur Hanna’s seats. Mr Christie, by his own admission when he returned to the Pindling Cabinet, said that “they talk about weakness,” but for many years he had “kept silent.” Not so Mr Ingraham. He had plenty to say.

Sir Cecil, said Mr Foulkes, would never have considered Perry Christie to succeed him. Was this the reason for Mr Christie’s return to his old party?

“Mr Ingraham could have easily accepted Sir Lynden’s offer,” said Mr Foulkes, “but he didn’t. It was Mr Christie who did.”

“When Sir Cecil was dying in a Miami hospital,” said Mr Foulkes, “it was Mr Ingraham that Sir Cecil sent for and at his bedside he asked Mr Ingraham to take over the position of Leader of Opposition Business in the House.”

Mr Ingraham has remained true to his word – he has served his people honestly and he has worked tirelessly for them.