The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

It is my opinion that Hubert Minnis is a deeply flawed and possibly irreparable leader. Even those closest to him acknowledge this.

Despite that unfortunate reality, wise men in the senior ranks of the FNM decided to go to the mat for him. They decided to risk everything and remove every possible impediment that might get in the way of him proving himself. Let’s hope he does just that – prove himself.

Following the one day convention Dr Minnis is surrounded completely by an amen chorus of people of his choosing. The irritant called Deputy Leader Loretta Butler-Turner has been neutralised. A new deputy is in place.

What was clear is that in the deputy leader race as well as in several other races for senior party officers, the Minnis Camp was determined to ensure the complete elimination of anyone perceived as a strong or outspoken challenger to Hubert Minnis. After the North Abaco fiasco with Loretta Butler-Turner, Hubert Minnis told FNM supporters publicly that he had to “destroy” Loretta Butler Turner. What was clearly not spoken was the commitment to destroy anyone else who was perceived as being friendly to Mrs Turner or who would otherwise be a threat or who would overshadow Minnis.

The first order of business for the Minnis Camp was to destroy Loretta Butler-Turner. However, to fully understand why Minnis felt this was necessary, you have to go back to the beginning. Butler-Turner saw the debate about stem cells for its scientific and human value and came out in favour of it very quickly. Minnis saw only the political value of opposing it and said no. When members of the press checked the stem cell records it turned out Minnis was for it before he was against it.

Then Butler-Turner was an advocate for marching in favour of mortgage relief. Minnis was against it and that was the end of that. This woman simply was too strong. She had to be stopped.

Step two was to ensure that Minnis would not have a Deputy Leader who would be NOTHING like Loretta Butler-Turner. Minnis took an early look at the contenders and decided very early on that neither of them would meet his threshold for obedience.

Sands’s independent streak was revealed very early on in that same stem cell debate. He too saw the scientific value and had the strength of conviction to hold firm to his earlier professional positions, unlike Minnis who flipped and flopped. Duane Sands was viewed by many as a safe deputy because he does not rock the boat. However, a lot of insiders are aware of Hubert Minnis’s – shall we say lack of preference for Sands – so, despite Sands’s strengths, he too fell into the enemy camp. But he was certainly more acceptable than Darren Cash, because his public uttering were not as significant as Cash v Minnis.

So this leads me to the next early contender for Deputy, Darren Cash – who I have followed from COB days – started his role as Party Chairman with a leaked email that revealed that he had issues with Minnis’s insular management style. It would seem that from the stellar job he did as chairman he must not have let those differences get in the way. Nevertheless, there were several instances where Cash was not only at odds with Minnis but with his entire party. I can remember vividly Cash’s leaked and well publicized “Country First” memo that urged his Party to cooperate with the government on tax reform and regularization of web shops. That attitude of bi-partisanship got Cash called before the Executive Committee of the Party.

So, when Minnis was looking for the “right” deputy leader he was in quite a fix. It seems now that what was obviously clear to the Minnis camp is that the known enemy that had to be destroyed. What also seems clear is that the known enemy was the outspoken chairman Darren Cash who, despite the outstanding job that he did as chairman, he still had a reputation for being an independent thinker who could not be controlled. This sad fact should give young Cash some confidence. Because he was clearly the deputy most likely to be a “strong, tell it like it is, speak truth to power deputy.” As we reflect on the results, it seems to me and many observers that Cash was the clear and unequivocal enemy to the Minnis camp. The race for the deputy became a race between the two people most likely to be weak deputies. Case in point. On Saturday morning a good friend asked me who won the deputy race. I replied, Peter Turnquest. His immediate answer was “Who is he?”

In the final analysis, Peter Turnquest was the safest choice for deputy leader. The regrettable thing for the FNM is that when the public conversation about the new FNM deputy leader begins with “Peter who?” or “Who is he?” that might not be helpful to the party in the long term. Turnquest, who is new to the FNM (joining just before the 2012 elections when his negotiations for a PLP nomination broke down) has not distinguished himself as a shadow minister of finance. When everything in the country in the past year has been about financial matters Turnquest should have been a household name just as Sands and Cash are. But again, this is precisely what Minnis wants; a diminutive supporting cast. Mission accomplished. What is sad too is knowing that in 2014, and in a party I helped to build from infancy, delegates in mine and the other major party demonstrate little independence of thought; they vote as they are told.

Despite that reality, what is good for the FNM is that now Minnis has absolutely no excuses. He has a team that is totally of his own choosing with no voices of dissent. Everyone is in the amen chorus and will salute him at all times. Time will tell whether the convention’s decision to purge the senior leadership of Butler Turner, Sands, and other strong voices will work in the party’s best interests.

FRANK NEHEMIAH MILLER

Nassau,

November 23, 2014.