Bullshittery
Despite being roundly condemned (here, here, here, here and here) for their failure to debate Renee Webb’s amendment to the Human Rights Act last week, Bermuda’s MPs continue to equivocate.
Paula Cox:
”Some clear, objective and factual discussion and consultation needed to occur prior even to any debate. If not, you contribute to a situation where in the absence of information there is a vacuum and in which fear and misinformation can flourish.”
You had a chance to contribute to some clear, objective and factual discussion in the House last week, Ms. Cox. Instead, your silence contributed to that “fear and misinformation”.
Trevor Moniz:
”Some people, like Nelson Bascome and Neville Darrell, say Renee’s amendment is already implicitly included in the Act. I don’t know if that’s correct or not.”
Come on, Mr. Moniz. Given your legal experience, you can do better than that. Is it included or isn’t it?
Michael Dunkley:
”I was very disappointed that Renee Webb didn’t take the opportunity to speak to our group about it... You could see how the debate went that she hadn’t really done her homework…The people who supported the amendment didn’t say anything. Renee Webb was led up the garden path by some of her colleagues.
We thought one of the first people to stand up would be someone from the Cabinet — maybe the Minister responsible for the Human Rights Commission [Dale Butler]. He didn’t carry out his performance as a Minister as expected.”
Blame, blame, blame. What about your own responsibility, Mr. Dunkley? Instead of telling us where everyone else was at fault, why don’t you say why you didn’t you back the motion?
Wayne Furbert:
“I believe the current Human Rights Act covers sexual orientation. The UBP didn’t have a strategy.”
What sections of the Act do you think cover sexual orientation, Mr. Furbert? Part I, section 2 (2)(a) is very explicit about the categories that are covered, and I don’t see sexual orientation in there.
As for the UBP not having a strategy… please. John Barritt already told the Royal Gazette that the UBP caucus agreed that no UBP MP would speak on the motion unless a member of the PLP front bench did so first.
Jamahl Simmons:
“I voted no. At the end of the day I have to respect the wishes of my constituents.”
Well, that wasn’t what you told me the day before the vote last week.
And let's not forget Ewart Brown:
"I elected not to speak today. I intend to speak on this issue another time and another place."
When and where would that be, Dr. Brown? The bathroom?
The more I read about Friday’s debacle, the angrier I become.
Archives By Date
How can the leader of the opposition not have done enough research HIMSELF on the act in question in which one of the most controversial amendments in recent Bermudian history to know what he is talking about, yet is willing to make authoritative statements on it? And whats with the semi-Orwellian political talk about 'we did not have a strategy...'
Posted by al-ghorab on 01.06.06 at 22:08
sounds to me like the UBP picked another winner to lead them off to obscurity. I would be very afraid to vote for any party that has a leader who doesn't have first hand knowledge of which they speak.
"I do not have the article in front of me but it has been told us that it is included.
How long has he known that this debate was coming? and he still doesn't know first hand what it does say and what it doesn't? Truly a sad case for a supposed leader.
Posted by charles on 02.06.06 at 11:20
What's particularly disappointing is that, when these complete assclowns talk about gay rights already being covered by the Act, or implicitly covered, it really shows how little knowledge of the subject they have and how very little they care about human rights. Anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge or caring couldn't say such complete bollocks.
Posted by loki on 02.06.06 at 11:24
Hope everyone read this in yesterday's SUN. Hope other church leaders follow suit (...wishful thinking). I called the reverend to congratulate him on his stance...hope others do as well.
Posted by Joseph Froncioni on 03.06.06 at 10:26
And Mr. Scott accused the United Bermuda Party of "wimping out" during the debate on Renée Webb's Human Rights Act amendment motion to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation.
He said: "They wimped out under pressure.The Opposition members did not speak on what was supposedly was an individual vote.
As if the PLP was crawling all over each other to speak on this issue?!?
"We (PLP) were all free men and women on that one and we will be again if it (the motion) comes back."
And he said representatives of the Church were as entitled as any to sit in the public gallery during the debate. Mr. Scott also reiterated his belief that Bermuda's Human Rights Act in its present form provides all the protection necessary to address discrimination.
He added: "It serves all of us. If I see that it doesn't then we will look at it."
bullshittery indeed. Does this constitute hard evidence that Alex Scott has had a psychotic break with reality??? He's lucky everyone's watching football rather than paying attention to his foolishness.
Posted by silencedogood on 27.06.06 at 15:18