As debate wound down on the 2007/2008 budget in the House of Assembly, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said Wednesday afternoon that Opposition Leader Perry Christie should take responsibility for his party?s recent defeat at the polls and resign.

Link To Original Article (http://www.jonesbahamas.com/?c=45&a=12979)

The prime minister said Mr. Christie "ought to have done the honourable thing and resign" because he led the PLP to defeat.

"It’s up to the leader to take responsibility," the prime minister said.
The heck? This doenst make any sense to me. I guess we are telling persons : "if you lose then you must quit, its the honorable thing to do" Taking responsibility is one thing, but who says one must resign after a loss.

"Why do you think the PLP government came to office, met a law put in place by the FNM to deal with land sales to foreigners and in five years they didn’t change the law?...They operated on that law because generally speaking they didn’t have any substantial difference of opinion with ourselves. But The Bahamas, as I said Mr. Speaker, is a democracy. A change in a governing party does not bring governance to an end. The government continues."
Quite true. It amazes me that the then govt blasted laws made by the previous FNM admin, but didn't make one move to change em, when they had the ability to do so.

"They (the PLP) made a huge mistake when they made the election campaign about Hubert Alexander Ingraham."


So True!

The heck? This doenst make any sense to me. I guess we are telling persons : "if you lose then you must quit, its the honorable thing to do" Taking responsibility is one thing, but who says one must resign after a loss.

That is how it is done in democracies. If you lead your party to defeat at the polls, the immediate thing you are expected to do is offer your resignation. Tommy Turnquest did it right after the FNM lost. They chose to allow him to stay on as leader.

This is thing. If you say the economy was great and the people had what they needed and they STILL rejected your party, then you have to accept that they rejected it because of YOU.

Why should Christie risk the certain humilation of being voted out of leadership in November at convention. The country rejected you as their Prime Minister, so you know politically what that means.

That is how it is done in democracies. If you lead your party to defeat at the polls, the immediate thing you are expected to do is offer your resignation. Tommy Turnquest did it right after the FNM lost. They chose to allow him to stay on as leader.
This is thing. If you say the economy was great and the people had what they needed and they STILL rejected your party, then you have to accept that they rejected it because of YOU.
Why should Christie risk the certain humilation of being voted out of leadership in November at convention. The country rejected you as their Prime Minister, so you know politically what that means.



I agree, He should've resigned and let them refuse ito accept it like they did with Pindling. That way, whenever they have their convention, he would have no doubt where they stand.


After they sold me on all the talk about how Ingraham ruined the Finance Industry and sold ALL our Crown Land, they changed NOTHING. Buggers.
The knives are out Perry, watch out!!

It amazes me that the then govt blasted laws made by the previous FNM admin, but didn't make one move to change em, when they had the ability to do so.


This is one of the major reason why they lost and I with other voted against them. They demonized people who used laws that they were well aware of before their term and had 5 years to change. And they refuse to change it because, like I said before, they know exactly why it the laws were put there. How do you think we have a booming real estate market like we have now? Certainly not without the repeal of some of those land acts!

Isn't it ironic that we have drug dealer who make millions off of destroying people's lives, but we had a government who wished to destroy people for doing things along legal avenues?! How do you justify that? You can't!

That is how it is done in democracies. If you lead your party to defeat at the polls, the immediate thing you are expected to do is offer your resignation. Tommy Turnquest did it right after the FNM lost. They chose to allow him to stay on as leader.
This is thing. If you say the economy was great and the people had what they needed and they STILL rejected your party, then you have to accept that they rejected it because of YOU.
Why should Christie risk the certain humilation of being voted out of leadership in November at convention. The country rejected you as their Prime Minister, so you know politically what that means.

Exactly right on that one. Two name scome to mind to me.... Al Gore and John Kerry............

We all know it is the respectable thing to do but we are talking about a man who did not even want Shane Gibson to resign after embarrassing the whole nation and his family. :dgi: