Is This A Conflict Of Interest?

Submitted by Taran Rampersad on Thu, 06/10/2010 - 17:26

Since the election, I've been glad to hear the dolting adoration of the new government fall away into critical thought regarding how Trinidad and Tobago governs itself. That the new Opposition Leader, Dr. Keith Rowley singled out Jack Warner regarding a possible conflict of interest has created friction within the social networks around me.

I've read that Dr. Rowley was wrong to point at what could be a conflict of interest. I disagree - I think that no one is above this and would ask that anyone in government do the same, even Dr. Rowley. I've read ignorance on both sides and I've read more enlightened commentary from either side. The idea that this could be an issue has a lot of people delving into the laws, enough so that 'Make A Choice, Jack' has some teeth. Comments on that article reflect most of the discussion that I've seen, but a link to a YouTube video got me interested. The video linked to, here, doesn't seem too prejudiced.

Yet in looking around further on YouTube, I found the video below. 

 

Now here's my question: Is this how Trinidad and Tobago should be represented?

Yes or no will suffice. For myself, despite not being about Trinidad and Tobago government, I find it disconcerting that a person to hold office in Trinidad and Tobago would behave this way. So I would say, "No"... and I would say that in this regard and context, there is a conflict of interest not for Jack Warner, but for Trinidad and Tobago.

Blog: 
UNC
United National Congress
Jack Warner
People's Partnership
conflict of interest
integrity commission

Comments

Submitted by From Foreign (not verified) on Thu, 06/10/2010 - 20:05.

I've been amazed by peoples' adoration of Jack Warner. T&T has the memory of a baby goldfish. The fact that people are even questioning this is just really odd.

Submitted by Shelly-Anne on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 12:46.

 This was a contentious issue during the reign of previous administrations, and members were encouraged to either declare their interests/give up positions on boards etc, etc. Why is it now being seen as not a big deal for someone in the administration of the People's Partnership to hold a position in addition to one within that administration?

As an aside, whilst a 'Code of Conduct'/'Code of Ethics' is not the law per se, it is meant to serve as the guidelines within which the members of the particular organisation should conduct themselves.