Sears: I never intentionally misled House

Opposition leader Michael Pintard said yesterday that the Davis administration would peg fuel prices and stabilize the Bahamas Power and Light (BPL) fuel charge.

Pintard raised the issue again in the House, and Sears stood up and declared that he had never deliberately misled the House.

Sears made exceptions to Pintard’s use of certain words to describe the actions of the Davis administration in what he (Pintard) called a lack of transparency on the issue.

The Speaker of the House ordered certain words to be deleted from the Congressional record, but Pintard said that even though certain words were not used, “in English they are called synonyms. They have the same meaning.” You have misled the House of Commons eight times.”

Pintard told Congress: We will be paying over $100 million for unwise decisions by this administration…”

Opposition leaders have repeatedly accused the decision not to go through with the deal directly leading to steep fuel price hikes, and the prime minister announced in October that this would be phased into the bill.

Pintard suggested that it would be difficult to trust the government’s word in the future, given that the government has not been able to “state” on the BPL issue.

He has repeatedly insisted that Sears resign because of his conflicting statements in the House.

Pintado said, “I mean not disrespectful.

“What I mean is that there are conventions, especially when people want to flaunt the rules, Mr. Madame.”

But Sears stood up again and said. I object to the denunciation of this deliberate attempt to mislead Congress. ”

Pintard retorted, “Madame Chairman, it’s a matter of public record.”

He said Sears “confessed” to being briefed about the need to execute the transaction.

“He said in this House of Commons, on his feet, of course he did, and then he blamed the Finance Minister, Speaker Madame,” added Pintard.

“He said he knew and the finance minister had made the decision.

“Chairman Madam, the legislators of Fort Charlotte have misled the country and misled the House of Commons.”

Sears claimed, “Speaker of the House, I have never intentionally, consciously misled this House…”

Pintado refused to back down from his case.

He repeated, “Speaker of the House, Congressman has misled the House, misled the House by showing that he has not been briefed (about the need to carry out the deal), and he has been in this House at least eight times, in the House. I said so eight times.Most members here have seen the tape.I have shared it with you.”

Mr Pintard said:

“This administration took out a loan from the central bank.

“I was given permission to withdraw $230 million and they are absolutely correct in not reporting it. Only after we brought it up and the media followed suit.”

Earlier last month, the Treasury Department said Pintado’s previous allegations that the government “borrows” or “prints money” through access to the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) obtained through the Central Bank of the Bahamas. comment was misleading.

The ministry said the government is using the funds for legitimate and intended purposes.

Pintard questions the legal basis for government access to the SDR.

But the issue he pushed most strongly with the government was that of BPL hedging, especially after Sears made conflicting statements on the matter in the House over the course of several weeks.

Sears, after repeatedly stating that he was unaware of the request to execute the transaction made by the BPL Fuel Hedging Committee, only publicly admitted in December that he had actually received an email requesting such a request.

On November 17, after Pintard continued to raise the issue, Sears said it had confirmed with Treasury Secretary Simon Wilson.

Prime Minister and Treasurer Philip Davis also said in Parliament that he had not seen anything regarding the demand for a hedging deal, but Sears later told the House of Commons that the Cabinet’s letter on hedging was addressed to the Treasurer, and that said it was decided. Reject the recommendation after review.

However, Davis insists he was not involved in the decision to reject the trade recommendation.