In 2023, our Parliament passed the Integrity In Public Life Act.
Section 3 of the Act establishes a six-member “body corporate” that is to be known as the Integrity Commission, and whose members are to be appointed by the President of Barbados.
Section 58 of the Act stipulates that the Act “shall come into operation on a day to be fixed by Proclamation”.
No such day has yet been fixed by Proclamation, and so the Act is not yet in operation. And, of course, no members of the Integrity Commission have yet been appointed by the President.
Now, Section 23 (1) of the Act states that where a Member of Parliament receives a gift that is valued more than $2 500, the MP must make a report of the gift to the Integrity Commission. And Section 23 (7) goes on to say that the Integrity Commission will then determine whether or not the gift was intended to be a motive or reward for the MP to do something.
The Section further states that if it is deemed that the gift was not intended to be a motive or reward for doing something, the MP will be entitled to keep the gift. But if, on the other hand, the gift is deemed to have been intended to be a motive or reward for the MP to do something, the Integrity Commission will instruct that the gift be delivered to the Minister of Finance.
So, my fellow citizens, can anyone please explain to me what exactly the MP for St Michael South East is supposed to have done wrong when a business firm sent her a gift of a $7 500 cheque to be used in her constituency outreach programme?
Was she supposed to make a report of this gift to a non-existent Integrity Commission?
I just don’t get it, and I am hoping that someone could explain it to me.
Ambassador David Comissiong
