Gordon Robinson | Ever see wifey without make-up?

On October 4, Prime Minister Holness gave his perspective of why he thought Government’s attempt to extend the already unconscionable time Cabinet minutes are kept secret became a bipartisan effort.

“I briefed the opposition leader that we would bring an order resolution and that the resolution would increase [the waiting period] from 20 to 70 years. I explained what had triggered it and that we’d want his support, which he agreed to. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have gone through with it.”

“I explained what had triggered it … .” Cute! We now know the “trigger” was eminent journalist Dionne Jackson-Miller’s request for 1975-76 Cabinet minutes (during the period leading up to, and including, Jamaica’s most acrimonious state of emergency). That state of emergency (SOE) was promoted by a People’s National Party (PNP) Government, but I’m sure that historical fact wasn’t deliberately used by Andrew Holness as strategy to obtain PNP consent (wink, wink). Equally, I’m certain it never occurred to the PM that this trigger was perfect misdirection to obfuscate any intention to prevent exposure of current Cabinet deliberations on (er, um) ‘sensitive’ issues until thy kingdom come.

Nope, surely this was a genuine, sincere, altruistic attempt to protect PNP Cabinet members from embarrassing disclosures regarding their 1975 deliberations? Ain’t that just the kind of selfless, patriotic policymaking we expect based on Jamaica’s governance history? But we know no good deed goes unpunished, so when Andrew tried to evade the stream of brown waste that hit the parliamentary fan by shovelling it over to the PNP, Peter denied him thrice. In a typically verbose response, Peter called Andrew’s statement “an incomplete and unfaithful representation of the conversation between us”.

In what way, Peter?

THE ISSUE OF CONSENT

Phillips said that when Holness mentioned the 70-year plot, “I immediately told him the period was too long.”

TOO LONG? How long would be acceptable? Sixty? Fifty? Forty?

Peter denied Andrew a second time:

“The prime minister then indicated that 70 years was the international norm. This has turned out to be false.”

OK. So, had it been true, you wouldn’t have a problem. Right?

Finally, before the cock crowed on October 4, Peter landed the treble: “At no time did I tell the prime minister the Opposition agreed or disagreed with his new policy.”

DWL! Let me get you straight. You didn’t tell PM you agreed or disagreed. WHY? This was a private, under-the-bleachers assignation. Why would either of you be coy with your feelings? One thing independent observers can safely conclude based on the strategic wording of the PM’s approach ( “I explained what had triggered it”) WHICH HASN’T BEEN CONTRADICTED is that the PM’s purpose was to lure Phillips into consenting, as part of a seemingly successful ploy, to disguise his true purpose. If he didn’t get Phillips’ consent, why press on, regardless? THAT he could’ve done without a play date.

Also, if there was no consent, why fuss about allegedly misleadingly cited international norms? THAT would only be relevant if consent was given, but based on that misrepresentation. Yet, in the same breath, Phillips says no consent was given.

In any event, who cares who said what? It’s all politricks. Why argue about how long business should be secret from us instead of about WHAT should be kept secret? I believe BOTH SIDES want to keep OUR BUSINESS secret from us forever. But nothing Government does is private, properly so called, because we are government. So NOTHING except information damaging to national security should be secret.

THAT’s where the conversation should be focused. If not, we could end up like the husband in a Haemorrhoid shaggy dog tale (like Joel from The Marvelous Mrs Maisel) who, after 20 years of happy marriage, entered his favourite bar and downed several shots before shakily telling friends:

“Things turned really ugly at my house last night. The wife removed her make-up!”

Cabinet and we are one. We don’t want to wait 20 years to be surprised by Cabinet without make-up.

Peace and love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.