By Kurt Reynolds
By all accounts, Rufus Bousquet’s budget contribution was blazing. The Choiseul MP was locked and loaded and his verbal guns were aimed straight at the heart of the UWP government. Among those in his line of fire was a certain senator, handpicked by deceased PM Sir John Compton and later chosen again by Stephenson King to head the ministry of economic affairs.
Said Bousquet: "There are insidious and dangerous forces at work in the back rooms of government and they are not sitting on the opposition benches. Neither are they sitting on the government benches. Yet their DNA is all over this budgetary crime scene. And if you allow this budget to pass without comment or action, there will be 17 judgments against this House. One for every member who fails and sacrifices ethics and principals on the alter of expedience."
Though St Lucia’s forensic lab is yet to be completed, that ‘DNA’ Bousquet spoke of has been linked to senator Ausbert d’Auvergne. Formally the head of the political party, The National Development Movement, d’Auvergne had teamed up with the UWP just before the elections of 2006 and became the center of the campaign which would bring the party back into government after ten years in exile. d’Auvergne had been seen as Sir John’s right hand and though the nation changed prime ministers his role in government did not. In fact d’Auvergne is thought to be the one really pulling the prime minister’s strings!
Who would have thought that after Rufus Bousquet––twice dismissed from the Cabinet of ministers––delivered his sharp criticisms of d’Auvergne that he would get support from another government MP. It seems that there will be one less judgment to be cast. Marcus Nicholas has now called for Stephenson King to fire the economic affairs minister. In an interview with DBS’ Pete Ninvalle, the Dennery North MP said there is "deep division within the government of the UWP."
"You have a situation where a senator is the minister of economic affairs," said Nicholas, "and it is expected that the economic affairs minister would bring the members of the government together so that we can look at the whole vision and development of the country." Ninvalle pressured Nicholas, who appeared to be avoiding d’Auvergne’s name to clarify who he was referring to, the MP conceded: "I am talking about Ausbert d’Auvergne!"
"The senator has failed, through his economic plans, to bring the government together so that we could sit down and all the elected members could put their thoughts down," he said. Could this be an admittance that the budget was no amalgamation of ideas from all ministers as was suggested by the prime minister? Nicholas went on: "I believe d’Auvergne must go and if he continues to remain a senator of the UWP, we are going to find ourselves in serious problems! I have made up my mind. I am like a peg in the party . . . and not only me, there are a number of us. You heard from the MP for Choiseul and Castries Central.
"If we cannot get it right within the government; Rufus Bousquet cannot come back as a full fledged minister; myself and the others cannot sit down with government and Cabinet to design the way forward after presenting ourselves to the people, then I think we need to go back to these very same people and explain the situation and tell them at the moment, we are looking at new faces," he said.
"The persons who are now given the latitude to do so much damage can now face the polls themselves. Now, I am preparing myself for what might be a next general elections." Nicholas said that whenever King is called to act, he replies that it is his constitutional right as PM, to do whatever he desires, and in so doing, King is "abusing his authority." He added that he too has constitutional rights and could "withdraw [my] support for him as the prime minister at any time."
Nicholas said it is his decision to be part of the UWP government and withdrawing his support for them "is part of what [I am] thinking of right now." Nicholas added that joining the SLP is a move that he has to discuss with his constituents. "A lot of us felt that Sir John was very close to d’Auvergne, he was being unfair, in terms of the allocation of monies and certain things that were happening," he said
Meanwhile, the Choiseul MP has come out to support his Dennery North colleague, saying that his comments should be viewed from the vantage point of a man deeply concerned about the affairs of this country. "Marcus stated quite clearly that there is an issue with respect to Ausbert d’Auvergne. He was courageous enough to come out and say that and I compliment him for being brave enough to express himself and be heard," Bousquet told the STAR yesterday.
He said the concerns that he shares with Nicholas are "no thing personal towards Ausbert d’Auvergne." But if d’Auvergne is indeed dismissed, would that bring an end to the government’s dilemma? Bousquet replied: "The main thing for me is that I think d’Auvergne should go and I don’t think he should have the influence that he does in the decision-making process. I also think that Mr Chastanet cannot be given a blank cheque of $50 million to do as he pleases. Finally, I think we have to revisit the budget. We have to make it a budget that is more socially oriented and deals with the needs of the people."
As it related to the proposed no-confidence vote in d’Auvergne by the SLP, Bousquet admitted: "If there is a no-confidence vote I will certainly support it. There is no doubt that I will support it!"In the end, the final decision rests with the prime minister, and thus far, Stephenson King has made his position clear: "Ausbert d’Auvergne is a member of Cabinet.
It is the prime minister to determine the composition of his Cabinet. I am not aware there is a question about whether Mr Ausbert stays or goes. He is a member of Cabinet and the prime minister determines at any time what his Cabinet should comprise of and so that is it!" News reaching us at press time indicates that a group comprising the UWP power base was on its way to a meeting to determine how best to dispose of senator Ausbert d’Auvergne, in an effort to appease angry MPs.