Confusion looms as to who is responsible for HM Prison
This was discussed when the Governor’s Office appeared before the Parliamentary Committee and was represented by the Private Secretary in the Governor’s Office Mrs. Natalie Fahie-Smith.
The Minister for Health and Social Development Ronnie W. Skelton enquired if the Governor’s Group was responsible for the prison. The Private Secretary, Fahie-Smith answered that the Governor His Excellency Body McCleary only had constitutional responsibility for the prison and was not in charge of the prison.
Following another question on the specifics of the Governor’s constitutional responsibility, Mrs. Fahie-Smith told the SFC that the Governor was responsible for matters of National Security and he was also responsible for the release of prisoners under Prerogative of Mercy.
When pressed by Honourable Skelton on what is meant by the Governor was responsible for National Security, as it relates to the prison, the Governor’s Private Secretary told the members it meant, “that the Governor was responsible for the safety of the Territory which encompasses the prison, because if not secured the prison could posed a threat to the Territory”. However, this does not entail the Governor being responsible for construction and repairing barracks and fences at the prison.
Governor meets with PS & Superintendent, why not Minister?
It was also revealed at the 2012 SFC deliberations that the Governor as part of not wanting to run the day to day operation of the prison, meets with the Acting Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Superintendent of Prison to discuss matters pertaining to the prison.
Mrs. Fahie-Smith also disclosed that the Governor was also trying to seek to have meetings with the Minister to resolve immediate problems, as the Governor had no desire to be in charge of the prison.
The Minister for Education and Cultural Myron V. Walwyn asked, if his Ministry was responsible for the “day to day running of the Prison”.
The Private Secretary informed that as far as she was aware it was, but there were “grey areas regarding the prison” which the Governor had tried to resolve for quite some time and as such had send correspondences to the Minister for Education and Culture asking for discussions on the prison to take place.
Mrs. Fahie-Smith told the Parliamentary Committee that the grey areas included matters such as who was directly responsible for providing funding for some of the projects that takes place at the prison and the visiting committee etc.
Minister Walwyn asked why the Governor only met with the Superintendent and not the Minister himself since the Minister and the Ministry was responsible for the day to day operations of the prison and the Governor was responsible for National Security.
In her testimony before the committee, Mrs. Fahie-Smith said that the Governor was gearing towards having meetings directly with the Minister and had sought to have such meetings since early 2011. She also added that the Governor had been trying to have that type of relation for a very long time and in her opinion once that relationship was established, the way forward was going to be clearer.
However, Minister Walwyn express that “a country could not run on relationships” and that there was a constitution which clearly gave the Minister and the Governor certain responsibilities and as such “the Governor should not meet with only the Superintendent and not the Minister.”
The Private Secretary also said the Ministry was responsible for the Parole Board to which the Minister for Education and Culture noted that the Private Secretary used the word “Ministry and not Minister” and expressed that as Minister he “knew nothing of the Parole Board being the Ministry’s responsibility”.
On the issue of not being able to meet with the Minister for Education, Mrs. Fahie-Smith said it was the former Minister that she was referring to. However, the former Minister Andrew A. Fahie told the SFC that he had several meetings with the current Governor on the Prison. The member for the first district also noted that the former Governor David Pearey “made no effort to have meetings during the time when he was Minister for Education and Culture regarding the prison.”
Mr. Fahie told the SFC that the former Governor insisted that the prison was part of his portfolio, thus no significant discussions or meetings were held with him despite numerous requests by the Minister to have such. He told the Committee that there was an excellent professional relationship between him and the current Governor Boyd McCleary regarding the Prison and “we were well on the way to have the grey areas addressed.”
16 Responses to “Confusion looms as to who is responsible for HM Prison”