Intergrity Brug? Really? more like corruption!

Dear Mr. Editor,

I listened to Minister Richinel Brug in Parliament, and I have one simple reaction: trying to drag the Prime Minister into the fire with him does not erase what is staring the public in the face.

Minister Brug can talk about humility, integrity, being quiet, being misunderstood, and being attacked all he wants. None of that changes the basic facts around the blatant scheme to self-enrich. A company operated by his close friend, campaign partner or adviser was lined up for a contract under his ministry. That man’s wife just happens to be the Minister’s chief of staff. And that same chief of staff reportedly signed the advice involving her husband’s company. How does that happen in a ministry where integrity is supposed to mean something?

Minister Brug knew whose company it was. The person involved is close to him politically, some say even like brothers. He appointed that person’s wife as his chief of staff. His ministry moved forward with the contract. His chief of staff signed the advice. He was warned about a conflict of interest. And he went ahead anyway. That is the kind of thing that should cost a minister his job.

The public is not stupid. You do not need a law degree to understand that your chief of staff’s husband should not be anywhere near a contract under your ministry. You do not need a committee, a long explanation, or a sad story about how difficult politics is to know that this looks bad because it is bad.

What “buns” me most is when someone knows the public sees him as humble and quiet, then uses that image to sell a story, to manipulate the narrative. Minister Brug stood in Parliament almost presenting himself as the victim of everybody else. But integrity is not about how softly you speak. Integrity is what you do when your friends can enrich themselves on the backs of the people. Integrity is what you do when your chief of staff’s husband is involved. Integrity is knowing that some things are so obviously wrong that you do not even let them reach your desk.

Now Minister Brug wants to expose the Prime Minister. Fine. If the Prime Minister did wrong, let him answer too. No one should be protected. But Minister Brug only came with these heavy allegations now that his own job is on the line. The joke is, he even tried to pre-empt the motion of no confidence by telling parliament they should hear him first as if hearing him will absolve his act of corruption. THAT is what it was, corruption. Where was all this integrity before? Where was the public warning before? Where was the stand for good governance before the political heat reached his own doorstep?

If the URSM and the PM had say "no problem bro, go ahead", would Minister Brug be in Parliament acting? Or would he and his friends be rolling in a nice contract unbeknownst to the rest of us?

Minister Brug cannot use allegations against the Prime Minister as a shield against his own actions. Two things can be true at the same time. The Prime Minister may have questions to answer, and Minister Brug may still be unfit to continue as Minister. One does not cancel out the other.

Minister Brug should not be saved from what is coming. In fact, he should save the country the time, the long meetings, the speeches, the acting, and the political circus. He should resign.

Because when your defense is to point at everybody else, but the facts around you still stink, it is time to go.

‍