All modern political democracies are built on a system of checks and balances and Bermuda is no exception.

But while the principle of "checks and balances" usually refers to the separation of powers between branches of government, the PLP Cabinet seems to have a different take ? cut me a cheque and increase my balance, principal not principle.

If you thought that the dead-on-arrival BHC investigation would put an end to "unethical but not illegal" campaigns, you'd be sadly mistaken. The revelations just keep on coming.

The Bermuda Government's pension funds are the new BHC.

In the past few months alone we've learned that two Cabinet Ministers were involved in highly inappropriate activity.

First we saw a sitting Government Minister receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in commissions for broking Government pensions into a company she was a major shareholder in.

Now, just weeks later, it has been revealed that a dozen or so current and prospective pension fund managers, who we were told just coincidentally happen to be Dr. Brown's friends, each paid the then Transport Minister $2,500 for the pleasure of his company. If they weren't his friends before the lunch ? which now seems to be the case ? I'm sure they were afterwards. Wasn't that the whole point?

So what has been the official response to this latest scandal? We're being asked to believe that this gathering of investment professionals ? all with a current of prospective interest in the Bermuda Government's pension portfolio ? had nothing whatsoever to do with influence peddling with a Cabinet Minister and his pension fund consultant friend.

The voters in Warwick South Central must feel very reassured knowing that their local MP is financed by foreign corporations ? a collection of investment professionals with an odd concern for Bermuda's transportation issues.

The upside however is that we at least have a new PLP campaign slogan for the next election. "Pay for play" easily sums up the seven-year track record of the New Bermuda. Unfortunately though, while our "leadership plays", we're the ones who will ultimately pay, with both our tax dollars and our good name.

But while we're on the topic of paying and playing, who paid for Dr. Brown's travel expenses to these 'fundraisers' anyway? What else don't we know about? Who keeps spilling the beans?

Is Cabinet turning on each other yet again? It seems that way.

Thus far, not one of Ms Webb or Dr. Brown's Cabinet colleagues have come to their defence, indicating all the outward signs of a continuing internal power struggle. Dr. Brown is probably receiving a little pay for play himself, with his colleagues engaging in a little payback for his surgical separation of Jennifer Smith and the Premiership.

And speaking of Premiers, why is the current one chronically AWOL when it comes to speaking up on financial dealings and ethical failures, of which there have been many? We have a Premier who is yet to flex any muscles, preferring instead to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to Cabinet level abuses of power; inaction that amounts to a tacit endorsement. So much for Mr. Scott's self-professed strong leadership.

Not surprisingly, in the wake of this most recent revelation (remember the undeclared, double market value, twice rejected, Flatts real estate deal) the Premier is again conspicuously out of sight, his primary concern being self-preservation, not good governance. More than likely, the Accidental Premier's position is so tenuous, so compromised, that he can only sit back and watch this apparent free for all unfold?

The Premier is acutely aware that his second in command would like to be in command. It's abundantly clear that Dr. Brown comes not only with a big car and a big travel budget, but big ambition after already taking down one Premier ? and evidently a big campaign fund.

As the saying goes, you keep your friends close and your enemies closer. So inside Cabinet he'll no doubt stay, a man on his own mission of self-interest and self-promotion.

But if Mr. Scott won't act, then who will? It certainly won't be the as yet to be appointed Ombudsman. Not-so-casual observers will recall that Cabinet quietly and conveniently excluded themselves from the investigative reach of this official, and aren't rushing to fill the post either.

US regulators might have the ability hold the parties involved on their side accountable, but ours will get off Scott free (pun intended).

Yet again, Bermudians are getting no answers and no satisfaction. Will this ever end?