ONE can only hope that Glenn Blakeney will see sense this morning and tender his resignation.

Should he choose not to, he can rest assured the integrity of the ministry which he oversees will remain tainted for as long as he retains the title of 'honourable Sports Minister.'

It was suspected when he was promoted to this ministry last year, he wasn't the right man for the job (he has yet to make himself available for a single interview or outline his sports policy).

Now, it's never been clearer.

What transpired at City Hall on Saturday night was a sham.

In a slick production of the Annual Sports Awards, much improved on previous years, every one of those who were honoured thoroughly deserved recognition for their contribution to what has always been a thriving sporting community.

Yet, shamefully, they will have been left wondering if their names were the same as those recommended by the committee which examines the nominees and then awaits the Minister's approval.

For sure, swimmer Roy Allen Burch was chosen as Male Athlete of Year and replaced by racquets champion James Stout on the orders of the minister – or was he himself directed by Cabinet, as has been indicated by another minister, Terry Lister.

Whatever the case, Blakeney's position is no longer tenable.

The entire Sports Award programme has been undermined by politicians who put their noses in a place where they didn't belong.

In past years confirmation of the selection committee's choice has been merely one of official procedure, a rubber stamp. This year that procedure was never followed.

World racquets champion Stout will know by now, despite his performances in 2008, he was considered second best to Burch.

But political interference "of the worst kind", as described by one Government insider, meant that Burch was denied for reasons which nobody is prepared to explain, in particular the aloof and arrogant Blakeney, although the criticism that the swimmer heaped on Government over what he perceived to be inequity in the way in which funds are distributed in sport appears to be the catalyst.

He should have known freedom of speech is not always tolerated on these shores.

But the finger has been firmly pointed at Blakeney who, if he didn't make the decision alone and was swayed by other ministers, still had an obligation to ensure due process was followed.

Since taking charge of the ministry late last year, Blakeney has already established himself as our most ineffective, uncommunicative sports minister since the PLP assumed power. (Dale Butler and El James didn't always agree with the media, and in the latter's case if we got it wrong in his opinion, he'd let us know in no uncertain terms. But with both, the channels of communication always remained open).

When word of the Sports Awards 'U turn' was first mentioned last Thursday night by ZBM reporter Gary Moreno, there was no comment from the minister. It was the same when he was contacted by The Royal Gazette on Friday.

Seemingly uncomfortable, Blakeney, as we now know, had something to hide. And if he refutes that claim, then let's hear exactly how the Male Athlete of the Year was determined.

When some heat was applied by this writer after the ceremony on Saturday, the agitated minister steadfastly refused to answer any questions.

This bizarre defensive stance by Blakeney perhaps offered the only explanation needed.

If there were more evidence needed concerning the shennanigans that preceded Saturday's ceremony, consider this:

When it was announced Burch had earned an 'Achievement Award', there was not a single member of his family present to accept his plaque.

When Stout was announced as Athlete of the Year, his father was on hand to read a lengthy thankyou and explanation as to why his son was a worthy winner. James, he said, had been delighted when told he had won.

But wasn't the list of winners and the awards they were to collect supposed to have remained a secret? The element of surprise was designed to make the televised event more entertaining.

Stout had been told and his father had time to write his acceptance speech. Not so Female of the Year Kiera Aitken's mother who admitted she was stunned her daughter had won for a second successive year. So stunned, she intended to immediately call Kiera in Spain where she would be fast asleep.

Why the difference in procedure between Male and Female?

The entire episode will forever tarnish these annual awards unless an independent body is formed to take control with the caveat that politicians be kept in the dark until the night of the ceremony, like the rest of the public.

In the meantime, the minister has little option but to stand down. Whether he was directed by higher authority or not, the disgraceful turn of events came under his watch and his reluctance to comment leaves the impression that he either made the decision or at very least condoned it.

Does sport in Bermuda deserve a minister who acts in such an unsportsmanlike manner?