The Bahamas Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez fears a split in the Anglican Communion

Fears Of Anglican Split Persist

 

 

 

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

19 April 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three years after delegates of the last Episcopal General Convention in the United States approved the election of V. Gene Robinson, a homosexual, as bishop of New Hampshire, local Archbishop Drexel Gomez still fears a split in the Anglican Communion.

 

His comments came as the Episcopal Church, the American arm of the Anglican denomination, released a recent report, which will form the basis of the formal response to the 2004 Windsor Report, which contains findings of the Lambeth Commission.

 

That Commission studied issues like ordination of gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions.

 

"What the rest of the Communion is saying to the Episcopal Church is "we don't approve of [the ordination of gay clergy.] We don't believe this is in keeping with the gospel and we are asking you to give a commitment not to do this...if you wish to live in communion with the rest of us," explained Archbishop Gomez, who was a member of the Lambeth Commission.

 

The Commission was formed in response to the decision by the Episcopal Church to ordain Bishop Robinson, and the decision by the Diocese of New Westminster in the Anglican Church of Canada to authorize the blessing of same-sex unions.

 

The Windsor Report asks for a stop to same-sex blessings.

 

Following the release of the report, a special commission on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion was constituted in 2005 by the Presiding Bishop and the President of the House of Deputies to assist the 75th General Convention in considering the report.

 

The commission is recommending that the General Convention express regret for the pain caused by its actions at the 74th General Convention.

 

It also urges "very considerable caution be exercised in the nomination, election, consent to, and the consecration of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion."

 

But the commission did not agree to the moratorium on the ordination of gay clergy asked for by the Windsor Report.

 

While clarifying that the General Convention has not authorized public rites of blessing for same-sex unions, the commission said, "we concur with the Windsor Report and suggest that the Episcopal Church not proceed to authorize such rites at this time."

 

At the same time, the commission acknowledged that it is necessary to maintain "a breadth of private response to the situations of individual pastoral care" for gay and lesbian people.

 

Asked whether he still feared a split in the Anglican Communion, Archbishop Gomez said, "It's still a possibility".

 

He added, however, "From the recent reports I have received, I think members of the Episcopal Church will make a genuine effort to try to address the concerns. I personally believe they will not go as far as I would like them to go."

 

Archbishop Gomez said that some Anglicans are doubtful that the issues could ever be resolved satisfactorily for all concerned.

 

"The rest of the Communion is waiting anxiously to see how the [Episcopalians] will [formally] respond," he said.

 

The General Convention will meet from June 13 to 21 in Columbus, Ohio. At that time, a legislative committee will review the new report.

 

Archbishop Gomez said the ordination of gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex blessings are contrary to what most Anglicans do and believe.

 

"So if we are to go forward together the [Episcopalians] have to, as it were, backtrack," he said.

 

"There will be the question of how the Communion will receive what they offer."

Constitutional Review Commission Officials At Odds about Some of The New Recommendations of The Commission - and with what the Ingraham Administration had Proposed in The 2002 Referendum

Michael Barnett, Co-deputy Chairman of the Constitutional Review Commission defends the position of the FNM government on the failed 2002 referendum

2002 Referendum Defended

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

11 April 2006

 

 

  

 

Two officials of the government-appointed Constitutional Review Commission are at odds over whether some of the new recommendations of the Commission are largely in line with what the Ingraham Administration had proposed in the 2002 referendum.

Co-deputy Chairman Michael Barnett even defended the position of the FNM government on the failed referendum, noting that the proposed changes had been supported by the then opposition in parliament and then later opposed.

"There is no radical difference in the nature of the recommendations with respect to constitutional change," said Mr. Barnett, who was one of the guests on the Love 97 programme ‘Jones and Company’ on Sunday.

He suggested that besides some "tinkering, glossing and tightening up" the recommendations of the new report "are very much the same" as what the FNM government had pushed in the referendum.

Shortly after members of the commission presented a copy of their preliminary report to Prime Minister Perry Christie last month, former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, who is now again the leader of the FNM, noted essentially the same.

He also said that the PLP government appeared to now be suggesting that while the proposed changes were wrong under the FNM’s watch, they are now right under the PLP’s watch.

But Commission Co-chairman Paul Adderley, who was also on the Sunday programme, agreed that while Mr. Barnett was suggesting that the groundwork for what the commission is now doing was laid by the Ingraham Administration, that is not true.

He indicated that there are fundamental differences contained in the report of his commission, although he recognized that there are some similarities.

"Firstly, with regard to citizenship, no one objects to the concept of equality of women and the FNM proposal was that Bahamian women married to a foreigner [that their] children became Bahamians just like the children of Bahamian men," Mr. Adderley noted.

"That provision is exactly the same and I think everybody agrees with that."

But he pointed out that while the FNM government proposed that a foreign man who married a Bahamian woman could obtain citizenship immediately, the commission recommends that he be made to wait years before qualifying.

"That particular provision, I think, caused them more difficulty in the referendum than any other, that instantaneous citizenship," Mr. Adderley said.  "This commission proposed between five to 10 years…That is the fundamental difference…That, I think, is very, very significant."

The commission co-chairman also pointed out that the FNM government proposed that the boundaries commission still be subjected to the prime minister’s power to amend.

But the Constitutional Commission is recommending that the constitution be amended to create a truly independent electoral and boundaries commission and remove the power of the prime minister to modify the report of the commission.

Mr. Barnett then insisted again that the concepts and the ideas of the 2002 proposal and the present one are the same.

"With respect to the marriage, what was proposed during the 2002 referendum exercise, I thought, is the concept that the right that was afforded to non-Bahamian women who were married to Bahamian men…that same right should be given to a non-Bahamian male who is married to a non-Bahamian female…That very same concept is repeated in the recommendations that have been made by this report," he said, repeating Mr. Adderley’s earlier point.

Mr. Adderley, meanwhile, said there are also significant differences as they relate to the 2002 proposal on the mandatory retirement age of judges.

"The point where we disagree is with regard to the term of judges," he said.

The Ingraham Administration recommended that the retirement age of a Supreme Court judge be extended from 67 to 72; and the retirement age of a justice of the Court of Appeal be extended to 75, with the right to extend being held by the prime minister.

"Mr. Adderley said, "We have number one suggested so far that the retirement age be 70 – fixed and no question of extending it by the prime minister because we thought that would give the prime minister a little too much leverage and power."

Mr. Barnett said he still thinks that the retirement age being recommended by the commission is "too low", but he said he agreed with the concept that the prime minister should not have the power to extend the retirement age.

On the point of the 2002 referendum defeat, Mr. Barnett pointed out that the PLP while in opposition had supported the Ingraham Administration’s proposal.

"You must not forget that the proposals that had been put forward had received the unanimous support of all the members of parliament and that the people could have been educated as to why those…proposals had been made and why it was that they supported them," he said.

"[The opposition] elected not to do so and as a result of that I think we got caught up in the politics of early 2002 - and what were really sensible proposals were simply rejected…not because of the defects of the proposals or the lack of merit of the proposals because you can see many of the proposals are repeated here."

Mr. Adderley quickly said, "But don’t underestimate the people’s capacity once they are told something to think for themselves."

The commission intends to carry out another round of consultations with the Bahamian people before submitting final recommendations.

Responding to a question that was asked by the show’s host, Wendall Jones, Mr. Adderley said, "[The government doesn’t] have to accept a single word which we put down here, but a government would be a very foolish government not to accept anything we put down."

The commission makes many key provisional recommendations in its report – copies of which are available at the commission’s office in the Royal Victoria Gardens.

A few of the recommendations include abolishing the office of governor general and creating a democratic parliamentary republic with the head of state being the president; increasing the size of the senate to 23 and giving the president the power to appoint five of those senators; and eliminating gender bias from the constitution.

Prime Minister Christie has foreshadowed that a referendum will be held so Bahamians can decide on what changes would actually be made to the constitution.

Local Journalists Welcome The Suggestion of The Constitutional Review Commission that Freedom of The Press and Access to Information in The Bahamas Receive Constitutional Protection

Advocates Want Freedom of The Press to be Included as part of the Principle of Free Expression in The Bahamas

Constitution May Protect “Freedom Of The Press”

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

27 March 2006

Local journalists, long frustrated by what they see as a general lack of access to public documents, are welcoming a suggestion by the Constitutional Review Commission that freedom of the press and access to information receive constitutional protection.

"I have to say that it is a pity that we need a constitutional amendment or an amendment to the law at all to ensure what should have been the prevailing situation all along," said Sir Arthur Foulkes, a veteran journalist, who is also a former Cabinet Minister and a former diplomat.

Sir Arthur was a member of the opposition delegation at the Constitutional Conference in London in 1972.

The Constitutional Review Commission, which presented its report to Prime Minister Perry Christie last Wednesday, said it heard from a number of advocates who want freedom of the press to be included as part of the principle of free expression.

"It cannot be denied that a free and unbridled press is one of the most important institutions in a democratic society, and may be deserving of constitutional protection," the report says.

It would be in line with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees "the freedom of worship, of speech, of the press, of assembly, and of petition to the government for redress of grievances."

The Constitutional Review Commission’s report also pointed out that with freedom of speech must come access to public information.

"The right of free expression embraces the right to impart and receive information, and thus it is not surprising that some Constitutions link the right of freedom of information to that of free speech," the report says.

"Some provide for extensive rights of freedom of information, such as the South African model, which provides a right of access to information held by the state.  Others do not elevate it to a constitutional right, but have adopted freedom of information laws."

Wendall Jones, CEO of Jones Communications Network, believes that a Freedom of Information Act would be "a step in the right direction."

"It has taken the framers of the constitution or those who are interested in constitutional reform a long time to really put forward something that should have been enshrined in the constitution from Independence of 1973," Mr. Jones said.

"Of course we always assumed that we had freedom of the press in this country.  We know that we do not have a Freedom of Information Act, but once we have a Freedom of Information Act in The Bahamas it is hoped that people would understand what the Act is all about and it would not simply be something on paper, but that public servants in particular would understand that the press has a right to certain information."

Jerome Sawyer, a highly-regarded journalist who is the news director of Island FM and Cable 12, said access to information would give rise to much better reporting.

"We would be able to accurately give information that we normally now have to get from unnamed sources and people who are secretly giving [us] information," Mr. Sawyer said.

"I think it would also give some more credibility to our work because a lot of times we are operating just off of hearsay information we receive as opposed to being able to access actual data and actual information."

Mr. Sawyer said making freedom of the press a constitutional right would benefit, not just journalists, but all Bahamians.

"I think many people in the press are intimidated by the possibility of legal action and for that reason a lot of stories are not even touched," he said, but added that responsibility must always be a priority of every good journalist.

Carlton Smith, deputy general manager of news and special projects at the Broadcasting Corporation of The Bahamas, also spoke of the importance of journalists exercising a "serious level of responsibility".

"Freedom without responsibility is a dangerous weapon and it could destroy as opposed to build a nation," Mr. Smith said, "but freedom with responsibility is a catalyst in helping in the positive growth and development in a developing society."

He believes that enshrining freedom of the press in the constitution "would be a significant accomplishment in helping to promote true democracy and assist in the national development of our country".

With respect to freedom of the press, Mr. Jones opined that there are many press people who have abused their freedoms even though there is nothing enshrined in the constitution.

"It is hoped that when it is enshrined in the constitution and when we do have a Freedom of Information Act, that members of the press would be responsible and understand that even though this is enshrined in the constitution they have a duty to the public to be very responsible," he said.

Sir Arthur, meanwhile, said there is a culture of secrecy in government that goes back many decades.

"It’s a culture where civil servants seem afraid to give people information that rightly belongs to them and that they ought to have access to," he said.

"That should have been the ordinary state of affairs.  It’s about time that culture is broken and it’s about time that [members of] the public [are] allowed through the press to have all the information to which they are entitled."

Sir Arthur also expressed disappointment that there is no press association in The Bahamas although there has been a lot of talk about establishing one.

"[We need] to speak with one voice as it regards the rights of the press and the duty of journalists and the media to report to the Bahamian people," he said.

"Somebody put it like this: we’re like the amplifier, the loud speaker to broadcast to people what is happening with their affairs." 

The Constitutional Commission: The Bahamas should be a Democratic Parliamentary Republic with the Head of State being The President

The Constitutional Commission Recommends that The English Monarch no Longer Be Head of State of The Bahamas and The Office of The Governor General Be Abolished

Abolish Governor General

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

23 March 2006

Saying that the time has come for a Bahamian head of state to be elected by both Houses of Parliament, the Constitutional Commission is recommending that the English monarch no longer be head of state of The Bahamas and the office of the governor general be abolished.

The Commission also says in its preliminary report presented to Prime Minister Perry Christie at his Cable Beach office on Wednesday that The Bahamas should be a democratic parliamentary republic with the head of state being the president.

"Executive powers shall continue to be exercised by the cabinet with the head of government being the prime minister," the report recommends.

It also says the head of state should be a citizen of The Bahamas.

The Commission found it "curious" that there is no requirement for the holder of the office of governor general to be a citizen of The Bahamas.

"Because of the method of appointment of the governor general, it hardly seems logical that the person appointed to this office would be a non-Bahamian," the report says.  "To remove all doubt it should be declared that the governor general or head of state be a Bahamian citizen."

The report says it is apparent that the position of head of state of The Bahamas is not seen in reality to be the Queen of Great Britain, who constitutionally is also the Queen of The Bahamas.

It adds, "People appear not to be troubled by the concept and are apparently satisfied to regard the governor general, although wrongly, to be the head of state of The Bahamas.  The reaction to the proposition that the queen is constitutionally queen of The Bahamas was usually met with silence."

The Commission notes on page 12 of its preliminary report that the abolition of the English monarch as head of state of the Bahamas is part of the evolutionary process toward a truly peoples government, not one of the Queen’s dominions, but part of the Commonwealth.

The report says, "The Commission would wish the Bahamian people to focus on whether the position of a foreign monarch and one that is shared with many other countries, is reconcilable with the founding provisions which state The Bahamas shall be a ‘sovereign’ democratic state.

"We cannot on the one hand assert ourselves as a sovereign country and a free and independent actor in international affairs while relying on the legal fiction of ‘Her Majesty in Parliament’ and ‘Her Majesty’s Government’ in the ‘speech from the throne’ to give legitimacy to our government."

Additionally, the report says it is conceded that in an increasingly interdependent world the concept of sovereignty as it denotes a self-sufficient national territory is waning; sovereignty must denote an independent legal entity, where some supreme body has virtually unlimited capacity to make laws.

It notes that although the existence and validity and rules in the country’s legal system are determined by reference to a written constitution, those laws still require the participation of the ‘Queen in Parliament’ to be properly enacted.

"This is inconsistent with being a completely independent legal entity," the report says.

The report reveals that during its consultations on every inhabited Bahamian island, except three cays in the Exumas, there were mixed feelings about the retention of the Queen of England as Queen of The Bahamas and head of state of The Bahamas.

It notes that there was a significant number of persons who expressed no opinion on the institution of monarchy; there were others who were of the opinion that the status quo should remain, while others were of the view that this link to the British Monarchy was inconsistent with Bahamian independence and sovereignty and should be severed while preserving membership with the Commonwealth of which queen is symbolic head.

The Commission recommends that the provision of the Constitution that permits the chief justice and the president of the senate to serve as acting head of state should be removed to avoid a conflict of interest.

Deputies should be appointed from among eminent citizens to fill any vacancies of that office, the report says.

The Constitution Commission Submits Its Report to Prime Minister Perry Christie

It is The View of the Constitution Commission that there Should Be Greater Opportunity for The Involvement of Civil Society before The Exercise of Executive Power

There is Widespread Support Among The Bahamian People to Limit the Powers of The Prime Minister

Push To Limit PM’s Powers

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

23 March 2006

More than three years after it was appointed to review the Bahamas Constitution and make recommendations for change, the Constitution Commission yesterday presented its report to Prime Minister Perry Christie, which states that there is widespread support among the Bahamian people to limit the powers of the nation’s leader.

"By and large people felt the enormous powers of the prime minister, whether real or perceived, had to be limited without affecting the prime minister’s authority," the highly-anticipated report states.

"It was their view that there should be greater opportunity for the involvement of civil society before the exercise of executive power."

Former Attorney General Paul Adderley, who chairs the Commission with Queen’s Counsel Harvey Tynes, said the initial report will be widely circulated and the Commission will then draft final recommendations, which will be presented to the prime minister.

"We’re only half way through the process now and [we hope] that by the end of the day we have a general agreement in The Bahamas," said Mr. Adderley, who noted that the Commission received strong response from Family Islanders in particular during its consultations.

Prime Minister Christie, meanwhile, foreshadowed that there will have to be a referendum so that Bahamians could decide what changes they want to see to their constitution.

"At some stage we are going to go to the people on a referendum," Mr. Christie said.  "The lesson of this country is that when we do that we must have exhausted every opportunity we have now for consultation; that must never be an issue again, whether or not we have consulted sufficiently."

The prime minister was referring to the failed referendum of February 2002, during which time the Bahamian people overwhelmingly rejected the Ingraham Administration’s move to have changed certain provisions of the constitution, including those to do with citizenship.

Mr. Christie, who appointed the Commission on December 23, 2002, mandated it to carry out a comprehensive review and make recommendations that would strengthen fundamental freedoms and civil and political rights of the individual, and critically examine the structure of the executive authority.

In its preliminary report, the Constitutional Commission wrote that there were many criticisms leveled at the devotion to duty provided by some members of parliament, and many persons expressed the view that there should be some system for penalizing or recalling delinquent representatives.

Generally, the report states, there was not any great dissatisfaction with the basic system of parliamentary democracy and the two-chambered parliament.

However, there was reportedly widespread agreement with the need for reform of the Senate to make it a more mature representative body with membership drawn from broader segments of the community.

"Many persons expressed the view that the Senate should be an elected body," the report states, "but without altering its powers; others felt that some senators should have security of tenure."

It also says that the early town meetings of the commission held in New Providence and the Family Islands were dominated by a discussion on the preamble to the constitution and there was unanimous support for retaining the preamble in its current form.

The preamble, which is the section at the beginning of the constitution explaining the reasons for its enactment and its objectives, points to self-discipline, industry, loyalty, unity and an abiding respect for Christian values and the rule of law as being vital to guaranteeing the freedom of Bahamians.

Weeks after the appointment of Sir Arthur Hanna as the queen’s representative in The Bahamas, the report reveals that there were mixed feelings about the retention of the Queen of England as Queen of The Bahamas and head of state of The Bahamas.

It notes that there was a significant number of persons who expressed no opinion on the institution of monarchy; there were others who were of the opinion that the status quo should remain, while others were of the view that this link to the British Monarchy was inconsistent with Bahamian independence and sovereignty and should be severed while preserving membership with the Commonwealth of which queen is symbolic head.

The Commission recommends that the English Monarch shall no longer be the head of state of The Bahamas and the office of governor general be abolished.

The report also says that there was a common concern that the government did not have command of the immigration situation, and most people thought to some degree this was linked to the state of the citizenship and immigration laws.

"In particular, there was concern over the status of children born in The Bahamas to non-Bahamian parents," the report adds.

The Commission also reported that a large number of Family Island persons resonated a call for greater autonomy in local government and for the constitution to specify the relationship between the central and local government.

"A realistic study of the governmental needs of the more developed islands and the less developed should be undertaken," the report says.

Suisse Security Bank and Trust Ltd (SSBT) Loses Privy Council Appeal on Its License Revocation By The Central Bank of The Bahamas

Harajchi Loses Appeal 

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

14 March 2006

...the Central Bank governor was well within his legal rights to shut the bank down.

Saying that it would have been "inconceivable" for the Central Bank governor to have allowed Mohamad Harajchi’s Suisse Security Bank to continue operating, the Privy Council yesterday rejected the bank’s bid to have the decision of then governor Julian Francis overturned.

The high court said that SSBT’s audited accounts and its most recent quarterly reports to the Central Bank were "evidently erroneous".

"SSBT did not have cash on hand and in banks in the sums stated," said the ruling, which was written by Lord Mance.

The ruling said "the state of affairs disclosed by the evidence before their Lordships makes it inconceivable that SSBT could be allowed to continue as an operating bank", and the high court said it saw no basis on which to set aside or remit the governor’s decision to revoke SSBT’s licence and dismissed the appeal.

The bank’s licence was granted on July 20, 1993, and on March 5, 2001, Mr. Francis gave notice that he was of the opinion that the licence should be revoked on the ground that SSBT was carrying on its business in a manner detrimental to the public interest and to the interests of its depositors and other creditors.

Also on March 5, 2001, the governor appointed Raymond Winder as receiver of SSBT, but Mr. Winder had been unable to share the bank’s assets among its depositors and creditors because the appeal had been outstanding.

Mr. Harajchi had appealed a June 29, 2004 decision from the Court of Appeal, which dismissed an appeal filed as a result of the April 25, 2003 ruling handed down by Justice Austin Davis.  Justice Davis refused to overturn Mr. Francis’s decision to revoke the licence.

In a press release issued yesterday after the ruling was handed down, the Central Bank said it will take immediate steps to have Mr. Winder (now the provisional liquidator) appointed as liquidator of SSBT so that the company may be wound up and its assets duly distributed.

Attorneys for SSBT had argued before the Privy Council that by suspending, then revoking SSBT’s licence, the governor acted in breach of an interlocutory injunction granted by Justice Hartman Longley on March 2, 2001 in separate judicial review proceedings commenced by SSBT against the governor on February 22, 2001.

They had also argued that the governor, in breach of principals of procedural fairness, failed to give notice to SSBT prior to or on March 5, 2001 that he was minded to suspend its licence on the grounds on which he actually suspended it on that date, together with an opportunity to respond before he took any such step.

The third issue that the Privy Council considered was whether the governor, in breach of principals of procedural fairness revoked SSBT’s licence on April 2, 2001 on grounds different from, or additional to, those of which he had given notice on March 5, 2001, without giving SSBT an opportunity to respond to such new grounds, and in circumstances in which he did not regard the grounds of which he had given notice on March 5, 2001 as justifying such revocation.

In outlining the facts of the case, the ruling said during the second half of 2000 and early 2001 the Central Bank in correspondence and meetings insisted to SSBT that SSBT should as quickly as possible attract a significant institutional shareholder, that it should maintain a ratio of deposits to capital of 5 to 1 and that SSBT should commission a special audit of its debit card activities.

The ruling said it is the requirement to maintain the 5 to 1 ratio that was "particularly relevant" to the appeal before the Privy Council.

In a letter dated May 6, 1993, which preceded the issue of the bank’s licence, the Central Bank said that the ratio was the first "prudential norm" to which SSBT was to adhere.

The ruling said that as at September 30, 1999 SSBT’s audited accounts showed shareholders funds of $5,891,280.

In a note headed "contingency", the ruling said, SSBT had disclosed a United States judgment and stated that SSBT was appealing, but that it had paid $1.6 million into a trust account and that ‘the bank’s principal shareholder has committed to underwrite any potential loss resulting from this matter’.

In July 2000 the Central Bank sought explanations regarding SSBT’s apparently increased profitability shown by its quarterly return as at March 31, 2000 and a Visa debit card operation, about which it had not previously been informed and of which it feared use might be made by criminal elements for money laundering.

The ruling also said that at a meeting between Mr. Francis and Mr. Harajchi on August 21, 2000, the governor also objected to SSBT’s ownership being in the hands of a single family, the extent of 77.5 percent of its share capital, and urged the introduction of a significant institutional shareholder, which Mr. Harajchi refused.

The Central Bank ordered SSBT to find such a shareholder within six months.  It also confirmed its concern about SSBT’s Visa operation.

The Central Bank also ordered SSBT not to exceed the 5:1 ratio pending introduction of a credible institutional shareholder, but the ruling said SSBT soon exceeded the ratio.

On December 7, 2000, the governor expressed his disappointment in the bank’s failure to respect the Central Bank’s directive with regard to a prudential limit of $30 million it had placed on customer deposits and other funding activities, even though Mr. Harajchi had agreed to this limit and cautioned that "it is a very dangerous strategy to violate limits placed on the bank" and that "this clearly indicates as a complete failure to monitor our limit placed on the bank".

The ruling then goes into a lengthy series of correspondence between the parties, determining ultimately that based on the bank’s state of affairs, the Central Bank governor was well within his legal rights to shut the bank down.

The Privy Council said that the parties involved in the appeal have 14 days in which to make submissions in writing on costs in light of its opinion.

No Case of Bird Flu Found in The Bahamas

 Tourism Officials Seek To Calm Bird Flu Fears

 

 

 

 

 

 

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, Bahamas

3 March 06

 

 

 

 

 

The Bahamas Ministry of Tourism has flown into damage control mode to avoid any fallout from reports that spread internationally this week that health experts were investigating to determine whether dead birds found on Inagua had avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu.

 

This came even as Ministry of Agriculture experts said that they had determined that there was no bird flu and the birds ‐ including flamingos ‐ died of other causes like old age.

 

In the House of Assembly on Wednesday night, Prime Minister Perry Christie told parliamentary colleagues that his government would continue investigations to make absolutely certain that the initial findings were accurate and he was certain that they were.

 

But reports of the bird flu fears had already spread rapidly around the world as reflected in scores of stories on the Internet.

 

Director General of Tourism Vernice Walkine admitted on Thursday that those reports had created some jitters.

 

"We are absolutely concerned about the reports and the nature of the reporting because the fact of the matter is it's important for Bahamians to understand that there's no such thing as local news," Ms. Walkine told The Bahama Journal.

 

"It is entirely possible for every Bahamian at some point or the other to cause a crisis to be created."

 

She said last week she had spoken to a group of people in Exuma about the impact that words can have on the tourism industry and she believes that mere reports that officials were investigating to determine whether the dead birds had bird flu could have done serious harm.

 

Ms. Walkine said despite the report experts made that the birds did not have bird flu there are still some people who will remain suspicious about whether tourism and other Bahamian officials were trying to "bury the story".

 

"I think in the fullness of time it will go away," she said of the story, noting that the tourism business is a very sensitive one.

 

"People need to feel safe and secure when they travel abroad for vacation and we've always promoted ourselves as safe and secure and if you have even a hint of bird flu, [that] could be potentially dangerous."

 

Ms. Walkine appeared happy to report on Thursday that there had been no cancellations as a result of the story of the bird flu fears.

 

"It's important for us to pay attention to these kinds of stories that have that potentially negative impact on the tourism business," she said.

 

On Thursday, a release issued on the World Wide Web by PRNewswire said that preliminary field reports on the investigation of unexplained deaths of birds on Inagua were exaggerated.

 

The press release that went out internationally also noted that the senior veterinary officer of the Ministry of Agriculture and Marine Resources indicated that only five birds were involved in the reported incident on Inagua, reducing the likelihood of an outbreak of avian influenza H5N1.

 

"It is to be noted that other countries in the region have had similar scares recently and that mortality of birds [has been] attributed to other causes and not the deadly H5N1, which to date has been confirmed in Europe, Asia and Africa," the release added.

 

Meanwhile, Bloomberg reported that the United States more than tripled its national flu medication stockpiles as The Bahamas tested whether the dead birds had carried the Western Hemisphere's first cases of avian influenza.

 

That same report said that the U.S. government on Wednesday ordered additional courses of flu treatment, raising the country's National Strategic Stockpile to almost 20 million courses of treatment.

 

Meanwhile, veterinary experts said that the presence of the deadly H5N1 would have decimated the large flock of flamingoes and other birds on that island.

 

The Ministry of Agriculture and Marine Resources assured that it will continue to investigate all reports of unexplained bird mortality.

 

It said that the birds involved in the incident appear to have been dead for several days, and the senior veterinary officer reported that there had been no new incidents of avian mortality reported on Inagua.