By NOELLE NICOLLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
nnicolls@tribunemedia.net:
GAMING advocates are applauding the government for its decision to consider legalising the popular Bahamian pastime of playing "numbers".
However, some are of the opinion that government should go even further and reform the Gaming and Lotteries Act to also legalise casino gambling for all Bahamians.
"I think legalising the numbers game is a step in the right direction of course, but it is just one step. As an international person myself I have a lot of friends and guests who come here and go to the casino. It is embarrassing as a law abiding citizen to have to walk through the casino with my hands in my pockets," said Lincoln Bain, equal rights advocate, media personality and entrepreneur.
Mr Bain said the Bahamian public should not be fooled into thinking a referendum is needed to decide this matter.
He said Section 67J of the Lotteries and Gaming Act, which states that the minister responsible has the power to "make regulations regulating and restricting the admission of persons on premises licensed under this Act", is proof of this.
"The minister can wake up and say Bahamians can gamble. Only people making $50,000 per year can gamble; only Bahamians who have never been bankrupt, or Bahamians who have not been diagnosed with a gambling problem. He can also blacklist persons who are deemed unfit," said Mr Bain.
Last week the Free National Movement said the its council and parliamentarians favoured legalising gambling as it would bring major financial benefits to the government.
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said the government was consulting on the matter, although no final decision has been made.
Local advocates, like the Bahamas Gaming Reform (BGR) agree. In a press statement, the committee noted the new regulations could generate thousands of jobs and millions in incremental revenue for the government.
"In spite of the heavy sighs of relief from many quarters of the country, anything short of complete reform (permitting Bahamians to be stakeholders and players in our casino) will be an affront to Bahamians and only deepen the social divide as foreigners will again be afforded more privileges in this country," said Sidney Strachan, BGR spokesperson.
"With any progress there is going to be adverse affects. Hotel developments have a negative side. Progress always brings that. I am waiting on someone to show me any other country in the world where the entire moral fabric of the country was broken down or where there has been less productivity as a result of gambling. I am not sure where those people are getting their data from," said Mr Strachan.
The GBR has not been granted an audience with the prime minister, although representatives said they have spoken to Minister of Tourism and Aviation, Vincent Vanderpool-Wallace, the minister responsible for gaming.
While the Bahamas Hotel Association (BHA) supports the concept of a national lottery and the legalisation of the numbers business, it is maintaining its opposition to total access to casinos for Bahamians.
"The BHA believes that gambling can and should be supported and expanded. We have presented a variety of positions to the competent authorities in government on gambling.
"The primary areas would have a direct incremental impact on the competitiveness of our business and allow access to new games and items present in international markets," said Robert Sands, BHA president.
Some of the recommendations made by the BHA relate to the Gaming Board's approval processes and initiatives to allow junket representatives, entertainers, and permanent residents with a certain level of net worth to gamble.
Mr Bain said there should be one moral standard for gambling. He said if the churches believe gambling is wrong they "should be in front of the casinos picketing".
"There should not be a law that allows some people to gamble but not all. There would not be a law to allow tourists to smoke marijuana and prohibit Bahamians, or for tourists to run the red light and not Bahamians. The whole law is ludicrous and reminiscent of the 1950s and 1960s segregation area," said Mr Bain.
April 21, 2010
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Government to issue four numbers licences
Govt to issue four numbers licences
By PAUL G TURNQUEST
Tribune Staff Reporter
pturnquest@tribunemedia.net:
LOCAL number operators will reportedly be asked to put up a $5 million cash bond before they are issued with one of what is reported to be only four issued licences.
As the government is currently mulling over whether or not to legalize the local lottery business, reports have started to surface as to how regulators would go about issuing licences for an industry that is already flooded with large and small scale operators.
Currently, there exists four main local number houses - FML, Asue Draw, NWS and Island Luck - that make up the majority of sales in New Providence and in most Family Islands, with eight smaller number operators filling in the gaps. Of the four larger entities, FML remains by far the most dominate force on which other, smaller, number houses "bank" their daily tickets as insurance against any possible "big hit" for a given day.
With the daily payouts having dropped in the past week from $900 to $800 for the dollar played during the Early Miami, Early Chicago, and Early New York lottos, local number operators have expressed their fears that the government could be "unfairly" manipulating the requirements to "price out" the majority of the current operators.
Currently it is being rumoured that each number operator would be required, along with the $5 million bond, to pay out to the government a certain percentage of their annual rake as a "fee", along with the actual cost of the licence which is said to be anywhere in the "six figure" range.
Also, it is being said that in their initial discussions on the matter it has already been proposed to limit the possibility of licences to "three or four", instead of a full-scale opening of the current market.
This report, however, is being frowned upon by many "smaller" number operators who fear that these requirements are being "hiked out of proportion" to limit access to the market, or in fact even open it up for "other more politically connected persons" to enter the field.
Speaking with The Tribune yesterday, one small number operator said that he fears he will not be able to stay in the business as there is no way he could come up with $5 million.
"That price is ridiculous. I've been in the business for a little while, and I want to remain in the business. Right now I have 32 people employed and for me to come up with that big bond, I could never make that.
"I don't feel that they should only give certain people a licence and kick everybody else out. If the government wants us to contribute $10,000 for every six months from every number house, that should be enough. Or whatever fee they want to impose, but to knock everybody out and only give a certain set a licence, that isn't fair. I don't see how the government could do that," he said.
While the government through Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has voiced its support for discussions on the matter of legalizing the industry, there has been little to no further discussion since.
In fact, when The Tribune attempted to reach a number of officials at the Ministry of Finance on the topic, we were informed that "no one" at their offices would be authorized to speak on "that issue" at this time.
April 21, 2010
tribune242
By PAUL G TURNQUEST
Tribune Staff Reporter
pturnquest@tribunemedia.net:
LOCAL number operators will reportedly be asked to put up a $5 million cash bond before they are issued with one of what is reported to be only four issued licences.
As the government is currently mulling over whether or not to legalize the local lottery business, reports have started to surface as to how regulators would go about issuing licences for an industry that is already flooded with large and small scale operators.
Currently, there exists four main local number houses - FML, Asue Draw, NWS and Island Luck - that make up the majority of sales in New Providence and in most Family Islands, with eight smaller number operators filling in the gaps. Of the four larger entities, FML remains by far the most dominate force on which other, smaller, number houses "bank" their daily tickets as insurance against any possible "big hit" for a given day.
With the daily payouts having dropped in the past week from $900 to $800 for the dollar played during the Early Miami, Early Chicago, and Early New York lottos, local number operators have expressed their fears that the government could be "unfairly" manipulating the requirements to "price out" the majority of the current operators.
Currently it is being rumoured that each number operator would be required, along with the $5 million bond, to pay out to the government a certain percentage of their annual rake as a "fee", along with the actual cost of the licence which is said to be anywhere in the "six figure" range.
Also, it is being said that in their initial discussions on the matter it has already been proposed to limit the possibility of licences to "three or four", instead of a full-scale opening of the current market.
This report, however, is being frowned upon by many "smaller" number operators who fear that these requirements are being "hiked out of proportion" to limit access to the market, or in fact even open it up for "other more politically connected persons" to enter the field.
Speaking with The Tribune yesterday, one small number operator said that he fears he will not be able to stay in the business as there is no way he could come up with $5 million.
"That price is ridiculous. I've been in the business for a little while, and I want to remain in the business. Right now I have 32 people employed and for me to come up with that big bond, I could never make that.
"I don't feel that they should only give certain people a licence and kick everybody else out. If the government wants us to contribute $10,000 for every six months from every number house, that should be enough. Or whatever fee they want to impose, but to knock everybody out and only give a certain set a licence, that isn't fair. I don't see how the government could do that," he said.
While the government through Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has voiced its support for discussions on the matter of legalizing the industry, there has been little to no further discussion since.
In fact, when The Tribune attempted to reach a number of officials at the Ministry of Finance on the topic, we were informed that "no one" at their offices would be authorized to speak on "that issue" at this time.
April 21, 2010
tribune242
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
FNM's Women's Association distances itself from senior FNM women's letter to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham
FNM's Women's Association distances itself from letter to PM
By CANDIA DAMES ~ Guardian News Editor ~ candia@nasguard.com:
The Free National Movement's Women's Association made it clear yesterday that it had no part in a letter written to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham late last month by a group of senior women in the FNM.
As reported by The Nassau Guardian yesterday, the women who wrote the letter had been trying to cause the appointment of former FNM minister Janet Bostwick as governor general.
The group of senior women also raised concerns about the "disappearance" of FNM women from prominent positions in national life.
The Women's Association said it respects the sole right and privilege of the prime minister to appoint the governor general and congratulated Sir Arthur Foulkes on his appointment to the highest office in the land.
"During his many years of distinguished public service, Sir Arthur helped to pave the way for the greater equality of all Bahamians, including that of women," the association said.
The FNM Women's Association acknowledged "the tremendous" record of Prime Minister Ingraham on behalf of all Bahamian women, including when his efforts were at times unpopular.
"This includes his appointment of women to many significant posts, as well as landmark legislation on a variety of issues related to the ending of discrimination against women," the statement said.
"The FNM Women's Association is proud of our own record and that of the broader FNM with regards to the empowerment of our Bahamian sisters. We will continue to advance the cause of women and families. In this regard, we will also continue to promote excellent female candidates for national office. We will do so as a united group, committed to the great ideals of our party and the values of our founders."
Former FNM Minister Theresa Moxey-Ingraham, who spoke in an interview with The Guardian yesterday, also recognized Sir Arthur's contributions to the party and the nation and stressed that the women who wrote the letter respect him highly and were not attacking him.
The letter was written more than two weeks before his appointment was announced and never mentioned his name. Moxey-Ingraham along with former MPs Italia Johnson (also the first female speaker), and Jaunianne Dorsett and other women in the party signed the letter.
"Sir Arthur has his place in Bahamian history," Moxey-Ingraham said yesterday. "He has his place in the building and forward development of our party and has his place in the hearts of all Bahamians. This was never meant to be an attack on him or his achievements in any way - not at all."
Explaining why the group of women wrote the letter to Ingraham, she said, "As a part of an organization we feel very strongly the need to express our opinion on any matter that is of relevance to our party. We've earned our place and earned the right to speak and we thought it important to do so. We didn't necessarily think we would change his (the prime minister's) opinion. In fact, as we all know, the appointment in many, many instances is the prime minister's appointment and we knew that an appointment had already been made. We felt the need to express how we felt about it."
Moxey-Ingraham said it is unacceptable that there is only one woman in Ingraham's Cabinet — Loretta Butler-Turner, minister of state for social development.
"We had a particular level of national profile and national prominence that has been diminished to a significant degree," she said. "Any empty FNM seats in the Senate have not been filled by women. The two ladies who departed from the Cabinet (Elma Campbell and Claire Hepburn) their positions were filled by men.
"Again, [this is] nothing to do with the achievements or the accomplishments of the men who filled those places. The whole idea though is that if we're talking about a nation where equality is of value then special effort needs to be made to bring women to levels of national prominence, and we are concerned about that in general."
Moxey-Ingraham recognized the role Ingraham played in the advancement of women in The Bahamas, but said the group who wrote to him wants affirmative action for women.
"We were very appreciative that he did respond and what he claimed in the letter is true; those are historical facts. He played a great role in promoting women to positions of prominence, positions of high responsibility and under his first administration women were highly prominent..." she said.
"We still want more. There is so much more to be achieved. Women have so much further to go and they will not be able to get there if they cannot at least get to the first step which is somebody acknowledging that you are worthy and worthwhile [to] move forward."
Asked to expand on the group's claim in its letter that Prime Minister Ingraham had callously dismissed a request for an audience with him, Moxey Ingraham said, "We consider ourselves serious enough. We consider our service serious enough and worthwhile enough to be granted an audience with the party leader... When you get the message back that indicates 'you're not important enough. I can't be bothered with you', that doesn't make you feel very good as a founding member, a prominent member, a serious, hard-working contributor over the years to a party.
"And from a party leader it left us very disappointed."
Moxey-Ingraham said she felt insulted and was not satisfied with the prime minister's response as he did not provide any assurances that this affirmative action will be adopted moving forward.
April 20, 2010
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES ~ Guardian News Editor ~ candia@nasguard.com:
The Free National Movement's Women's Association made it clear yesterday that it had no part in a letter written to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham late last month by a group of senior women in the FNM.
As reported by The Nassau Guardian yesterday, the women who wrote the letter had been trying to cause the appointment of former FNM minister Janet Bostwick as governor general.
The group of senior women also raised concerns about the "disappearance" of FNM women from prominent positions in national life.
The Women's Association said it respects the sole right and privilege of the prime minister to appoint the governor general and congratulated Sir Arthur Foulkes on his appointment to the highest office in the land.
"During his many years of distinguished public service, Sir Arthur helped to pave the way for the greater equality of all Bahamians, including that of women," the association said.
The FNM Women's Association acknowledged "the tremendous" record of Prime Minister Ingraham on behalf of all Bahamian women, including when his efforts were at times unpopular.
"This includes his appointment of women to many significant posts, as well as landmark legislation on a variety of issues related to the ending of discrimination against women," the statement said.
"The FNM Women's Association is proud of our own record and that of the broader FNM with regards to the empowerment of our Bahamian sisters. We will continue to advance the cause of women and families. In this regard, we will also continue to promote excellent female candidates for national office. We will do so as a united group, committed to the great ideals of our party and the values of our founders."
Former FNM Minister Theresa Moxey-Ingraham, who spoke in an interview with The Guardian yesterday, also recognized Sir Arthur's contributions to the party and the nation and stressed that the women who wrote the letter respect him highly and were not attacking him.
The letter was written more than two weeks before his appointment was announced and never mentioned his name. Moxey-Ingraham along with former MPs Italia Johnson (also the first female speaker), and Jaunianne Dorsett and other women in the party signed the letter.
"Sir Arthur has his place in Bahamian history," Moxey-Ingraham said yesterday. "He has his place in the building and forward development of our party and has his place in the hearts of all Bahamians. This was never meant to be an attack on him or his achievements in any way - not at all."
Explaining why the group of women wrote the letter to Ingraham, she said, "As a part of an organization we feel very strongly the need to express our opinion on any matter that is of relevance to our party. We've earned our place and earned the right to speak and we thought it important to do so. We didn't necessarily think we would change his (the prime minister's) opinion. In fact, as we all know, the appointment in many, many instances is the prime minister's appointment and we knew that an appointment had already been made. We felt the need to express how we felt about it."
Moxey-Ingraham said it is unacceptable that there is only one woman in Ingraham's Cabinet — Loretta Butler-Turner, minister of state for social development.
"We had a particular level of national profile and national prominence that has been diminished to a significant degree," she said. "Any empty FNM seats in the Senate have not been filled by women. The two ladies who departed from the Cabinet (Elma Campbell and Claire Hepburn) their positions were filled by men.
"Again, [this is] nothing to do with the achievements or the accomplishments of the men who filled those places. The whole idea though is that if we're talking about a nation where equality is of value then special effort needs to be made to bring women to levels of national prominence, and we are concerned about that in general."
Moxey-Ingraham recognized the role Ingraham played in the advancement of women in The Bahamas, but said the group who wrote to him wants affirmative action for women.
"We were very appreciative that he did respond and what he claimed in the letter is true; those are historical facts. He played a great role in promoting women to positions of prominence, positions of high responsibility and under his first administration women were highly prominent..." she said.
"We still want more. There is so much more to be achieved. Women have so much further to go and they will not be able to get there if they cannot at least get to the first step which is somebody acknowledging that you are worthy and worthwhile [to] move forward."
Asked to expand on the group's claim in its letter that Prime Minister Ingraham had callously dismissed a request for an audience with him, Moxey Ingraham said, "We consider ourselves serious enough. We consider our service serious enough and worthwhile enough to be granted an audience with the party leader... When you get the message back that indicates 'you're not important enough. I can't be bothered with you', that doesn't make you feel very good as a founding member, a prominent member, a serious, hard-working contributor over the years to a party.
"And from a party leader it left us very disappointed."
Moxey-Ingraham said she felt insulted and was not satisfied with the prime minister's response as he did not provide any assurances that this affirmative action will be adopted moving forward.
April 20, 2010
thenassauguardian
Monday, April 19, 2010
Privy Council could hear review of [Elizabeth by-election] Election Court decision
Privy Council could hear review of Election Court decision
By KRYSTEL ROLLE ~ Guardian Staff Reporter ~ krystel@nasguard.com:
The review of the Election Court decision handed down last month, validating all of the protest votes in the Elizabeth by-election, could go to the Privy Council, Attorney General John Delaney told The Nassau Guardian recently.
The Office of the Attorney General is currently conducting a review of the decision, which was handed down in favor of the Progressive Liberal Party and its Elizabeth candidate Ryan Pinder on March 23.
"We're having a look to see what avenues might exist with respect to any possibility of having a judicial review with respect to the point of law to the ruling," Delaney said last week.
"Of course there is the position on the statute that on the election court there is no appeal from it. So it's analysis that is presently being done. We'll have to take a look to see whether it is possible to have a review sometime by the Privy Council.
Hours after the decision of the Election Court, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said the Office of the Attorney General will review the ruling.
The justices validated all of the five protest votes cast in Pinder's favor in the February 16 by-election, resulting in him winning by three votes.
But Ingraham indicated that the Free National Movement has concerns about the reasoning behind the decision.
"We were surprised by the reasoning for the decision of the Election Court," Ingraham said. "It is outside anything we have known up to now as to the meaning of our law. We will therefore have the Office of the Attorney General undertake a review of the decision so that determinations can be made as to the extent to which any consideration ought to be given to either amending the law or calling upon a higher court to determine the validity of the reasoning issued by the court.
"It is our purpose and intent to ensure that orderly, fair and predictable elections are held in The Bahamas."
Delaney told The Guardian that the review could result in recommendations for changes to be made to the law.
"If there is to be a review, the venues might be a review of a point of law or sometime akin to a judicial review type thing," he said. "But it's really premature for me to speculate on that at this time because, as I said, we're just taking a look to see about possibilities in that connection."
In the Speech from the Throne read on Wednesday by newly-appointed Governor General Sir Arthur Foulkes, the government pledged to bring legislation to amend the Parliamentary Elections Act.
An official from the Office of the Attorney General told The Guardian that the review would be done in short order.
The official, who did not want to be named, said the review would be conducted to determine what, if any amendments needs to be made to the Parliamentary Elections Act.
"The government asked that we conduct a review and in short order, whatever changes if at all would be communicated to Cabinet and Cabinet would seek to have those changes, if such are recommended to legislation, whatever legislation in the form of an amendment, would be brought to the House of Assembly."
He stressed that a judicial review is not the same as an appeal.
"An appeal might make certain findings, it might overturn certain things that may exist," said the official. "A judicial review or reference makes findings but there is nothing that can be done. So the review can determine that the decision made was not in accordance with the law but it can't overturn the decision or ruling made."
thenassauguardian
By KRYSTEL ROLLE ~ Guardian Staff Reporter ~ krystel@nasguard.com:
The review of the Election Court decision handed down last month, validating all of the protest votes in the Elizabeth by-election, could go to the Privy Council, Attorney General John Delaney told The Nassau Guardian recently.
The Office of the Attorney General is currently conducting a review of the decision, which was handed down in favor of the Progressive Liberal Party and its Elizabeth candidate Ryan Pinder on March 23.
"We're having a look to see what avenues might exist with respect to any possibility of having a judicial review with respect to the point of law to the ruling," Delaney said last week.
"Of course there is the position on the statute that on the election court there is no appeal from it. So it's analysis that is presently being done. We'll have to take a look to see whether it is possible to have a review sometime by the Privy Council.
Hours after the decision of the Election Court, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said the Office of the Attorney General will review the ruling.
The justices validated all of the five protest votes cast in Pinder's favor in the February 16 by-election, resulting in him winning by three votes.
But Ingraham indicated that the Free National Movement has concerns about the reasoning behind the decision.
"We were surprised by the reasoning for the decision of the Election Court," Ingraham said. "It is outside anything we have known up to now as to the meaning of our law. We will therefore have the Office of the Attorney General undertake a review of the decision so that determinations can be made as to the extent to which any consideration ought to be given to either amending the law or calling upon a higher court to determine the validity of the reasoning issued by the court.
"It is our purpose and intent to ensure that orderly, fair and predictable elections are held in The Bahamas."
Delaney told The Guardian that the review could result in recommendations for changes to be made to the law.
"If there is to be a review, the venues might be a review of a point of law or sometime akin to a judicial review type thing," he said. "But it's really premature for me to speculate on that at this time because, as I said, we're just taking a look to see about possibilities in that connection."
In the Speech from the Throne read on Wednesday by newly-appointed Governor General Sir Arthur Foulkes, the government pledged to bring legislation to amend the Parliamentary Elections Act.
An official from the Office of the Attorney General told The Guardian that the review would be done in short order.
The official, who did not want to be named, said the review would be conducted to determine what, if any amendments needs to be made to the Parliamentary Elections Act.
"The government asked that we conduct a review and in short order, whatever changes if at all would be communicated to Cabinet and Cabinet would seek to have those changes, if such are recommended to legislation, whatever legislation in the form of an amendment, would be brought to the House of Assembly."
He stressed that a judicial review is not the same as an appeal.
"An appeal might make certain findings, it might overturn certain things that may exist," said the official. "A judicial review or reference makes findings but there is nothing that can be done. So the review can determine that the decision made was not in accordance with the law but it can't overturn the decision or ruling made."
thenassauguardian
Time to be realistic about gambling
tribune242 Editorial:
TO GAMBLE or not to gamble, that is the question.
Former prime minister Perry Christie believes that to legalise "the numbers business" in the Bahamas would have "enormous implications" for the tourism industry as well as "deep social implications."
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has met with the Christian Council, which really represents the Baptist voice, a voice that is rigidly against gambling in any form -- as a matter of fact it is a tenet of their religion. However, there are other churches -- the Catholics in particular -- that use a benign form of gambling - bingo and raffles -- to raise funds to help operate their schools and various other organisations.
From time to time the police have raided the various numbers houses -- including the largest one of all, the Flowers enterprise-- vowing that as long as gambling remains on the statute books they are going to enforce the law and stamp it out.
And then there are the people, who are making a fool of them all. The numbers game has become a part of their religion, and police or no police, law or no law, they intend to play the numbers. Why even police officers have been seen at the numbers window waiting to take their chance. And we know of Baptists who have asked for birth dates, hoping that playing those dates will flip a few extra coins in their pockets.
Meanwhile, crime grows in our communities and society needs protection. There are not enough police officers to go around, so the Christian Council will have to make up its mind and face reality. Do these men of the cloth want the police to chase the numbers man, and his patrons, or the gun-toting criminal who breaks into their homes, steals, rapes and murders? A realistic choice has to be made.
The Council is adamant that gambling should be stamped out, rather than legalised and controlled. The numbers racket has been allowed to go on far too long in this county, so long that even a police state would find it impossible to suppress it. If government listens to the Council, nothing will be done and the street corner numbers racket and Flowers' more sophisticated operation will continue to flourish. The people will continue to make a fool of the law, and the police will be stretched thin in trying to chase both the harmless and the vicious criminal. It is now time that the Christian Council faces reality.
In discussing the matter in the House of Assembly this was Prime Minister's Ingraham's realistic view of the situation:
"Now, Mr Speaker, this society on a Sunday morning, you go to the gaming houses, to Flowers and those places, and it is like a bank on payday - government payday. They are set-up like a bank, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of places. Well, either we believe that it is illegal, or we believe that it should be legal," said Mr Ingraham.
"I told the commissioner of police last week, that it seems to me that we are unable to enforce that law, and that I was going to give consideration to legalizing the numbers business. Of course he didn't support me in that thinking, but the reality is that it is not an enforceable law. And the society is doing it everyday. There is webshop here, and a webshop there, all over the island," said the prime minister.
The phenomenon of webshops - gaming houses - have now spread across the Family Islands, noted Mr Ingraham, to places such as Abaco, Exuma and Bimini. He said of the phenomenon, "it's nationwide."
As it cannot be controlled, then manage it, and tax it to the point that its revenue can benefit all of the Bahamian people. Education, the medical facilities and sports all desperately need an infusion of funds to improve their services to the nation.
In Barbados, for example, the national lottery is made up of the Barbados Olympic Association, the Barbados Cricket Association, the Barbados Turf Club and the National Sports Council.
It was announced that GTECH Holdings Corporation has a management agreement to operate and manage the Barbados Lottery. During the 18-year agreement GTECH expects to generate revenues between $80 and $100 million.
Can one imagine what government could do with such funds?
The Bahamian people have already decided the issue. Regardless of the law, they intend to play their numbers. It would be better for all of society if this game of chance were decriminalized, taken in out of the cold and controlled by the laws of the land.
April 19, 2010
tribune242
TO GAMBLE or not to gamble, that is the question.
Former prime minister Perry Christie believes that to legalise "the numbers business" in the Bahamas would have "enormous implications" for the tourism industry as well as "deep social implications."
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has met with the Christian Council, which really represents the Baptist voice, a voice that is rigidly against gambling in any form -- as a matter of fact it is a tenet of their religion. However, there are other churches -- the Catholics in particular -- that use a benign form of gambling - bingo and raffles -- to raise funds to help operate their schools and various other organisations.
From time to time the police have raided the various numbers houses -- including the largest one of all, the Flowers enterprise-- vowing that as long as gambling remains on the statute books they are going to enforce the law and stamp it out.
And then there are the people, who are making a fool of them all. The numbers game has become a part of their religion, and police or no police, law or no law, they intend to play the numbers. Why even police officers have been seen at the numbers window waiting to take their chance. And we know of Baptists who have asked for birth dates, hoping that playing those dates will flip a few extra coins in their pockets.
Meanwhile, crime grows in our communities and society needs protection. There are not enough police officers to go around, so the Christian Council will have to make up its mind and face reality. Do these men of the cloth want the police to chase the numbers man, and his patrons, or the gun-toting criminal who breaks into their homes, steals, rapes and murders? A realistic choice has to be made.
The Council is adamant that gambling should be stamped out, rather than legalised and controlled. The numbers racket has been allowed to go on far too long in this county, so long that even a police state would find it impossible to suppress it. If government listens to the Council, nothing will be done and the street corner numbers racket and Flowers' more sophisticated operation will continue to flourish. The people will continue to make a fool of the law, and the police will be stretched thin in trying to chase both the harmless and the vicious criminal. It is now time that the Christian Council faces reality.
In discussing the matter in the House of Assembly this was Prime Minister's Ingraham's realistic view of the situation:
"Now, Mr Speaker, this society on a Sunday morning, you go to the gaming houses, to Flowers and those places, and it is like a bank on payday - government payday. They are set-up like a bank, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of places. Well, either we believe that it is illegal, or we believe that it should be legal," said Mr Ingraham.
"I told the commissioner of police last week, that it seems to me that we are unable to enforce that law, and that I was going to give consideration to legalizing the numbers business. Of course he didn't support me in that thinking, but the reality is that it is not an enforceable law. And the society is doing it everyday. There is webshop here, and a webshop there, all over the island," said the prime minister.
The phenomenon of webshops - gaming houses - have now spread across the Family Islands, noted Mr Ingraham, to places such as Abaco, Exuma and Bimini. He said of the phenomenon, "it's nationwide."
As it cannot be controlled, then manage it, and tax it to the point that its revenue can benefit all of the Bahamian people. Education, the medical facilities and sports all desperately need an infusion of funds to improve their services to the nation.
In Barbados, for example, the national lottery is made up of the Barbados Olympic Association, the Barbados Cricket Association, the Barbados Turf Club and the National Sports Council.
It was announced that GTECH Holdings Corporation has a management agreement to operate and manage the Barbados Lottery. During the 18-year agreement GTECH expects to generate revenues between $80 and $100 million.
Can one imagine what government could do with such funds?
The Bahamian people have already decided the issue. Regardless of the law, they intend to play their numbers. It would be better for all of society if this game of chance were decriminalized, taken in out of the cold and controlled by the laws of the land.
April 19, 2010
tribune242
Ranking Women in the FNM have expressed alarm to PM Hubert Ingraham over the "disappearance of FNM women in prominent levels of national life"
FNM women hit out
By CANDIA DAMES ~ Guardian News Editor ~ candia@nasguard.com:
Several senior women in the Free National Movement have expressed alarm to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham over the "disappearance of FNM women in prominent levels of national life", and said they are offended by his "callous dismissal" of their recent bid to meet with him to discuss the appointment of a governor general.
The women said they had recently become "very concerned" about several matters related to the functioning and public face of their party.
They failed in their efforts to convince the prime minister, who heads the FNM, to appoint former Cabinet minister Janet Bostwick to the high post.
Instead, Ingraham chose Sir Arthur Foulkes, who was sworn in last Wednesday.
In a letter dated March 29, 2010, the women wrote to Ingraham that they wished to express their opinions on the appointment that had been looming.
Their letter came before any announcement was made regarding Sir Arthur's appointment.
"Miss Italia Johnson (former Speaker of the House) reported to us that upon asking for an audience with you on our behalf, you told her that you had no need to be 'lobbied' on the matter," the women wrote.
"We write to express our extreme disappointment and dismay regarding this response and to say that we are offended at your callous dismissal."
Johnson and former FNM MPs Theresa Moxey-Ingraham and Jaunianne Dorsett were among the women who signed the letter to the party's leader.
The women said, "We have always considered ourselves much more than mere lobbyists in this great organization. In fact, history will reflect that from its inception, we have all played pivotal roles in the growth and development of this party and that we have successfully performed in every role.
"...We have worked diligently at every conceivable level of this party with the exception of leader, and we have carried our fair share of the burdens, responsibilities and blame that has gone into the building of a strong and successful political party.
"We are offended by the very term 'lobby'."
The women said they believe the appointment of Bostwick, an "iconic" woman in the party, to the office of governor general "is an opportunity for our party to regain some of the political prominence we enjoyed as an organization which respects and celebrates the contribution of women."
They said that in recent years, what had been perceived as a 'golden age' of prominence for FNM women in public life has turned into a wilderness period.
The women said that their numbers in Cabinet have been reduced; their numbers in the Senate have been reduced; few women have been appointed as chair or deputy of major public boards and committees, and true progress and prominence for the women in the party appears to have been stalled and "we have been dismissed and cast aside."
But in a response dated April 8, the party's leader failed to agree that FNM women were being cast aside.
"Each of you have held office in either our party or in governments which I have been privileged to lead between 1990 and 2002 and again from 2005 to the present," Ingraham wrote.
"You are no doubt aware that my dedication to equality of the sexes is not transitory nor politically motivated but rather fundamental to my belief system.
"I have never appointed women to positions of leadership or responsibility so as to appease a political faction or pander to any group. Women who serve in my administrations are held to the same standard as are their male colleagues. I have seldom been disappointed with the commitment of women to getting the job done and done well."
Ingraham told the women that he shared their view that Bostwick is worthy of every accolade that the party and government can offer, given her long years of service to the party and the party's cause of national political reform and social and economic advancement for Bahamians.
"Mrs. Bostwick was a valuable member of my Cabinet for 10 years," he noted.
"You should be aware that Mrs. Bostwick is fully aware of my personal high regard for her and of my gratitude and appreciation to her for her service to our party and to our country."
Ingraham said, "One of my greatest disappointments in public life has been my inability, and that of our party, to cause the majority of the adult Bahamian population to support the equality of the sexes in law and in practice.
"I am totally committed to the promotion of women and women's rights in our country. As the father of four daughters I can have no other view..."
Ingraham also said no one regrets more than he the dearth of women elected to the House of Assembly in the most recent general election.
"Indeed, it appeared as if we as a nation took a step backward when so many qualified and dedicated women offered by us to the electorate were rejected at the polls in 2007."
There is currently only one woman in Ingraham's Cabinet — Loretta Butler-Turner.
The only other female FNM MP is Verna Grant, who represents in Eight Mile Rock.
The Progressive Liberal Party has three female MPs — Cynthia 'Mother' Pratt, Glenys Hanna-Martin and Melanie Griffin.
In his letter to the FNM women, Ingraham said the fight to gain wide support and recognition of women must be fought in every corner of society.
"The victory will not come from political appointment but from genuine acceptance of women as viable political leaders," he said.
Referring to the controversial Marital Rape Bill, Ingraham said, "Since 2007 we have not been able to build a groundswell of support to afford married women the same level of protection against abuse by a spouse that is extended by law today to prostitutes."
The prime minister outlined his role and that of his administration — past and present — in advancing the cause of women in The Bahamas, including the appointment of the first female governor general and first female Speaker of the House of Assembly.
He ended his letter to the FNM women by advising that he proposed to appoint Sir Arthur governor general.
"Sir Arthur, who sacrificed much and who suffered long and hard in the political trenches of our country, all in the interest of furthering the cause of the Free National Movement, is now in his 80s," Ingraham wrote.
"I do not believe that we can properly postpone national recognition of his life work and sacrifice. He is most deserving of this tribute of respect and I trust that he will have the full support of the senior women of the Free National Movement."
In addition to the former female FNM MPs, the March 29 letter to Ingraham was signed by Patricia Johnson, Margaret Rodgers, Erma Williams and Althea Sands.
Apart from the "disappearance" of women in prominent positions in national life, they did not elaborate on any other concerns in their letter to their party leader.
April 19, 2010
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES ~ Guardian News Editor ~ candia@nasguard.com:
Several senior women in the Free National Movement have expressed alarm to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham over the "disappearance of FNM women in prominent levels of national life", and said they are offended by his "callous dismissal" of their recent bid to meet with him to discuss the appointment of a governor general.
The women said they had recently become "very concerned" about several matters related to the functioning and public face of their party.
They failed in their efforts to convince the prime minister, who heads the FNM, to appoint former Cabinet minister Janet Bostwick to the high post.
Instead, Ingraham chose Sir Arthur Foulkes, who was sworn in last Wednesday.
In a letter dated March 29, 2010, the women wrote to Ingraham that they wished to express their opinions on the appointment that had been looming.
Their letter came before any announcement was made regarding Sir Arthur's appointment.
"Miss Italia Johnson (former Speaker of the House) reported to us that upon asking for an audience with you on our behalf, you told her that you had no need to be 'lobbied' on the matter," the women wrote.
"We write to express our extreme disappointment and dismay regarding this response and to say that we are offended at your callous dismissal."
Johnson and former FNM MPs Theresa Moxey-Ingraham and Jaunianne Dorsett were among the women who signed the letter to the party's leader.
The women said, "We have always considered ourselves much more than mere lobbyists in this great organization. In fact, history will reflect that from its inception, we have all played pivotal roles in the growth and development of this party and that we have successfully performed in every role.
"...We have worked diligently at every conceivable level of this party with the exception of leader, and we have carried our fair share of the burdens, responsibilities and blame that has gone into the building of a strong and successful political party.
"We are offended by the very term 'lobby'."
The women said they believe the appointment of Bostwick, an "iconic" woman in the party, to the office of governor general "is an opportunity for our party to regain some of the political prominence we enjoyed as an organization which respects and celebrates the contribution of women."
They said that in recent years, what had been perceived as a 'golden age' of prominence for FNM women in public life has turned into a wilderness period.
The women said that their numbers in Cabinet have been reduced; their numbers in the Senate have been reduced; few women have been appointed as chair or deputy of major public boards and committees, and true progress and prominence for the women in the party appears to have been stalled and "we have been dismissed and cast aside."
But in a response dated April 8, the party's leader failed to agree that FNM women were being cast aside.
"Each of you have held office in either our party or in governments which I have been privileged to lead between 1990 and 2002 and again from 2005 to the present," Ingraham wrote.
"You are no doubt aware that my dedication to equality of the sexes is not transitory nor politically motivated but rather fundamental to my belief system.
"I have never appointed women to positions of leadership or responsibility so as to appease a political faction or pander to any group. Women who serve in my administrations are held to the same standard as are their male colleagues. I have seldom been disappointed with the commitment of women to getting the job done and done well."
Ingraham told the women that he shared their view that Bostwick is worthy of every accolade that the party and government can offer, given her long years of service to the party and the party's cause of national political reform and social and economic advancement for Bahamians.
"Mrs. Bostwick was a valuable member of my Cabinet for 10 years," he noted.
"You should be aware that Mrs. Bostwick is fully aware of my personal high regard for her and of my gratitude and appreciation to her for her service to our party and to our country."
Ingraham said, "One of my greatest disappointments in public life has been my inability, and that of our party, to cause the majority of the adult Bahamian population to support the equality of the sexes in law and in practice.
"I am totally committed to the promotion of women and women's rights in our country. As the father of four daughters I can have no other view..."
Ingraham also said no one regrets more than he the dearth of women elected to the House of Assembly in the most recent general election.
"Indeed, it appeared as if we as a nation took a step backward when so many qualified and dedicated women offered by us to the electorate were rejected at the polls in 2007."
There is currently only one woman in Ingraham's Cabinet — Loretta Butler-Turner.
The only other female FNM MP is Verna Grant, who represents in Eight Mile Rock.
The Progressive Liberal Party has three female MPs — Cynthia 'Mother' Pratt, Glenys Hanna-Martin and Melanie Griffin.
In his letter to the FNM women, Ingraham said the fight to gain wide support and recognition of women must be fought in every corner of society.
"The victory will not come from political appointment but from genuine acceptance of women as viable political leaders," he said.
Referring to the controversial Marital Rape Bill, Ingraham said, "Since 2007 we have not been able to build a groundswell of support to afford married women the same level of protection against abuse by a spouse that is extended by law today to prostitutes."
The prime minister outlined his role and that of his administration — past and present — in advancing the cause of women in The Bahamas, including the appointment of the first female governor general and first female Speaker of the House of Assembly.
He ended his letter to the FNM women by advising that he proposed to appoint Sir Arthur governor general.
"Sir Arthur, who sacrificed much and who suffered long and hard in the political trenches of our country, all in the interest of furthering the cause of the Free National Movement, is now in his 80s," Ingraham wrote.
"I do not believe that we can properly postpone national recognition of his life work and sacrifice. He is most deserving of this tribute of respect and I trust that he will have the full support of the senior women of the Free National Movement."
In addition to the former female FNM MPs, the March 29 letter to Ingraham was signed by Patricia Johnson, Margaret Rodgers, Erma Williams and Althea Sands.
Apart from the "disappearance" of women in prominent positions in national life, they did not elaborate on any other concerns in their letter to their party leader.
April 19, 2010
thenassauguardian
The Bahamas needs tax and spending reform
By Youri Kemp:
I was listening to the news just recently, where Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, who also is the Minister of Finance, said something to the effect that he would not lean against anyone broaching the issue of taxing the illegal numbers racket in The Bahamas, by virtue of taxing the internet cafés that are reportedly "fronts" for internet gambling businesses.
However, I'm not quite sure how easy it is to tax the numbers racket through internet cafés in The Bahamas. For starters, you have to have them recognize that they are, in fact, running illegal gambling out of internet cafés -- considering that the authorities have not been able to produce solid evidence in order to prosecute anyone allegedly gambling in these establishments.
Secondly, what about the internet cafés that are legitimate internet cafés? Can't tax them... can you? Lastly, if I am running an illegal gambling racket through an internet café, then why would I want to pay taxes to the government for something I have been getting away with for so long?
Even if you put the work out for companies to bid on a national lottery, you still would be left at square one with the internet cafés that run the numbers racket and their subsequent prosecution.
It is no easy task and good luck to the persons tasked with sorting it out.
More importantly, however, if we have come to a point where we are speaking in open forum about taxing the numbers racket, seriously, it signifies that the government feels that The Bahamas is at a juncture where it needs meaningful tax reform for government revenue; the government, clearly, is not generating enough internal revenue in order to meet its obligations now; and that the prospects of meeting the debt service, is very bleak with the current system of taxation.
To be very blunt: the government has to tax. However, the term "tax reform” isn't necessarily supposed to have a negative connotation or stand for a pejorative slight of hand.
The word "tax", does evoke personal sentiments for obvious reasons and the word "reform" -- especially used by politicians -- is a code word of sorts for the refocusing of entitlements and simultaneously as a buzz word for business persons, which signifies more and unnecessary regulation. Which to business people means more time away from their business and more time dealing with a governmental agency with mentally challenged employees.
To be fair, government employees aren't mentally challenged -- although some who look like they shouldn't be makes one wonder -- and everyone doesn't understand what reform signifies -- either which way -- and no one wants to pay more taxes.
The truth is, however, The Bahamas government is in debt to over 40 percent of GDP -- with a widening deficit. Another clear fact is that The Bahamas doesn't have any streams of government revenue, other than from import taxes (where it gets over 50% of its revenue), National Insurance contributions, revenue from public corporations and government agencies and also through forms of public service charges and real estate; i.e., vehicle registration and real property tax.
Conversely, the Bahamas's tax to GDP ratio is about 18 percent. Which isn't that bad, considering Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad is at 32, 27 and 38 percent respectively. But, The Bahamas isn't just like any other Caribbean country -- we do things a little different.
Firstly, we don't produce many agricultural products for mass consumption in The Bahamas, neither do we have a large export sector in terms of people involved in exports, away from the concentrated profits some firms make.
Another concern that compounds the lack of efficient and beneficial dynamism in the market place as it relates to an optimal and targeted tax mix is the reliance of import tariffs for government revenue.
While The Bahamas does not produce over 80% of what it consumes, and with the tax system as basic as it is, it has to tax imports heavily. As a consequence, this puts consumers and more importantly, low income consumer, at a disadvantage as the tax burden is disproportionate to what they spend on taxes in relation to what larger corporations and high income earners pay. For example, a 50 percent flat tax on all consumer goods means more to someone who makes $20k per year than someone who makes $100k per year and a flat rate for business licenses, means more to the small business person than it does for a large corporation.
Moreover, large industries such as banking and shipping, are virtually untouched as it relates to taxation -- no capital gains or corporate tax. Even the export of fisheries products is untouched as they relate to export taxes.
Some may argue that these low taxes are the reason why these industries are so dynamic and successful. However, there is more to a successful enterprise than just low taxation -- location, barriers to entry and diversification, comparative and competitive advantages, come first and foremost for a successful enterprise.
More importantly, inequitable or no taxation, can be more destructive than high taxation. For political reasons, the need to keep such high-end entitlements incentivises corruption. Also, with regard to adequate funding for social programmes, people wishing to engage in such specialised enterprises face high entry costs that the consumer and subsequently the state ultimately must pay for.
Those additional barriers,decrease the tax base as persons begin to spend more of their disposable income in an effort to obtain the training and skills necessary to compete in and for what the marketplace offers, in addition to the high cost of private investment into such specialised enterprises.
What makes it worse is if the perception of risk through sacrifice made by individuals does not facilitate for the full cycle completion on endeavours. Or, the high cost for entry is private market based (cost for capital investment and cost for private education), where the government does not have a progressive, optimal tax mix and that tax mix model is not synergised to assist with the equitable development of the industry at all levels.
When such market failures occur, the government must spend on socio-economic policies that develop infrastructure and human capital.
Through all of this, I must state that the issues are more complex than just taxation. We need more bang for the buck and a re-engineering of our socio-economic programmes, in addition to doing more with respect to meaningful tax and spend policies that encourage economic growth, as well as lowering the private and public entry barriers to enterprise and skills training.
Before we begin the discussions on what forms of taxation we should have -- VAT, excise taxes, etc... -- or what types of spending we must endeavour, we must begin to frame the minds of citizens and add to the conversation of what the economic importance of tax and spending reform is and what that means to us all, as I hoped this article addressed.
April 19, 2010
caribbeannetnews
I was listening to the news just recently, where Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, who also is the Minister of Finance, said something to the effect that he would not lean against anyone broaching the issue of taxing the illegal numbers racket in The Bahamas, by virtue of taxing the internet cafés that are reportedly "fronts" for internet gambling businesses.
However, I'm not quite sure how easy it is to tax the numbers racket through internet cafés in The Bahamas. For starters, you have to have them recognize that they are, in fact, running illegal gambling out of internet cafés -- considering that the authorities have not been able to produce solid evidence in order to prosecute anyone allegedly gambling in these establishments. Secondly, what about the internet cafés that are legitimate internet cafés? Can't tax them... can you? Lastly, if I am running an illegal gambling racket through an internet café, then why would I want to pay taxes to the government for something I have been getting away with for so long?
Even if you put the work out for companies to bid on a national lottery, you still would be left at square one with the internet cafés that run the numbers racket and their subsequent prosecution.
It is no easy task and good luck to the persons tasked with sorting it out.
More importantly, however, if we have come to a point where we are speaking in open forum about taxing the numbers racket, seriously, it signifies that the government feels that The Bahamas is at a juncture where it needs meaningful tax reform for government revenue; the government, clearly, is not generating enough internal revenue in order to meet its obligations now; and that the prospects of meeting the debt service, is very bleak with the current system of taxation.
To be very blunt: the government has to tax. However, the term "tax reform” isn't necessarily supposed to have a negative connotation or stand for a pejorative slight of hand.
The word "tax", does evoke personal sentiments for obvious reasons and the word "reform" -- especially used by politicians -- is a code word of sorts for the refocusing of entitlements and simultaneously as a buzz word for business persons, which signifies more and unnecessary regulation. Which to business people means more time away from their business and more time dealing with a governmental agency with mentally challenged employees.
To be fair, government employees aren't mentally challenged -- although some who look like they shouldn't be makes one wonder -- and everyone doesn't understand what reform signifies -- either which way -- and no one wants to pay more taxes.
The truth is, however, The Bahamas government is in debt to over 40 percent of GDP -- with a widening deficit. Another clear fact is that The Bahamas doesn't have any streams of government revenue, other than from import taxes (where it gets over 50% of its revenue), National Insurance contributions, revenue from public corporations and government agencies and also through forms of public service charges and real estate; i.e., vehicle registration and real property tax.
Conversely, the Bahamas's tax to GDP ratio is about 18 percent. Which isn't that bad, considering Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad is at 32, 27 and 38 percent respectively. But, The Bahamas isn't just like any other Caribbean country -- we do things a little different.
Firstly, we don't produce many agricultural products for mass consumption in The Bahamas, neither do we have a large export sector in terms of people involved in exports, away from the concentrated profits some firms make.
Another concern that compounds the lack of efficient and beneficial dynamism in the market place as it relates to an optimal and targeted tax mix is the reliance of import tariffs for government revenue.
While The Bahamas does not produce over 80% of what it consumes, and with the tax system as basic as it is, it has to tax imports heavily. As a consequence, this puts consumers and more importantly, low income consumer, at a disadvantage as the tax burden is disproportionate to what they spend on taxes in relation to what larger corporations and high income earners pay. For example, a 50 percent flat tax on all consumer goods means more to someone who makes $20k per year than someone who makes $100k per year and a flat rate for business licenses, means more to the small business person than it does for a large corporation.
Moreover, large industries such as banking and shipping, are virtually untouched as it relates to taxation -- no capital gains or corporate tax. Even the export of fisheries products is untouched as they relate to export taxes.
Some may argue that these low taxes are the reason why these industries are so dynamic and successful. However, there is more to a successful enterprise than just low taxation -- location, barriers to entry and diversification, comparative and competitive advantages, come first and foremost for a successful enterprise.
More importantly, inequitable or no taxation, can be more destructive than high taxation. For political reasons, the need to keep such high-end entitlements incentivises corruption. Also, with regard to adequate funding for social programmes, people wishing to engage in such specialised enterprises face high entry costs that the consumer and subsequently the state ultimately must pay for.
Those additional barriers,decrease the tax base as persons begin to spend more of their disposable income in an effort to obtain the training and skills necessary to compete in and for what the marketplace offers, in addition to the high cost of private investment into such specialised enterprises.
What makes it worse is if the perception of risk through sacrifice made by individuals does not facilitate for the full cycle completion on endeavours. Or, the high cost for entry is private market based (cost for capital investment and cost for private education), where the government does not have a progressive, optimal tax mix and that tax mix model is not synergised to assist with the equitable development of the industry at all levels.
When such market failures occur, the government must spend on socio-economic policies that develop infrastructure and human capital.
Through all of this, I must state that the issues are more complex than just taxation. We need more bang for the buck and a re-engineering of our socio-economic programmes, in addition to doing more with respect to meaningful tax and spend policies that encourage economic growth, as well as lowering the private and public entry barriers to enterprise and skills training.
Before we begin the discussions on what forms of taxation we should have -- VAT, excise taxes, etc... -- or what types of spending we must endeavour, we must begin to frame the minds of citizens and add to the conversation of what the economic importance of tax and spending reform is and what that means to us all, as I hoped this article addressed.
April 19, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)