Debate on the Baha Mar development
By LARRY SMITH
DEBATE on the government's resolution to approve the Baha Mar development was scheduled to begin today in Parliament - five years after the initial deal was concluded in 2005. But the debate was postponed until the project's principals can come to terms with the Bank of Nova Scotia on outstanding debt.
It's been a long road - although not quite as long as the 13-year BTC sell-off - and conditions in 2005 were vastly different from what they are today. Back then, the credit boom underway in the US had a marked spillover effect on the Bahamas, with major developments planned around the country.
But most of these projects collapsed in the wake of the Great Recession that swept the world in 2008. The Baha Mar project was kept ticking over, even when the original joint venture partners withdrew. It was the brainchild of a Lyford Cay resident named Sarkis Izmirlian, whose grandfather left Armenia in the final years of the Ottoman Empire.
Sarkis' father, Dikran, made his fortune by cornering the world peanut trade. And the family became property developers in Britain, where one of their companies owns the 13-acre site on which London's City Hall is located. While Dikran lives in Switzerland, Sarkis manages the family's assets from the Bahamas.
He is said to be an astute developer who conceived the grandiose Baha Mar project partly to make a name for himself. But the project has been able to survive only because the Chinese are investing their huge currency reserves in support of their strategic interests. According to China's Commerce Ministry, some 800,000 Chinese are now working on energy, infrastructure and housing projects around the world.
Without clear evidence, we should discount the allegations that have been made about the use of Chinese convicts as workers on these projects. But we do think it makes sense for our government to seek a broad political consensus for the project in view of the large foreign labour component.
The 1,000-acre Baha Mar project is owned by the Izmirlian family, with the Chinese Export-Import Bank providing $2.5 billion in financing over 20 years and the China State Construction & Engineering Co as principal contractor.
Challenges
It was unclear at this writing whether the Bank of Nova Scotia, which financed the Izmirlian's earlier acquisition of Cable Beach hotels, would become an equity investor. But it is fair to ask how Baha Mar expects to repay a $2.5 billion loan from China when it has already encountered challenges servicing the current $200 million loan to Scotiabank.
Still, it is the view of most observers that Cable Beach needs to be redeveloped for the country's tourism industry to remain competitive, and whether the land used for collateral is conveyed on a long-term lease or as freehold is beside the point.
The optimum use for that land is resort development and nobody else in the current environment can finance such a project.
And even though a large portion of the $2.5 billion will return to China in the form of interest, wages and materials purchases, this is still a major foreign investment for the Bahamas that will help to stimulate the economy in the short term and drive tourism growth in the longer term.
Conflict of Interest
According to the Institute of Auditors, conflict of interest is when someone in a position of trust has a competing professional or personal interest that makes it difficult to fulfil his or her duties impartially, or that creates an appearance of impropriety.
But exactly what does that mean in the Bahamas? Well, the short answer is...very little.
The Bahamas is a small place, which makes it difficult for any of us to avoid apparent conflicts. And they happen all the time, at every level, in both the public and private sectors. There are very few explicit rules, and even where rules exist, there are no real sanctions.
In the political realm, the old United Bahamian Party oligarchs have been described as "the poster boys for conflict of interest and corruption." Back before the days when cabinet ministers earned official salaries, UBP politicos routinely represented companies doing business with the government and awarded themselves contracts as a matter of right.
Things were so bad that prior to the 1967 general election the UBP itself had issued a code of ethics requiring ministers to withdraw from any case in which they had a private interest.
But that didn't stop politicians like Sir Stafford Sands from acting as paid agents for Freeport gambling interests, as documented by the 1967 Commission of Inquiry.
Sands (who was finance and tourism minister at the time) received over $1.8 million in consultancy fees from the Grand Bahama Port Authority between 1962 and 1966. The Port also gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions to the UBP.
When the Progressive Liberal Party came to power in 1967 it promised to change all that.
The Pindling administration issued a new code of ethics that prohibited ministers from accepting substantial gifts from persons doing business with the government.
Fast forward 15 years and the Bahamas was in the throes of a criminal takeover by South American drug cartels.
The Colombian flag was raised over Norman's Cay in George Smith's Exuma constituency by the notorious gangster Carlos Lehder, who drove ordinary visitors away at gunpoint and orchestrated hourly cocaine flights to the US.
The 1984 Commission of Inquiry found that Smith had accepted gifts and hospitality from Lehder, who is now serving a long sentence in an American jail. In fact, one parliamentarian said at the time that "Pindling and his crew make the Bay Street Boys look like schoolchildren."
The 1993 inquiries into Bahamasair and the Hotel Corporation were initiated by the first Free National Movement government. They documented decades of gross mismanagement, conflict of interest, and official corruption under the PLP. In response, the FNM promised a government in the sunshine that would be fully accountable to the people.
In the years since there have been many accusations of conflict of interest featuring politicians of both major parties, but none of them have matched the scale and sheer brazenness of those earlier controversies.
For example, during the second FNM administration Brent Symonette resigned as chairman of the Airport Authority after it became known that a company in which he had a minor interest had been contracted to do paving work at the airport. Charges were made against Tommy Turnquest for allowing an air conditioning contractor to pay for his leader-elect victory party. And Dion Foulkes was accused of awarding contracts for school repairs without a public tender.
When the PLP was re-elected in 2002, Perry Christie made a lot of noise about integrity in public life, and issued another code of ethics for ministers that basically re-stated existing guidelines. But his promised law codifying rules on conflict of interest never came before parliament.
Controversies
And so the controversies continued. Leslie Miller and other PLP officials were accused of renting buildings to the government they served, a common practice.
Minister of Local Government V. Alfred Gray was accused of remaining active in his law firm, which was representing one party in a local government dispute. Neville Wisdom faced charges of impropriety in awarding contracts for Junkanoo bleachers.
PLP Minister Bradley Roberts and then chairman of the Water & Sewerage Corporation Don Demeritte were accused of leading a conspiracy that would have bilked Bahamians of millions of dollars. According to testimony in an industrial tribunal, the chairman instructed the corporation's general manager to call off the bidding process for a reverse osmosis plant at Arawak Cay, and start negotiations with a firm whose principal was Jerome Fitzgerald, a PLP senator. This matter is still before the court.
The most sensational case of conflict of interest during the PLP's last term involved Shane Gibson's relationship with expired American sex symbol Anna Nicole Smith.
Gibson resigned from the cabinet in February 2007 after The Tribune published embarrassing photos of him on a bed with Smith at her Eastern Road home, although both were fully clothed.
Gibson insisted he did not have a sexual relationship with Smith and denied doing her any favours.
At the time, the "attack" on Shane was characterised by a fellow PLP minister as "the successful manipulation of misinformation by people whose stock in trade is nastiness and sleaze."
Well, now we have something that trumps all of that potted history.
A minister who takes advantage of a private helicopter flight in order to attend two official meetings on two different islands over two consecutive days - the evening premiere of a conservation film on Abaco, and a meeting with visiting American experts in the Exuma Cays the next morning.
"I would not have been able to do either with regular flights, or even make the previously agreed times by boat," Environment Minister Earl Deveaux told me. "It is difficult, if not impossible, to discharge this job, with the required oversight, if we are not able to use the facilities of the principals."
For George Smith's information, the Aga Khan is not a criminal - unlike Carlos Lehder. He is as desirable an investor as Sarkis Izmirlian. His Swiss-registered Development Network runs a variety of multi-billion-dollar humanitarian programmes in 25 countries around the world. And the Aga Khan Health Services is one of the most comprehensive, private, not-for-profit healthcare systems in the developing world.
Before we jump to conclusions, perhaps we should ask what are the actual regulations that apply to official conflict of interest in the Bahamas these days.
The answer to that question is contained in the manual of cabinet procedure, which states that a minister "must not, except as may be permitted under the rules applicable to his office, accept any gift, hospitality or concessional travel offered in connection with the discharge of his duties."
On my reading, accepting a trip for a personal benefit rather than for a public duty would likely be considered a breach of this rule.
Yet incumbents of both major parties have accepted personal hospitality from big investors or foreign governments fairly routinely over the years, and usually without any controversy.
The real elephant in the room in this context is the financing of political parties by big investors and corporate interests.
There are no rules at all in this regard, and everything is done behind closed doors.
I have it on good authority that each of the 82 main party candidates in the 2007 general election received an average of $30,000 in campaign funds. Added to that are general party expenses for advertising, printing, logistics, travel, and give-aways.
Clearly, Bahamian elections cost millions of dollars. Where do you think that money comes from?
So should we be concerned about a free helicopter ride to a business meeting? You be the judge.
What do you think?
Send comments to
larry@tribunemedia.net
Or visit www.bahamapundit.com
September 22, 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, September 23, 2010
Environment Minister Earl Deveaux did not admit guilt by resignation
Deveaux did not admit guilt by resignation
tribune242 editorial
THE LATEST scuttlebut making the rounds of the political rumour mill is that by offering his resignation to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, Environment Minister Earl Deveaux admitted he was wrong to accept the invitation of Prince Karim Aga Khan to fly in his helicopter to the prince's private island in the Exumas. According to rumour mongers it is an admission by the Minister that the helicopter ride compromised his ability to make an objective decision on the Prince's application for permission to develop his island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park.
Those persons spreading the rumour are either completely ignorant of the Westminster system of parliamentary government, or they are maliciously exploiting the ignorance of the Bahamian people.
There are many reasons why ministers resign from Cabinet. We had an incident as recently as March when Branville McCartney resigned as Minister of State for Immigration. Mr McCartney said at the time that in the forefront of all his issues and emotions was his "feelings of stagnation and the inability to fully utilise" his "political potential at this time."
"We are facing tough times," he said, "but I confidently believe that the nation has been mobilized by Mr Ingraham and the FNM and rallied for a great national effort. I have learned why this Prime Minister and Leader of the FNM is the most successful leader of our party. And it is because of this that I say, I have no sympathy with and will give no credence or comfort to those who would want to use this resignation to undermine his leadership of the FNM and/or The Commonwealth of The Bahamas."
That was one reason for a resignation.
One must remember that when a member is elected to parliament, he is elected by the people. However, when he is made a Cabinet minister it is a position given by the prime minister -- a position that can be taken away at will for a number of reasons. Should anything arise in that ministry that could embarrass the prime minister or his government, then it is the action of a gentleman to go back to the prime minister and offer to resign. It is then up to the prime minister to accept or reject the offer.
In offering his resignation, Mr Deveaux did not admit that he had sold his integrity for a helicopter ride, he just did what was expected of him in the ancient tradition of the Westminster system. Unfortunately there are not many gentlemen left among us today.
This was the same tradition followed by the late Sir Kendal Isaacs when he relinquished the leadership of the FNM after he had led the party to defeat in the 1987 election. However, Opposition leader Perry Christie did not step down as party leader when he lost the government in 2007 to the FNM. He was not duty bound to do so and he chose not to follow tradition.
In the case of Mr Deveaux, Prime Minister Ingraham could hardly punish him for a practice that has been widely used over the years in all administrations when an investor wanted a minister to inspect a project for which he needed permission. It was customary for the investor to provide the transport, which is what the Aga Khan did in the case of Mr Deveaux.
And the Prime Minister certainly could not frown on Mr Deveaux after this practice had been turned into widespread abuse under the PLP government with investors -- with issues before cabinet and various government departments -- even making their aircraft available to fly PLP candidates around the islands during the 2007 election.
We know that the PLP are hungry for political bones to chew on, but it's time to drop this one -- it's going nowhere.
September 23, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
THE LATEST scuttlebut making the rounds of the political rumour mill is that by offering his resignation to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, Environment Minister Earl Deveaux admitted he was wrong to accept the invitation of Prince Karim Aga Khan to fly in his helicopter to the prince's private island in the Exumas. According to rumour mongers it is an admission by the Minister that the helicopter ride compromised his ability to make an objective decision on the Prince's application for permission to develop his island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park.
Those persons spreading the rumour are either completely ignorant of the Westminster system of parliamentary government, or they are maliciously exploiting the ignorance of the Bahamian people.
There are many reasons why ministers resign from Cabinet. We had an incident as recently as March when Branville McCartney resigned as Minister of State for Immigration. Mr McCartney said at the time that in the forefront of all his issues and emotions was his "feelings of stagnation and the inability to fully utilise" his "political potential at this time."
"We are facing tough times," he said, "but I confidently believe that the nation has been mobilized by Mr Ingraham and the FNM and rallied for a great national effort. I have learned why this Prime Minister and Leader of the FNM is the most successful leader of our party. And it is because of this that I say, I have no sympathy with and will give no credence or comfort to those who would want to use this resignation to undermine his leadership of the FNM and/or The Commonwealth of The Bahamas."
That was one reason for a resignation.
One must remember that when a member is elected to parliament, he is elected by the people. However, when he is made a Cabinet minister it is a position given by the prime minister -- a position that can be taken away at will for a number of reasons. Should anything arise in that ministry that could embarrass the prime minister or his government, then it is the action of a gentleman to go back to the prime minister and offer to resign. It is then up to the prime minister to accept or reject the offer.
In offering his resignation, Mr Deveaux did not admit that he had sold his integrity for a helicopter ride, he just did what was expected of him in the ancient tradition of the Westminster system. Unfortunately there are not many gentlemen left among us today.
This was the same tradition followed by the late Sir Kendal Isaacs when he relinquished the leadership of the FNM after he had led the party to defeat in the 1987 election. However, Opposition leader Perry Christie did not step down as party leader when he lost the government in 2007 to the FNM. He was not duty bound to do so and he chose not to follow tradition.
In the case of Mr Deveaux, Prime Minister Ingraham could hardly punish him for a practice that has been widely used over the years in all administrations when an investor wanted a minister to inspect a project for which he needed permission. It was customary for the investor to provide the transport, which is what the Aga Khan did in the case of Mr Deveaux.
And the Prime Minister certainly could not frown on Mr Deveaux after this practice had been turned into widespread abuse under the PLP government with investors -- with issues before cabinet and various government departments -- even making their aircraft available to fly PLP candidates around the islands during the 2007 election.
We know that the PLP are hungry for political bones to chew on, but it's time to drop this one -- it's going nowhere.
September 23, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Earl Deveaux's poor judgment
Poor judgement by Minister Deveaux
thenassauguardian editorial
In the end, it is a leader's judgment that matters more than just about any other quality. This is as true for a business executive as it is for a Cabinet minister. This week, the Minister of the Environment's poor judgment was on full display in a number of areas.
This included Minister Earl Deveaux's acceptance of hospitality from various developers. It also included his disclosure of a private conversation with the prime minister.
Cabinet ministers of both parties have accepted hospitality from private sector interests, including air transportation. Accepting hospitality is not in itself unethical, though at times appearances do make an enormous difference. It depends on the nature and degree of the hospitality, and if there are accompanying quid pro quos.
As the opposition continues to discuss recent matters related to the minister, it may want to review its own record. The opposition generally needs to keep the government accountable. But, those with their own questionable practices in dealing with private sector interests should spare us their hypocrisy and grandstanding.
The matter of allowing for development in the Exuma Land and Sea Park is a separate policy matter of which Bahamians should be rightly concerned. On this front the environment minister should be asked some pressing questions.
Still, there is no evidence that Minister Deveaux did anything unethical in terms of any quid pro quos with developers in exchange for favorable review of various outstanding applications on this or other matters.
But, the cavalier manner in which the minister shrugged off the hospitality of various developers in terms of helicopter and airplane rides is stunning. This is not just bad public relations. It suggests a mindset. It is a demonstration of very poor judgment.
This is especially so for someone who is supposed to be a seasoned Cabinet minister. In his sensitive portfolio as environment minister he must be beyond reproach, and must be seen to be beyond reproach.
His statement that he was inclined to approve a developer's application before it was sent to the Bahamas National Trust for review is another example of spectacularly poor judgement. He should not have commented prior to such a review.
The minister has also embarrassed a number of developers who must question his unrestrained public comments. Compounding that lack of restraint, the minister then went on radio later in the week to discuss a private conversation he had with the prime minister in terms of his future as a minister.
Private conversations between a Cabinet member and a president or prime minister must remain private for all sorts of reasons. This includes the trust between that individual and their leader, as well as public trust regarding the conduct of confidential matters.
Minister Deveaux's lack of judgement should be a lesson to both those in opposition and in the government who have or will serve as Cabinet ministers. Considered judgment, common sense and restraint are at the heart of what it means to be a good leader.
9/17/2010
thenassauguardian
thenassauguardian editorial
In the end, it is a leader's judgment that matters more than just about any other quality. This is as true for a business executive as it is for a Cabinet minister. This week, the Minister of the Environment's poor judgment was on full display in a number of areas.
This included Minister Earl Deveaux's acceptance of hospitality from various developers. It also included his disclosure of a private conversation with the prime minister.
Cabinet ministers of both parties have accepted hospitality from private sector interests, including air transportation. Accepting hospitality is not in itself unethical, though at times appearances do make an enormous difference. It depends on the nature and degree of the hospitality, and if there are accompanying quid pro quos.
As the opposition continues to discuss recent matters related to the minister, it may want to review its own record. The opposition generally needs to keep the government accountable. But, those with their own questionable practices in dealing with private sector interests should spare us their hypocrisy and grandstanding.
The matter of allowing for development in the Exuma Land and Sea Park is a separate policy matter of which Bahamians should be rightly concerned. On this front the environment minister should be asked some pressing questions.
Still, there is no evidence that Minister Deveaux did anything unethical in terms of any quid pro quos with developers in exchange for favorable review of various outstanding applications on this or other matters.
But, the cavalier manner in which the minister shrugged off the hospitality of various developers in terms of helicopter and airplane rides is stunning. This is not just bad public relations. It suggests a mindset. It is a demonstration of very poor judgment.
This is especially so for someone who is supposed to be a seasoned Cabinet minister. In his sensitive portfolio as environment minister he must be beyond reproach, and must be seen to be beyond reproach.
His statement that he was inclined to approve a developer's application before it was sent to the Bahamas National Trust for review is another example of spectacularly poor judgement. He should not have commented prior to such a review.
The minister has also embarrassed a number of developers who must question his unrestrained public comments. Compounding that lack of restraint, the minister then went on radio later in the week to discuss a private conversation he had with the prime minister in terms of his future as a minister.
Private conversations between a Cabinet member and a president or prime minister must remain private for all sorts of reasons. This includes the trust between that individual and their leader, as well as public trust regarding the conduct of confidential matters.
Minister Deveaux's lack of judgement should be a lesson to both those in opposition and in the government who have or will serve as Cabinet ministers. Considered judgment, common sense and restraint are at the heart of what it means to be a good leader.
9/17/2010
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Bell Island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park... being unearthed?
Bell Island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park being dredged?
by bahamascitizen
An application to dredge into the sea bed at Bell Island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park has not even been granted as yet, and the developer is already cutting deep into a limestone hill to create a marina.
The island’s developer, The Aga Khan IV of the Aga Khan Development Network, has two grandiose luxury homes that sit on top of two picturesque hills surrounded by plush natural vegetation on Bell Island in the park. Both homes have similar designs and feature areas of glass walls and a box shape that let’s in light at key areas of the homes. Manicured landscapes hug the homes, which are spaced far apart on one of the most beautiful and more elevated islands in the park.
One home sits just below the helicopter pad, which is a clean, grassy area on another hill. It’s the landing pad of the 13-seat helicopter that has been the center of headline stories, as the press and the public seek answers and call for more transparency as it pertains to developments on Crown Land in The Bahamas.
Ever since The Tribune ran a red-letter story disclosing how Environment Minister Earl Deveaux received rides in the Aga Khan’s helicopter, he has been placed in a compromising position in the eyes of the public. The subject has been hot on local talk shows, and members of the media and the public have called for his resignation.
He has handed his resignation into Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham. Media officials and the public are anxious for the Prime Minister to respond to this embarrassing situation for his government that claims to operate on a ‘trust factor’.
The Aga Khan IV has an application before the Ministry of Environment which Minister Earl Deveaux said he was ‘minded to’ approve. It will allow the Aga Khan to create a number of marina slips, dredging up to fifteen feet deep. The public has yet to be told how long and how wide the slips will be, leading out to the sea.
Although the application has not been approved, massive demolition of a portion of the hill has already begun. The portion of excavated hill is about 20 feet deep and has been flattened to sea level, making it easier for excavation of the sea bed once the official approval is granted.
But concerns have been raised as the excavation of the hill and the buildings believed to be housing materials indicates that the developer expects to get the approval. Meantime, the hill has already been cut down, unbeknownst to most of the Bahamian public.
There are two main buildings near the area where demolition is being presently carried out, which are believed to house materials to complete the construction of the marina. The island also features a gazebo near a private beach. The gazebo is draped with sheer, white cloth and exudes romanticism. There is also a development on the other side of the island, where it is believed that workmen reside, as tools and equipment can be seen on the lot, and simple, wooden homes are present.
The hill that has been cut down is close to what appears to be the main home, where two satellite dishes are nestled in the bushes and are used for communication on the island. Bell Island features four amazing, heavenly white sandy beaches.
Once a Crown Land lease is up in 47 years, Bahamian children who today aspire to achieve a lease must be afforded the opportunity. If leasing developers like Aga Khan make major detrimental changes to the landscape, it could destroy the sacred land that belongs to the people of the Bahamas that the Minister of the Environment and the Bahamas National Trust has failed to protect.
The Minister has publicly admitted to accepting rides in the luxury helicopter and said he would “do it again”, while it has been revealed that the managing director at BNT accepted a million-dollar grant from the Bell island developer last year.
September 22, 2010
bahamascitizen
by bahamascitizen
An application to dredge into the sea bed at Bell Island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park has not even been granted as yet, and the developer is already cutting deep into a limestone hill to create a marina.
The island’s developer, The Aga Khan IV of the Aga Khan Development Network, has two grandiose luxury homes that sit on top of two picturesque hills surrounded by plush natural vegetation on Bell Island in the park. Both homes have similar designs and feature areas of glass walls and a box shape that let’s in light at key areas of the homes. Manicured landscapes hug the homes, which are spaced far apart on one of the most beautiful and more elevated islands in the park.
One home sits just below the helicopter pad, which is a clean, grassy area on another hill. It’s the landing pad of the 13-seat helicopter that has been the center of headline stories, as the press and the public seek answers and call for more transparency as it pertains to developments on Crown Land in The Bahamas.
Ever since The Tribune ran a red-letter story disclosing how Environment Minister Earl Deveaux received rides in the Aga Khan’s helicopter, he has been placed in a compromising position in the eyes of the public. The subject has been hot on local talk shows, and members of the media and the public have called for his resignation.
He has handed his resignation into Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham. Media officials and the public are anxious for the Prime Minister to respond to this embarrassing situation for his government that claims to operate on a ‘trust factor’.
The Aga Khan IV has an application before the Ministry of Environment which Minister Earl Deveaux said he was ‘minded to’ approve. It will allow the Aga Khan to create a number of marina slips, dredging up to fifteen feet deep. The public has yet to be told how long and how wide the slips will be, leading out to the sea.
Although the application has not been approved, massive demolition of a portion of the hill has already begun. The portion of excavated hill is about 20 feet deep and has been flattened to sea level, making it easier for excavation of the sea bed once the official approval is granted.
But concerns have been raised as the excavation of the hill and the buildings believed to be housing materials indicates that the developer expects to get the approval. Meantime, the hill has already been cut down, unbeknownst to most of the Bahamian public.
There are two main buildings near the area where demolition is being presently carried out, which are believed to house materials to complete the construction of the marina. The island also features a gazebo near a private beach. The gazebo is draped with sheer, white cloth and exudes romanticism. There is also a development on the other side of the island, where it is believed that workmen reside, as tools and equipment can be seen on the lot, and simple, wooden homes are present.
The hill that has been cut down is close to what appears to be the main home, where two satellite dishes are nestled in the bushes and are used for communication on the island. Bell Island features four amazing, heavenly white sandy beaches.
Once a Crown Land lease is up in 47 years, Bahamian children who today aspire to achieve a lease must be afforded the opportunity. If leasing developers like Aga Khan make major detrimental changes to the landscape, it could destroy the sacred land that belongs to the people of the Bahamas that the Minister of the Environment and the Bahamas National Trust has failed to protect.
The Minister has publicly admitted to accepting rides in the luxury helicopter and said he would “do it again”, while it has been revealed that the managing director at BNT accepted a million-dollar grant from the Bell island developer last year.
September 22, 2010
bahamascitizen
Why are two Nassau Members of Parliament: Fred Mitchell and Alfred Sears playing politics in Grand Bahama
Why are two Nassau MPs playing politics in GB?
thenassauguardian editorial
Apparently there is not enough political wiggle room in Nassau(perhaps because of over-crowding), so two Nassau-based politicians have come to play their political games in Freeport's backyard.
Member of Parliament Fred Mitchell and Member of Parliament Alfred Sears, along with Senator Michael Darville have been on a campaign of sorts in Grand Bahama, addressing all of the major issues taking place on this island.
It all started with the issue at Walter Parker and since that time they have been jumping on every major issue in Grand Bahama, so much so that it seems they may have bought homes here in the second city and have settled in.
While the issue at Walter Parker remains unsettled, Mitchell, Sears and Darville jumped on the MSC trucking issue and have shifted into full gear. On Monday night Sears and Mitchell were on the news giving their take on the trucking situation.
If one didn't know better, they may have thought that they were watching the national news on ZNS, but in truth, they were watching the Northern Bahamas newscast.
Yes, MP Mitchell and MP Sears were at it again.
It's like they have become the new activists for Grand Bahama. Have they both began their political campaigns early? If so, why have they chosen Grand Bahama to be their stage? Over the past few weeks both politicians have used Grand Bahama as the background to get up on their "soap box" and make their voices heard.
That leaves some Grand Bahamians wondering, if these opposition members(who don't even live in or represent Grand Bahama)have so much to say about issues taking place in Grand Bahama, what are Grand Bahama representatives doing?
Even if the reasons behind opposition members' involvement in Grand Bahama affairs may be questionable, the fact is, they are making their voices heard about the issues and at least have something to say. Where are the Grand Bahama representatives, and why are they so silent? Why are they letting" someone else dig up in their backyard" without saying a word?
Grand Bahama is represented by six members of Parliament, of which three are Cabinet ministers. Why haven't any of these representatives spoken out against Mitchell and Sears'"invasion"of their constituencies?
Is there some political rule both Sears and Mitchell have broken, or is it a free-for-all landscape in which all politicians operate?
MP Fred Mitchell represents Fox Hill and MP Alfred Sears represents Fort Charlotte so why are they in Grand Bahama so frequently these days gaining political mileage? No doubt both men are certainly racking up some serious frequent flyer mileage.
Interestingly enough many Grand Bahamians have been silent on the opposition's move on Grand Bahama. Normally, Grand Bahamians may have made some comments about the frequent presence of these two men and would have demanded answers.
Is the political landscape in Grand Bahama changing, or is it due to the fact that economic hard times are so affecting Grand Bahamians that for this moment in time, they don't care who fights for them or which political party they belong too?
If local representatives choose to remain silent, then it is obvious that at least for now, Fred Mitchell and Alfred Sears have a lot to say in Grand Bahama.
9/21/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
Apparently there is not enough political wiggle room in Nassau(perhaps because of over-crowding), so two Nassau-based politicians have come to play their political games in Freeport's backyard.
Member of Parliament Fred Mitchell and Member of Parliament Alfred Sears, along with Senator Michael Darville have been on a campaign of sorts in Grand Bahama, addressing all of the major issues taking place on this island.
It all started with the issue at Walter Parker and since that time they have been jumping on every major issue in Grand Bahama, so much so that it seems they may have bought homes here in the second city and have settled in.
While the issue at Walter Parker remains unsettled, Mitchell, Sears and Darville jumped on the MSC trucking issue and have shifted into full gear. On Monday night Sears and Mitchell were on the news giving their take on the trucking situation.
If one didn't know better, they may have thought that they were watching the national news on ZNS, but in truth, they were watching the Northern Bahamas newscast.
Yes, MP Mitchell and MP Sears were at it again.
It's like they have become the new activists for Grand Bahama. Have they both began their political campaigns early? If so, why have they chosen Grand Bahama to be their stage? Over the past few weeks both politicians have used Grand Bahama as the background to get up on their "soap box" and make their voices heard.
That leaves some Grand Bahamians wondering, if these opposition members(who don't even live in or represent Grand Bahama)have so much to say about issues taking place in Grand Bahama, what are Grand Bahama representatives doing?
Even if the reasons behind opposition members' involvement in Grand Bahama affairs may be questionable, the fact is, they are making their voices heard about the issues and at least have something to say. Where are the Grand Bahama representatives, and why are they so silent? Why are they letting" someone else dig up in their backyard" without saying a word?
Grand Bahama is represented by six members of Parliament, of which three are Cabinet ministers. Why haven't any of these representatives spoken out against Mitchell and Sears'"invasion"of their constituencies?
Is there some political rule both Sears and Mitchell have broken, or is it a free-for-all landscape in which all politicians operate?
MP Fred Mitchell represents Fox Hill and MP Alfred Sears represents Fort Charlotte so why are they in Grand Bahama so frequently these days gaining political mileage? No doubt both men are certainly racking up some serious frequent flyer mileage.
Interestingly enough many Grand Bahamians have been silent on the opposition's move on Grand Bahama. Normally, Grand Bahamians may have made some comments about the frequent presence of these two men and would have demanded answers.
Is the political landscape in Grand Bahama changing, or is it due to the fact that economic hard times are so affecting Grand Bahamians that for this moment in time, they don't care who fights for them or which political party they belong too?
If local representatives choose to remain silent, then it is obvious that at least for now, Fred Mitchell and Alfred Sears have a lot to say in Grand Bahama.
9/21/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Environment Minister Earl Deveaux Free Ride in the Aga Khan's Helicopter Sparks Public Outcry
Free helicopter ride sparks public outcry
By MEGAN REYNOLDS
Tribune Staff Reporter
tribune242 Insight:
mreynolds@tribunemedia.net:
Environment Minister Earl Deveaux emerged from the Aga Khan's helicopter in Marsh Harbour, Abaco, to attend a Friends of the Environment event with the exhilarated grin of an excited schoolboy.
Having taken up Karim Aga Khan IV's offer to travel in the 12-seater AB-139 instead of chartering a flight, Dr Deveaux, his wife, and two friends, were able to ride in the lap of luxury at their convenience, and the Minister would not be late for a land assessment of Bell Island in Exuma the next day.
But as the Aga Khan is the owner of Bell Island who put the development plans in Dr Deveaux's lap, the childlike excitement on the Minister's face, and the front page of The Tribune last week, masked a darker reality.
The extension of such generosity by this enigmatic Persian prince exposed both himself and the Minister to ridicule and speculation over the process of planning applications and approvals.
And when the development is in an area as sensitive area as the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park, it is bound to stir the kind of public debate that hit the airwaves last week.
The 176 square mile park is a jewel of the Bahamas and the world as the oldest protected area of its kind, established in 1958, and a flourishing no-take marine reserve guarded by the Bahamas National Trust (BNT).
The Aga Khan bought the island north of Conch Cut and 17 miles north of Black Point last year and has plans to dredge 8.8 acres of sand from the seabed so he can pull into a newly carved marina on his 150ft yacht.
He also wants the supply barge to be accommodated at a 100ft dock, and have slips for 20 vessels in a 67-acre yacht basin excavated in the existing salt pond, as well as roads across the island.
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on the project was completed by Turrell, Hall and Associates Inc in March, and passed on to the BNT for further input.
But until The Tribune published details of the plans last week, not a word had been mentioned in the public domain.
The developer had paid for the EIA, the Ministry selected the marine and environmental consultants to do it, and the Trust to contribute to the discussion.
All of the correct protocols were in place and the procedures were duly followed, so processes could tick along smoothly, and the developers could quietly move in.
The public were not asked for their opinion because frankly what they think is irrelevant when Bell Island belongs to the Aga Khan, and it is his right to "renovate" it, just as other owners of private islands also have the right to enhance their personal pieces of the country -- including those in the area of the park.
Even the BNT has little say in the matter, according to a statement released by the board last week.
However, it is precisely this top-down approach that raises questions about the possibility for corruption in our planning and development process.
Especially when a billionaire such as the Aga Khan is in a position to woo a Minister in his AB139, and donate $1 million to the BNT. No one is suggesting that this is what happened in this case, but still the perception is there.
Dr Deveaux said: "I do not think a helicopter ride could buy me and I don't think it could alter my opinion."
But his defence asserts one of two things: either it would take more than one helicopter ride to buy him, or he cannot be corrupted.
I am inclined to believe the latter, which is why I think he was dignified in tendering his resignation, which the Prime Minister refused.
But a less noble man in his position surely would not have done the same.
As the Minister himself asserted, he is quite accustomed to travelling in the planes, boats and automobiles of wealthy developers, and being wined and dined at their expense, but he does not let this affect his judgment of planning applications.
He asserted he had travelled to Ginn Sur Mer's Old Bahama Bay development on the Ginn's boat, and saw Baker's Bay from the developer's jet, as I noted how all of the developments he listed in his argument have been approved.
Whether or not he is corruptible, he is vulnerable to speculation of corruption, and that is reason enough for a major change to be introduced and introduced now.
PLP MP Fred Mitchell suggested Cabinet ministers and government departments are provided with their own fleet of air and watercraft to transport them to far-flung sites across the islands on time, avoiding safety issues, or perceived cosiness with developers.
However, Freeport attorney Fred Smith, QC, advocates a change of the law.
He has been pushing for an Environmental Protection Act, and a Freedom of Information Act, to establish an independent Environmental Protection Agency that would facilitate EIAs, provide access to planning applications, and ensure there is full and proper public consultation over all plans submitted to the Ministry.
Such a system would protect everyone's best interests as residents, businesses, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and all other interested parties would be involved in the debate long before the diggers break ground.
As the lawyer representing Responsible Development for Abaco (RDA) in the request for a Judicial Review seeking to stop work at the $105 million Wilson City power plant, Mr Smith showed how BEC had gone ahead with clearing land, paving roads and building the power plant before they even had all the necessary building permits in place.
Although Supreme Court Justice Hartman Longley dismissed the Abaconian's request on Thursday, he at least acknowledged they had genuine reason for complaint.
The public was not aware of the power plant plans until work started, and when BEC finally agreed to hold a public meeting on the matter it served little purpose other than a place for hundreds of angry Abaconians to vent their anger over being so left out of the critical development of their island.
In that case, as with almost every other, communities were disregarded in the planning process from the beginning, as plans received or conceived of by government departments are assessed and approved from the top down, leaving the people demoralised and devoid of power.
A modified Local Government Act and Environmental Protection Act would allow communities to plan developments five, 10 or 20 years in the future, and create a sustainable model that benefits everyone.
Town councils would have more power to draw up bye-laws for their unique communities, impose local taxes to fund local projects and represent the community in national discussions about the development of their island.
"That's what's called decentralisation and democracy," Mr Smith said.
"And in our geographically fractured nation devolution of power is so necessary.
"It will help the Bahamas develop its marine and land resources in a sustainable manner.
"Because it may be that the people in Exuma have some idea about whether the Aga Khan should be able to proceed."
But when it comes to development in the Bahamas, "the rule of the people" defined by democracy is far from the process of granting planning approval.
We leave such matters in the hands of Ministers and wealthy developers, and when projects are approved, we are only left to speculate over what really happened.
"The current construct lends itself to conflicts, not necessarily intentional or intended, but it just does," said Mr Smith.
"And that's why I have been promoting a more transparent and accountable process, an objective process, which protects the Trust, protects the Minister, and protects the government agencies from the kind of criticism that can be made against them in this case."
Sharing the power of choice in a transparent planning process, which welcomes public consultation, would eradicate that speculation not only in principle, but also in practice.
Planning meetings were the bread and butter of the local newspaper I worked at in East London, England, as development plans ricocheted through the communities causing a stir for all who live and work nearby.
Residents and business owners were invited to view plans for around six weeks before they came to the local government council planning committee where they were debated in a lively public meeting that often continued until the early hours of the morning as everyone was invited to have their say.
Each interested person was invited to speak for three minutes about why a Victorian family home should not be converted into flats, why there should not be another generic block of flats built on what little green land they had left, or why the next door neighbour should not be allowed to extend their home into their own back garden or onto a third floor.
And as the plans were considered from all angles, when they were finally rejected or approved, those in protest at least felt they had been heard.
Development affects everybody, and it is a contentious issue in any community, but even more so in land-starved areas such as London, or ecologically precious areas in the sought after islands of the Bahamas.
Some areas need to be preserved for their environmental benefits, as in the national parks, and some need to be developed to create jobs and keep the economy afloat.
But there is only so much land to share; and in a democratic society, the people should really at least appear to have a say in what gets done.
"If we had an Environmental Protection Act and a Freedom of Information Act, we would at least have a measure of comfort that people can't sneak in the back door and start depleting our resources," Mr Smith said.
"I remain sceptical of private developers approaching the government quietly and the government and Cabinet quietly approving in principle or signing Heads of Agreement or making other non-disclosed arrangements with private developers before the public becomes aware of it.
"This is a continued recipe for disaster.
"This is what caused all of the controversy in Baker's Bay, Bimini and all other places in the Bahamas, including the Ginn project in Grand Bahama.
"I am also told there are several projects planned for East End that lies deep within the bosoms of the Cabinet and none of the citizens of Grand Bahama have any idea of what is being planned for our island communities
"If the Environmental Protection Agency could be isolated from political influence by the Cabinet or ruling party, you would have some kind of check and balance from the kind of incestuous inflection which exists when private developers make their clandestine approaches to government for approval in principle, because once approved in principle, then every government agency simply has to rubber stamp whatever is made.
"You don't just do an EIA to rubber stamp a project.
"Because the developers, like a cancer, are going to eat up every pleasant and unique environment that we have unless we manage it.
"And the only way to manage it is for all vested interests to be a part of considering what's happening."
The change would mean it is not just the Minister and his staff deciding whether the Aga Khan can put a development in the national park, and the issue of him flying around in his helicopter would not arise, because he would not be in that position.
There would instead be independent environmental and planning agencies, not beholden to the executive, making the decisions.
And if such agencies are not established in a new legislative framework soon, the Bahama islands and the resources we all share will gradually disappear in a method that is beyond our control, as those who can afford it break off pieces of our finite islands for themselves and leave the Bahamian people with fractured fragments of their country and no explanation about what happened, and where it all went.
September 20, 2010
tribune242 Insight
By MEGAN REYNOLDS
Tribune Staff Reporter
tribune242 Insight:
mreynolds@tribunemedia.net:
Environment Minister Earl Deveaux emerged from the Aga Khan's helicopter in Marsh Harbour, Abaco, to attend a Friends of the Environment event with the exhilarated grin of an excited schoolboy.
Having taken up Karim Aga Khan IV's offer to travel in the 12-seater AB-139 instead of chartering a flight, Dr Deveaux, his wife, and two friends, were able to ride in the lap of luxury at their convenience, and the Minister would not be late for a land assessment of Bell Island in Exuma the next day.
But as the Aga Khan is the owner of Bell Island who put the development plans in Dr Deveaux's lap, the childlike excitement on the Minister's face, and the front page of The Tribune last week, masked a darker reality.
The extension of such generosity by this enigmatic Persian prince exposed both himself and the Minister to ridicule and speculation over the process of planning applications and approvals.
And when the development is in an area as sensitive area as the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park, it is bound to stir the kind of public debate that hit the airwaves last week.
The 176 square mile park is a jewel of the Bahamas and the world as the oldest protected area of its kind, established in 1958, and a flourishing no-take marine reserve guarded by the Bahamas National Trust (BNT).
The Aga Khan bought the island north of Conch Cut and 17 miles north of Black Point last year and has plans to dredge 8.8 acres of sand from the seabed so he can pull into a newly carved marina on his 150ft yacht.
He also wants the supply barge to be accommodated at a 100ft dock, and have slips for 20 vessels in a 67-acre yacht basin excavated in the existing salt pond, as well as roads across the island.
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on the project was completed by Turrell, Hall and Associates Inc in March, and passed on to the BNT for further input.
But until The Tribune published details of the plans last week, not a word had been mentioned in the public domain.
The developer had paid for the EIA, the Ministry selected the marine and environmental consultants to do it, and the Trust to contribute to the discussion.
All of the correct protocols were in place and the procedures were duly followed, so processes could tick along smoothly, and the developers could quietly move in.
The public were not asked for their opinion because frankly what they think is irrelevant when Bell Island belongs to the Aga Khan, and it is his right to "renovate" it, just as other owners of private islands also have the right to enhance their personal pieces of the country -- including those in the area of the park.
Even the BNT has little say in the matter, according to a statement released by the board last week.
However, it is precisely this top-down approach that raises questions about the possibility for corruption in our planning and development process.
Especially when a billionaire such as the Aga Khan is in a position to woo a Minister in his AB139, and donate $1 million to the BNT. No one is suggesting that this is what happened in this case, but still the perception is there.
Dr Deveaux said: "I do not think a helicopter ride could buy me and I don't think it could alter my opinion."
But his defence asserts one of two things: either it would take more than one helicopter ride to buy him, or he cannot be corrupted.
I am inclined to believe the latter, which is why I think he was dignified in tendering his resignation, which the Prime Minister refused.
But a less noble man in his position surely would not have done the same.
As the Minister himself asserted, he is quite accustomed to travelling in the planes, boats and automobiles of wealthy developers, and being wined and dined at their expense, but he does not let this affect his judgment of planning applications.
He asserted he had travelled to Ginn Sur Mer's Old Bahama Bay development on the Ginn's boat, and saw Baker's Bay from the developer's jet, as I noted how all of the developments he listed in his argument have been approved.
Whether or not he is corruptible, he is vulnerable to speculation of corruption, and that is reason enough for a major change to be introduced and introduced now.
PLP MP Fred Mitchell suggested Cabinet ministers and government departments are provided with their own fleet of air and watercraft to transport them to far-flung sites across the islands on time, avoiding safety issues, or perceived cosiness with developers.
However, Freeport attorney Fred Smith, QC, advocates a change of the law.
He has been pushing for an Environmental Protection Act, and a Freedom of Information Act, to establish an independent Environmental Protection Agency that would facilitate EIAs, provide access to planning applications, and ensure there is full and proper public consultation over all plans submitted to the Ministry.
Such a system would protect everyone's best interests as residents, businesses, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and all other interested parties would be involved in the debate long before the diggers break ground.
As the lawyer representing Responsible Development for Abaco (RDA) in the request for a Judicial Review seeking to stop work at the $105 million Wilson City power plant, Mr Smith showed how BEC had gone ahead with clearing land, paving roads and building the power plant before they even had all the necessary building permits in place.
Although Supreme Court Justice Hartman Longley dismissed the Abaconian's request on Thursday, he at least acknowledged they had genuine reason for complaint.
The public was not aware of the power plant plans until work started, and when BEC finally agreed to hold a public meeting on the matter it served little purpose other than a place for hundreds of angry Abaconians to vent their anger over being so left out of the critical development of their island.
In that case, as with almost every other, communities were disregarded in the planning process from the beginning, as plans received or conceived of by government departments are assessed and approved from the top down, leaving the people demoralised and devoid of power.
A modified Local Government Act and Environmental Protection Act would allow communities to plan developments five, 10 or 20 years in the future, and create a sustainable model that benefits everyone.
Town councils would have more power to draw up bye-laws for their unique communities, impose local taxes to fund local projects and represent the community in national discussions about the development of their island.
"That's what's called decentralisation and democracy," Mr Smith said.
"And in our geographically fractured nation devolution of power is so necessary.
"It will help the Bahamas develop its marine and land resources in a sustainable manner.
"Because it may be that the people in Exuma have some idea about whether the Aga Khan should be able to proceed."
But when it comes to development in the Bahamas, "the rule of the people" defined by democracy is far from the process of granting planning approval.
We leave such matters in the hands of Ministers and wealthy developers, and when projects are approved, we are only left to speculate over what really happened.
"The current construct lends itself to conflicts, not necessarily intentional or intended, but it just does," said Mr Smith.
"And that's why I have been promoting a more transparent and accountable process, an objective process, which protects the Trust, protects the Minister, and protects the government agencies from the kind of criticism that can be made against them in this case."
Sharing the power of choice in a transparent planning process, which welcomes public consultation, would eradicate that speculation not only in principle, but also in practice.
Planning meetings were the bread and butter of the local newspaper I worked at in East London, England, as development plans ricocheted through the communities causing a stir for all who live and work nearby.
Residents and business owners were invited to view plans for around six weeks before they came to the local government council planning committee where they were debated in a lively public meeting that often continued until the early hours of the morning as everyone was invited to have their say.
Each interested person was invited to speak for three minutes about why a Victorian family home should not be converted into flats, why there should not be another generic block of flats built on what little green land they had left, or why the next door neighbour should not be allowed to extend their home into their own back garden or onto a third floor.
And as the plans were considered from all angles, when they were finally rejected or approved, those in protest at least felt they had been heard.
Development affects everybody, and it is a contentious issue in any community, but even more so in land-starved areas such as London, or ecologically precious areas in the sought after islands of the Bahamas.
Some areas need to be preserved for their environmental benefits, as in the national parks, and some need to be developed to create jobs and keep the economy afloat.
But there is only so much land to share; and in a democratic society, the people should really at least appear to have a say in what gets done.
"If we had an Environmental Protection Act and a Freedom of Information Act, we would at least have a measure of comfort that people can't sneak in the back door and start depleting our resources," Mr Smith said.
"I remain sceptical of private developers approaching the government quietly and the government and Cabinet quietly approving in principle or signing Heads of Agreement or making other non-disclosed arrangements with private developers before the public becomes aware of it.
"This is a continued recipe for disaster.
"This is what caused all of the controversy in Baker's Bay, Bimini and all other places in the Bahamas, including the Ginn project in Grand Bahama.
"I am also told there are several projects planned for East End that lies deep within the bosoms of the Cabinet and none of the citizens of Grand Bahama have any idea of what is being planned for our island communities
"If the Environmental Protection Agency could be isolated from political influence by the Cabinet or ruling party, you would have some kind of check and balance from the kind of incestuous inflection which exists when private developers make their clandestine approaches to government for approval in principle, because once approved in principle, then every government agency simply has to rubber stamp whatever is made.
"You don't just do an EIA to rubber stamp a project.
"Because the developers, like a cancer, are going to eat up every pleasant and unique environment that we have unless we manage it.
"And the only way to manage it is for all vested interests to be a part of considering what's happening."
The change would mean it is not just the Minister and his staff deciding whether the Aga Khan can put a development in the national park, and the issue of him flying around in his helicopter would not arise, because he would not be in that position.
There would instead be independent environmental and planning agencies, not beholden to the executive, making the decisions.
And if such agencies are not established in a new legislative framework soon, the Bahama islands and the resources we all share will gradually disappear in a method that is beyond our control, as those who can afford it break off pieces of our finite islands for themselves and leave the Bahamian people with fractured fragments of their country and no explanation about what happened, and where it all went.
September 20, 2010
tribune242 Insight
Chinese Criminals to Work on The Baha Mar Project: Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Nassau Responds to Allegations
Speculation that Chinese criminals may work on Baha Mar 'baseless'
By MEGAN REYNOLDS
Tribune Staff Reporter
mreynolds@tribunemedia.net:
SPECULATION that thousands of Chinese criminals will be brought in to build Baha Mar have been called baseless allegations by the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Nassau.
Concerns raised in the local press suggested the Chinese government has chosen convicts from its overcrowded prisons to work on foreign projects and may do the same when they bring in 8,150 workers to construct Baha Mar.
Editorial writers called on government to exercise due diligence in vetting their work permits if the foreign labour is approved as concerns stemmed from an article published in a Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, which reported that China "has devised a novel strategy to relieve pressure on its overcrowded prisons: Use convicts as labourers on overseas projects in the developing world." It gave as example projects in Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Africa where Chinese labour was used.
But the suggestion that The People's Republic of China may use the $2.6 billion Baha Mar project to export criminals to the Bahamas provoked a clear clarification of the facts from the Chinese embassy.
Liu Liqun, second secretary and press officer at the Embassy of the People's Republic of China, said that the allegations are unfounded.
"The Chinese Embassy fully respects each and every view expressed surrounding the Baha Mar project," he stated.
"However, such groundless accusations, which insult not only China, but also those countries having cooperation with us, go beyond tolerance."
Mr Liqun said that the Chinese contractors who have been working tirelessly on the Bahamas National Stadium project, "are disciplined and diligent, winning full respect and high praises from the Bahamian society."
PLP MP Fred Mitchell suggested the reason for speculation over the integrity of Chinese workers could stem from the FNM government's failure to be clear with the public on the issue.
He said: "The government is not exercising any leadership with this project and I think it's deliberate because they want to scuttle the project and that lets in speculation about this or that.
"I think some of the criticism has been exaggerated, but each view should be seriously considered by the authorities to see whether or not it is possible to deal with the concerns.
"However they seem to have the country flailing around wildly without any sense of direction."
A labour resolution tabled by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham in the House of Assembly has paved the way for the approval of work permits for the 8,150 Chinese workers and parliamentarians are expected to debate and vote on the resolution this Wednesday or Thursday.
The ratio of foreign workers to Bahamian employees at Baha Mar is expected to be 71 per cent foreign to 29 per cent Bahamian during the construction phase as agreed in the partnership deal between Baha Mar, the China Export-Import Bank and China State Construction.
Mr Mitchell said the anticipated parliamentary vote is ludicrous as it is the government's responsibility to decide whether the Chinese employees should be permitted to work at Baha Mar or not.
"What business is it of ours to ask Parliament whether or not the government should grant work permits?" he asked.
"I think the whole notion is ludicrous.
"The Prime Minister is looking for political cover because he's afraid to make the decision."
Baha Mar estimates it will take around five years to build six hotels with around 3,500 rooms and condominiums, a 100,000 sq ft casino, 200,000 sq ft of convention facilities, a 20-acre beach and pool experience, an 18-hole golf course and a 60,000 sq ft retail village in Cable Beach.
The project is expected to inject an estimated $1 billion into the Bahamas Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and create almost 11,000 permanent jobs for Bahamians.
September 20, 2010
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)