Many Family Islands in danger of being abandoned
thenassauguardian editorial
The results of the 2010 Census has finally been released and to no one's surprise, there has been an 18 percent hike in the number of people in New Providence.
The report has also revealed that there has been significant population decreases in a number of the Family Islands, namely Andros, Berry islands, Inagua, Cat Island and one or two others.
We really didn't need a census to point that out, because anyone traveling to the Family Islands over the past five years would have noticed a steady decline in the number of people on those islands.
To make matters worse, those numbers involved mostly young people leaving the islands. Those middle-aged people who opted to leave their places of birth more than likely did so out of financial necessity, moving to Nassau to seek employment opportunities.
For the most part it is our young people who are abandoning the islands and looking to"live it up"in Nassau.
Of course, on the surface, one cannot blame them.
When you consider the lack of any major developments within the Family Islands, it leaves very little choices of job opportunities for our youngsters.
The government may not feel any weight about these numbers and may disregard these significant declines, however, it cannot be ignored.
If we want to see these islands be preserved for Bahamians, something must be done to not only keep the little amounts of young people in those islands there, but to try and encourage others who may have left to return and contribute to the development of those islands.
More has to be done to boost the economies and the opportunities for people within our Family Islands. We have said this over and over, but apparently, this is falling on deaf ears.
These latest figures confirm that no one is listening.
If we continue to ignore our Family Islands and the development of those islands, one day we will look up and they will be overrun by foreigners or deserted.
Outsiders, who see the value of our islands will begin to move to those places, take over and even offer to buy those islands. The past has already proven that in some cases governments are eager to sell cays and certain parts of our islands.
When the older people who now inhabit our islands have passed on, with no young people there to move in and take over and positively contribute, what will become of our islands?
This is an issue we must take seriously.
But as long as the government and others continue to thrive on the notion that Nassau is The Bahamas, one day that may just be the only island we have left.
And with an already overcrowded population in Nassau, how much more can the island of 21 x 7 take?
The government must move quickly to preserve our Family Islands. We must divert more investors to the islands to provide more opportunities for those people on those islands to find employment.
Then, to make it livable, the proper infrastructure must also be put in place to sustain those developments and any proposed growth.
10/20/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
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.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Thursday, October 21, 2010
The victims of crime in The Bahamas
The victims of crime
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas should not become comfortable with, or used to, chronic delays in its criminal justice system. Impediments to justice are a further indignity to those who suffer at the hands of the violent. The vicious and debased things done to mothers, daughters, fathers and sons, sometimes during their last moments on earth, occupy media headlines for a day. Then, they are forgotten in the maze of confusion and disorganization called the Bahamian criminal justice system.
On Monday night armed men robbed and threatened to kill Bishop Elkin Symonette of Ebenezer Mission Baptist Church and his wife following a prayer meeting. The robbers later attempted to burn down the church.
During a series of armed home invasions in the Chippingham/Fort Charlotte area earlier in the year a woman was raped.
That woman will never be the same. Rape is a violation of the body, soul and mind. And sadly, based on the backlog of cases before the Supreme Court, there is no guarantee that the Office of the Attorney General will prosecute that case anytime soon.
Three men were charged in a magistrates'court early in July with burglary, robbery and rape. The courts will decide if they are guilty or not.
The sharp rise in the level of crime in this country is tragic. It's heartbreaking.
It is even more heartbreaking when you hear what actually happened to the victims; the level of fear that remains with those who survive; the depth of the loss felt by family members.
Bishop Symonette's wife, Inez, said the fear experienced during the robbery was inexplicable.
"I can't explain how I felt,"she said during a Nassau Guardian interview.
It is remarkable that the heirs of men and women who argued against the inadequacy of colonial rule would so poorly manage the criminal justice system.
Cases have been badly investigated and many not prosecuted.
Meanwhile, the victims and families of victims sit enraged and frustrated.
There are two logical consequences to the continued rise of violent crime in The Bahamas. One is vigilantism. Those who come to conclude that the criminal justice system is not concerned about their pain may soon, in greater numbers, seek their own justice.
The other consequence should concern our ruling class.
The poor, the working and middle classes of this country have no private security or police guards to protect them at night.
They have been preyed upon.
If solutions are not found soon to our crime problem, more and more of the privileged will also fall prey to the violators.
It would be a sad development in our country's history if this is required for change to take place.
10/19/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas should not become comfortable with, or used to, chronic delays in its criminal justice system. Impediments to justice are a further indignity to those who suffer at the hands of the violent. The vicious and debased things done to mothers, daughters, fathers and sons, sometimes during their last moments on earth, occupy media headlines for a day. Then, they are forgotten in the maze of confusion and disorganization called the Bahamian criminal justice system.
On Monday night armed men robbed and threatened to kill Bishop Elkin Symonette of Ebenezer Mission Baptist Church and his wife following a prayer meeting. The robbers later attempted to burn down the church.
During a series of armed home invasions in the Chippingham/Fort Charlotte area earlier in the year a woman was raped.
That woman will never be the same. Rape is a violation of the body, soul and mind. And sadly, based on the backlog of cases before the Supreme Court, there is no guarantee that the Office of the Attorney General will prosecute that case anytime soon.
Three men were charged in a magistrates'court early in July with burglary, robbery and rape. The courts will decide if they are guilty or not.
The sharp rise in the level of crime in this country is tragic. It's heartbreaking.
It is even more heartbreaking when you hear what actually happened to the victims; the level of fear that remains with those who survive; the depth of the loss felt by family members.
Bishop Symonette's wife, Inez, said the fear experienced during the robbery was inexplicable.
"I can't explain how I felt,"she said during a Nassau Guardian interview.
It is remarkable that the heirs of men and women who argued against the inadequacy of colonial rule would so poorly manage the criminal justice system.
Cases have been badly investigated and many not prosecuted.
Meanwhile, the victims and families of victims sit enraged and frustrated.
There are two logical consequences to the continued rise of violent crime in The Bahamas. One is vigilantism. Those who come to conclude that the criminal justice system is not concerned about their pain may soon, in greater numbers, seek their own justice.
The other consequence should concern our ruling class.
The poor, the working and middle classes of this country have no private security or police guards to protect them at night.
They have been preyed upon.
If solutions are not found soon to our crime problem, more and more of the privileged will also fall prey to the violators.
It would be a sad development in our country's history if this is required for change to take place.
10/19/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Bahamas' crime wave must stop
The crime wave must stop
thenassauguardian editorial
It seems as though everywhere you go, crime like an ugly monster, raises its head negatively affecting society and taking away the comforts of safety enjoyed by so many Bahamians over the years.
Even though careful steps have been taken by the leaders of the country to ensure that offenders are brought to justice, there is still a lack of respect by certain criminals in the country, who feel they are above the law and continue to engage in illicit behavior, a number of them inflicting undue pain on innocent people through violent acts.
Some acts are so brutal that there seems to be no regard or concern for human life.
Apart from the number of cases in New Providence where people have been tragically gunned down or stabbed to death after violent altercations with others, Grand Bahama has seen its own share of unexplained and brutal murders that have left many residents in shock.
Just yesterday, a man was brutally stabbed in a crowded bank in front of numerous witnesses.
According to police reports and eyewitness accounts, a man who appeared to be in his mid 30's was preparing to be served by a teller when he was approached by a younger man who began arguing with him.
The argument which was reportedly over money, intensified when the two men began choking and punching each other. The younger man reportedly pulled out a weapon and began stabbing the older man about the body.
Then on Thursday, a woman was attacked outside the Rand Memorial Hospital and her jewelry snatched from her neck. According to Officer-in-charge of the Central Division Superintendent Macktavaus Daniels,"People are becoming violent. We had an incident just this morning where a lady had dropped somebody at the Rand Memorial Hospital and a guy ran up to her, punched her and yanked her chain off her neck,"he said."And so that's where this thing(crime)is going now."
While these incidents represent a small fraction of the number of cases that take place in Grand Bahama and the northern region, one cannot argue the severity of the crimes and the awful disregard for the lives that were lost.
The sad thing about this whole situation is that whether we want to admit it or not, there will be more incidents to report this year as we head into the Christmas holiday.
There will be some that will escape our hearing and others, so brutal, we will wonder if such acts will ever end. The bone-shivering truth is, they will not stop.
So what should the government and concerned citizens do to help stop it?
Some say enforce the laws and resume hanging. Others say always impose the maximum punishment as dictated by law. The reality is, something must be done. During these harsh financial times, and with the tourism industry of the country suffering much loss, The Bahamas cannot afford to be known as a destination where crime is out of hand.
As we move toward a new year, it is time for those in authority to consider and implement new strategies. The criminals are not backing down, they are getting more aggressive everyday, therefore so must the system that brings them to justice.
10/16/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
It seems as though everywhere you go, crime like an ugly monster, raises its head negatively affecting society and taking away the comforts of safety enjoyed by so many Bahamians over the years.
Even though careful steps have been taken by the leaders of the country to ensure that offenders are brought to justice, there is still a lack of respect by certain criminals in the country, who feel they are above the law and continue to engage in illicit behavior, a number of them inflicting undue pain on innocent people through violent acts.
Some acts are so brutal that there seems to be no regard or concern for human life.
Apart from the number of cases in New Providence where people have been tragically gunned down or stabbed to death after violent altercations with others, Grand Bahama has seen its own share of unexplained and brutal murders that have left many residents in shock.
Just yesterday, a man was brutally stabbed in a crowded bank in front of numerous witnesses.
According to police reports and eyewitness accounts, a man who appeared to be in his mid 30's was preparing to be served by a teller when he was approached by a younger man who began arguing with him.
The argument which was reportedly over money, intensified when the two men began choking and punching each other. The younger man reportedly pulled out a weapon and began stabbing the older man about the body.
Then on Thursday, a woman was attacked outside the Rand Memorial Hospital and her jewelry snatched from her neck. According to Officer-in-charge of the Central Division Superintendent Macktavaus Daniels,"People are becoming violent. We had an incident just this morning where a lady had dropped somebody at the Rand Memorial Hospital and a guy ran up to her, punched her and yanked her chain off her neck,"he said."And so that's where this thing(crime)is going now."
While these incidents represent a small fraction of the number of cases that take place in Grand Bahama and the northern region, one cannot argue the severity of the crimes and the awful disregard for the lives that were lost.
The sad thing about this whole situation is that whether we want to admit it or not, there will be more incidents to report this year as we head into the Christmas holiday.
There will be some that will escape our hearing and others, so brutal, we will wonder if such acts will ever end. The bone-shivering truth is, they will not stop.
So what should the government and concerned citizens do to help stop it?
Some say enforce the laws and resume hanging. Others say always impose the maximum punishment as dictated by law. The reality is, something must be done. During these harsh financial times, and with the tourism industry of the country suffering much loss, The Bahamas cannot afford to be known as a destination where crime is out of hand.
As we move toward a new year, it is time for those in authority to consider and implement new strategies. The criminals are not backing down, they are getting more aggressive everyday, therefore so must the system that brings them to justice.
10/16/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham not satisfied with the hotel brand arrangements that Baha Mar has made to date
PM CONCERNED ABOUT BAHA MAR BRANDING FOCUS
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said yesterday that he is not satisfied with the hotel brand arrangements that Baha Mar has made to date.
Last month Ingraham expressed concerns about how Baha Mar would be branded and how it will fill so many new rooms, when for a second year it has had to temporarily close one of its hotels because of low demand.
Since then Baha Mar announced partnerships with three hotel brands.
Asked if those announcements appeased his concerns, Ingraham said,"It does not at all."
"If you recall when the Baha Mar deal was announced there was supposed to be a partnership with Harrah's, a major casino hotel company,"Ingraham told reporters yesterday during a tour of the Albany project."Harrah's was going to put in over $200 million in cash as its equity... All that I've read in the newspaper so far talks about who is going to manage the hotels[for Baha Mar]. It is critical for there to be equity partners-owners who are in the hotel business and who are major players, not managers.
"Managers come dime a dozen. You see them all the time. They are the easiest thing to pick up in the world-managers-because they have nothing in it other than collecting their money at the top,"Ingraham continued.
Baha Mar announced yesterday that it signed a letter of intent with Hyatt Hotels Corporation to operate and manage the planned 700-room Grand Hyatt. Baha Mar Ltd. also selected Hyatt as its timeshare partner in the project, which will initially include 50 units as part of the first phase, with plans for expansion in subsequent phases, the company said in a statement.
Earlier it announced that Rosewood Hotels and Resorts will operate and manage the 200-room luxury hotel that Baha Mar will construct and Morgans Hotel Group will operate and manage the planned 300-room luxury lifestyle hotel.
In addition to concerns surrounding the hotels'branding, Ingraham said the government remains concerned about the project's controversial labor component.
Baha Mar has requested 8,150 work permits for the project. The current deal requires that the core of the project be built exclusively by foreign labor.
The government intends to the take the labor issue directly to the source when Ingraham travels to China later this moth.
Ingraham said he is meeting with China State Construction Engineering Corporation and the China Export-Import Bank to discuss the project.
"We told the China State Construction Engineering Corporation from the first time we saw them more than a year ago that it was not possible to have that number of foreign workers on a job site with the Bahamian content being so low. Nothing has changed. We've been telling them that for more than a year.
"It appears that some people either don't take us seriously or they apparently think that we are so desperate that we will do whatever we are asked to do. But our strength is not weakened,"Ingraham said.
Asked what the government would do if the company refuses to amend the deal, Ingraham said the government will"figure that out"if it comes to that.
Notwithstanding the government's concerns, Ingraham said the project would be good for The Bahamas.
"We are obviously very pleased that the bank is willing to invest more than$2 billion in The Bahamas. That will be a tremendous boost for our economy. We are concerned about making sure the maximum benefit could be derived for Bahamians and for the economy of The Bahamas,"he said.
But Ingraham said the project has to be done in"such a way that it can be sustainable in the long run and have occupancy levels that are not going to threaten what we have."
"We wouldn't want(to be)a dog with the bone in his mouth and see a shadow in the water and let[the bone]go in order to pick that shadow up. We want to make sure that the next bone is capable of being developed and operated in a way whereby they can both be successful in th context of The Bahamas. That's our interest in these projects."
In a statement yesterday Baha Mar said It is anticipated that the development will make "The Bahamas one of the premier tourist locations in the world, drawing millions of vacationers and business travelers each year to the resort's six hotels."
"With almost 3,500 rooms and condos, the largest casino in the Caribbean, the largest convention center in The Bahamas, a world-class golf course, retail village and much more, Baha Mar Resort represents the Caribbean's largest single-phase destination resort. Baha Mar will employ approximately 4,000 Bahamians over the life of the construction period, which is expected to last nearly four years. Once the resort is complete, approximately 98 percent of the staff will be Bahamian nationals, representing some 7,000 jobs for Bahamians."
10/19/2010
thenassauguardian
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said yesterday that he is not satisfied with the hotel brand arrangements that Baha Mar has made to date.
Last month Ingraham expressed concerns about how Baha Mar would be branded and how it will fill so many new rooms, when for a second year it has had to temporarily close one of its hotels because of low demand.
Since then Baha Mar announced partnerships with three hotel brands.
Asked if those announcements appeased his concerns, Ingraham said,"It does not at all."
"If you recall when the Baha Mar deal was announced there was supposed to be a partnership with Harrah's, a major casino hotel company,"Ingraham told reporters yesterday during a tour of the Albany project."Harrah's was going to put in over $200 million in cash as its equity... All that I've read in the newspaper so far talks about who is going to manage the hotels[for Baha Mar]. It is critical for there to be equity partners-owners who are in the hotel business and who are major players, not managers.
"Managers come dime a dozen. You see them all the time. They are the easiest thing to pick up in the world-managers-because they have nothing in it other than collecting their money at the top,"Ingraham continued.
Baha Mar announced yesterday that it signed a letter of intent with Hyatt Hotels Corporation to operate and manage the planned 700-room Grand Hyatt. Baha Mar Ltd. also selected Hyatt as its timeshare partner in the project, which will initially include 50 units as part of the first phase, with plans for expansion in subsequent phases, the company said in a statement.
Earlier it announced that Rosewood Hotels and Resorts will operate and manage the 200-room luxury hotel that Baha Mar will construct and Morgans Hotel Group will operate and manage the planned 300-room luxury lifestyle hotel.
In addition to concerns surrounding the hotels'branding, Ingraham said the government remains concerned about the project's controversial labor component.
Baha Mar has requested 8,150 work permits for the project. The current deal requires that the core of the project be built exclusively by foreign labor.
The government intends to the take the labor issue directly to the source when Ingraham travels to China later this moth.
Ingraham said he is meeting with China State Construction Engineering Corporation and the China Export-Import Bank to discuss the project.
"We told the China State Construction Engineering Corporation from the first time we saw them more than a year ago that it was not possible to have that number of foreign workers on a job site with the Bahamian content being so low. Nothing has changed. We've been telling them that for more than a year.
"It appears that some people either don't take us seriously or they apparently think that we are so desperate that we will do whatever we are asked to do. But our strength is not weakened,"Ingraham said.
Asked what the government would do if the company refuses to amend the deal, Ingraham said the government will"figure that out"if it comes to that.
Notwithstanding the government's concerns, Ingraham said the project would be good for The Bahamas.
"We are obviously very pleased that the bank is willing to invest more than$2 billion in The Bahamas. That will be a tremendous boost for our economy. We are concerned about making sure the maximum benefit could be derived for Bahamians and for the economy of The Bahamas,"he said.
But Ingraham said the project has to be done in"such a way that it can be sustainable in the long run and have occupancy levels that are not going to threaten what we have."
"We wouldn't want(to be)a dog with the bone in his mouth and see a shadow in the water and let[the bone]go in order to pick that shadow up. We want to make sure that the next bone is capable of being developed and operated in a way whereby they can both be successful in th context of The Bahamas. That's our interest in these projects."
In a statement yesterday Baha Mar said It is anticipated that the development will make "The Bahamas one of the premier tourist locations in the world, drawing millions of vacationers and business travelers each year to the resort's six hotels."
"With almost 3,500 rooms and condos, the largest casino in the Caribbean, the largest convention center in The Bahamas, a world-class golf course, retail village and much more, Baha Mar Resort represents the Caribbean's largest single-phase destination resort. Baha Mar will employ approximately 4,000 Bahamians over the life of the construction period, which is expected to last nearly four years. Once the resort is complete, approximately 98 percent of the staff will be Bahamian nationals, representing some 7,000 jobs for Bahamians."
10/19/2010
thenassauguardian
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Philip “Brave” Davis - The Opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Deputy Leader - Questions The Governing Free National Movement (FNM) Road to Nowhere
Hon. Philip “Brave” Davis M.P.
Deputy Leader of The Progressive Liberal Party
HOW MUCH FOR SEVEN MILES OF AIRPORT HIGHWAY?
The Tribune of 4th October 2010 reported “The prime minister formally signed agreements for the $70.8 million highway project with two China State Companies; the China Export Import Bank and the China Construction Company on Thursday at the British Colonial Hilton” referring to the signings on the previous Thursday, 30th September 2010.
Since the government decided to give a contract to a foreign state owned construction company to build some seven miles of highway from the airport to the roundabout at Farrington Road, Thompson Blvd, and JFK Drive at some $71Million after passing a resolution in the House of Assembly the day before to borrow $58Million from the foreign state owned China Export-Import Bank I have tried to understand what Citizens of The Bahamas were getting for our investment of @ $10,000,000 (TEN MILLION DOLLARS) PER MILE OF ROAD!!!!
Minister Zhivargo Laing said during the debate on the government’s resolution for the loan from the Chinese Export-Import Bank, in the House of Assembly that the government HAD to use the Chinese state owned China Construction company to build the road BECAUSE we are borrowing $58,000,000 from the Chinese government owned bank at a very low interest rate.
In the House of Assembly and at the subsequent press conference for the contract signing, a lot of colourful renderings were shown.
I went to the government’s website and the Works & Transport Ministry’s website in search of the airport highway description in the hope that I could begin to fathom WHY seven miles of a four lane highway with utilities being placed underground, government acquired private land (I presume), and, landscaping along the highway, should cost $10,000,000 per mile. The government has not yet put the information online.
In the absence of information to the contrary, I concluded that the same road contractors hired by the government to build the road are the people who designed the road and calculated the cost of the works to be done. There has been no competitive bid on this massive expenditure. How does the Bahamian tax payer know that she or he is getting value for money? If we are overpaying to build the road then the low interest rate has no real value. Maybe Minister Laing would kindly explain this?
Further, even if the work that is to be done really does cost $10,000,000 per mile for a total of $71,000,000, what were the alternatives considered by the government? Do we need to spend $71,000,000 to build seven miles of landscaped road way from the airport to Farrington Road? How is the Bahamian public to receive benefit for their investment?
I call on those Bahamians with the technical and financial backgrounds to guide us on a full appreciation of this matter to weigh in on the issue.
The government is not supposed to be the overlord but, rather, it should be the servant of the People answerable to the People.
14th October, 2010
myplp.com
Deputy Leader of The Progressive Liberal Party
HOW MUCH FOR SEVEN MILES OF AIRPORT HIGHWAY?
The Tribune of 4th October 2010 reported “The prime minister formally signed agreements for the $70.8 million highway project with two China State Companies; the China Export Import Bank and the China Construction Company on Thursday at the British Colonial Hilton” referring to the signings on the previous Thursday, 30th September 2010.
Since the government decided to give a contract to a foreign state owned construction company to build some seven miles of highway from the airport to the roundabout at Farrington Road, Thompson Blvd, and JFK Drive at some $71Million after passing a resolution in the House of Assembly the day before to borrow $58Million from the foreign state owned China Export-Import Bank I have tried to understand what Citizens of The Bahamas were getting for our investment of @ $10,000,000 (TEN MILLION DOLLARS) PER MILE OF ROAD!!!!
Minister Zhivargo Laing said during the debate on the government’s resolution for the loan from the Chinese Export-Import Bank, in the House of Assembly that the government HAD to use the Chinese state owned China Construction company to build the road BECAUSE we are borrowing $58,000,000 from the Chinese government owned bank at a very low interest rate.
In the House of Assembly and at the subsequent press conference for the contract signing, a lot of colourful renderings were shown.
I went to the government’s website and the Works & Transport Ministry’s website in search of the airport highway description in the hope that I could begin to fathom WHY seven miles of a four lane highway with utilities being placed underground, government acquired private land (I presume), and, landscaping along the highway, should cost $10,000,000 per mile. The government has not yet put the information online.
In the absence of information to the contrary, I concluded that the same road contractors hired by the government to build the road are the people who designed the road and calculated the cost of the works to be done. There has been no competitive bid on this massive expenditure. How does the Bahamian tax payer know that she or he is getting value for money? If we are overpaying to build the road then the low interest rate has no real value. Maybe Minister Laing would kindly explain this?
Further, even if the work that is to be done really does cost $10,000,000 per mile for a total of $71,000,000, what were the alternatives considered by the government? Do we need to spend $71,000,000 to build seven miles of landscaped road way from the airport to Farrington Road? How is the Bahamian public to receive benefit for their investment?
I call on those Bahamians with the technical and financial backgrounds to guide us on a full appreciation of this matter to weigh in on the issue.
The government is not supposed to be the overlord but, rather, it should be the servant of the People answerable to the People.
14th October, 2010
myplp.com
Friday, October 15, 2010
Baha Mar Drama – (Part 2)
by Simon
To understand the potentially colossal mistake the PLP made in handing over the redevelopment of Cable Beach to Baha Mar, some historical background is necessary.
Before Baha Mar there was Cable Beach. The area derived its name after a telegraph cable line connecting The Bahamas with the rest of the world came ashore at Goodman’s Bay in 1892. One of the first people to receive a cable was the proprietor of the Royal Victoria Hotel.
Fast-forward some half a century and the area with its miles of pristine beach would surpass downtown Nassau as a major site for the expansion of the hotel sector. There was the Balmoral and the Bahamas Country Club.
In 1954, the Emerald Beach became the first fully air-conditioned hotel. Boasting 300 rooms and New Providence’s first convention centre, the ultramodern hotel came in at a price tag of $3.5 million. With the opening of the Nassau Beach Hotel on the strip in 1959 -- along with a Howard Johnson restaurant -- Cable Beach was helping to set the pace for the tourism industry and hotel sector.
In many ways, Cable Beach became the gold standard, even receiving the moniker, “the Bahamian Riviera”. Then, through the 1970s to the 1990s, the PLP made a series of fateful decisions that would prove disastrous for Cable Beach and end up costing the Pubic Treasury hundreds of millions if not more.
UNAPPEALING
This included construction of the monstrously unappealing, aesthetic nightmare that became the Crystal Palace Hotel, as well as the environmental damage that may have been caused through the erection of one of the hotel’s towers.
Re-elected in 2002, a new PLP Government would make another fateful and potentially disastrous decision about Cable Beach, reinforcing its record of economic incompetence and mismanagement. Much of the same PLP culture which proved disastrous for Cable Beach under Sir Lynden has resurfaced under Perry Christie.
But back to the 1970s. The then PLP Government purchased three major hotels on Cable Beach: the Sonesta Beach Hotel, the Balmoral and the Hyatt Emerald Beach. The Pindling administration also set up the Hotel Corporation, with Sir Lynden predicting that once the Corporation was doing well financially, shares would be offered to Bahamians.
His prediction was way off the mark. Indeed, the Hotel Corporation would come to have a checkered history, with Sir Lynden serving as Chairman at various junctures. In 1991, Carnival Cruise Lines, the owner-operator of the Crystal Palace Resort experienced considerable losses and threatened to either pull out of the development or declare bankruptcy.
In volume two of her major history of The Bahamas, Dr. Gail Saunders details how the Hotel Corporation responded to this threat:
“The Hotel Corporation, already accused of making an initial ‘sweetheart deal’ with Carnival and using the Crystal Palace to ‘featherbed’ PLP supporters, agreed to yet another bailout. Adding to massive debts, incurred through an unbusinesslike combination of takeovers and extravagant new building, the Hotel Corporation took a 40 percent stake in the Crystal Palace for $70 million.
“Though the government cited the drastic decline in tourist stopovers resulting from the worldwide recession as the cause of the Hotel Corporation’s woes, the opposition charged the corporation with gross irresponsibility as well as corruption and accused the government of virtually printing money to disguise its failures.”
UNTENABLE
State ownership of a large chunk of the hotel sector was rife with internal contradictions, with the Government being in the untenable position of having to act as the regulator and the regulated. In “Pindling: The Life and Times of the First Prime Minister of The Bahamas”, Michael Craton captures how irreconcilable were the contradictions:
“The Hotel Corporation had to weigh and juggle the cost to the Treasury against the benefits of import duty concessions, the advantages against the disadvantages of levying a government tax on rooms, the problem of keeping the owners and managers happy with the level of the wages bill while keeping the workers contented with pay and working conditions, the acceptable balance between Bahamian expatriate employment.”
This defied even the political skills and charm of Sir Lynden. It was akin to asking Moses to keep both the Egyptians and the Israelites happy at the same time. Shockingly, despite this failed history, one of their own making, the PLP condemned the Bahamas to repeating some of this history in the deal with the I-Group in Mayaguana.
By taking a 50 per cent stake in the Mayaguana Development Company, the Government once again placed itself in the role of the regulator and the regulated, an inherent conflict of interest.
But this is indicative of a PLP that refuses to learn the lessons of history, including its own massive failures and endless conflicts of interest. The “All for me baby” mentality in the PLP is alive and well, waiting for the next opportunity for nepotism and deal-making in a hidebound culture of self-entitlement.
After coming to office in 1992, the FNM privatized a number of hotels owned by the Hotel Corporation, including Cable Beach properties now owned by the successful Sandals and Breezes chains. This helped to revive an ailing and ageing Cable Beach.
With its return to office, the Christie administration had an opportunity to demonstrate that it was a new PLP with new ideas for tourism in general and for Cable Beach in particular. Sadly, the re-elected PLP was as clueless about market economics as when it was turned out of office a decade earlier.
This included Mr. Christie, a former Minister of Tourism whose understanding of tourism seems not to have evolved since he held that office. It also includes the former Minister of Financial Services and Investments, who was also involved in the Baha Mar deal.
Senator Allyson Gibson Maynard’s breathless defence of the ill-conceived Mayaguana Project -- with its near give-away of many miles of pristine coastal property to a single foreign developer -- is suggestive of a disturbing mindset in the PLP in terms of national development. It is an essentially neo-colonial mindset for a party still pretending to be progressive and liberal.
RHETORIC
Absent any real ideas to realize its rhetoric of empowerment and Bahamianization, the PLP seized upon all manner of schemes proposed by all manner of developers. Many of those developers had more ideas -- not necessarily good ones -- than they had dollars or good sense.
But no matter, a desperate PLP was prepared to essentially give away Bahamian treasure in the form of land, excessive concessions and cash to lure many of these developers. This was a part of an unreconstructed mindset in the PLP which talks Bahamianization while trashing the best interests of Bahamians in the service of narrower interests.
Cable Beach was in need of redevelopment, but not just by any developer at just about any cost. One of the PLP Government’s lead negotiators on this project, a consummate uber-consultant, continues to defend the original Baha Mar deal in both the print and broadcast media.
The uber-consultant is defending The Bahamas alienating some of our more valuable Crown and government land so that the developer could secure a loan. If this level of extraordinary state beneficence was necessary in order for the developer to receive the loan, we chose the wrong developer, especially for one of our premier touristic sites.
That the developer has laboured to pay back and renegotiate the terms of its major loan is suggestive of many things. All of which should have been taken into consideration before the Christie administration handed over the vision and patrimony of Cable Beach to selective interests.
As egregious, the developer was a middleman with no real track record in such a megaproject. And, the original deal that is being defended was rife with concessions the country never should have granted, a number of which have been clawed back by the Ingraham administration.
To see some of the blunders made at Baha Mar - readers may wish to read Baha Mar: Anatomy of a Big Blunder.
While Baha Mar may bring some short- and medium-term gains, its longer term prospects may be problematic on numerous fronts. The country continues to pay for the mistakes an earlier PLP made at Cable Beach. It may now have to endure the problems of a potentially colossal error that the Christie administration made with Baha Mar.
Baha Mar Drama – (Part 1)
bahamapundit
To understand the potentially colossal mistake the PLP made in handing over the redevelopment of Cable Beach to Baha Mar, some historical background is necessary.
Before Baha Mar there was Cable Beach. The area derived its name after a telegraph cable line connecting The Bahamas with the rest of the world came ashore at Goodman’s Bay in 1892. One of the first people to receive a cable was the proprietor of the Royal Victoria Hotel.
Fast-forward some half a century and the area with its miles of pristine beach would surpass downtown Nassau as a major site for the expansion of the hotel sector. There was the Balmoral and the Bahamas Country Club.
In 1954, the Emerald Beach became the first fully air-conditioned hotel. Boasting 300 rooms and New Providence’s first convention centre, the ultramodern hotel came in at a price tag of $3.5 million. With the opening of the Nassau Beach Hotel on the strip in 1959 -- along with a Howard Johnson restaurant -- Cable Beach was helping to set the pace for the tourism industry and hotel sector.
In many ways, Cable Beach became the gold standard, even receiving the moniker, “the Bahamian Riviera”. Then, through the 1970s to the 1990s, the PLP made a series of fateful decisions that would prove disastrous for Cable Beach and end up costing the Pubic Treasury hundreds of millions if not more.
UNAPPEALING
This included construction of the monstrously unappealing, aesthetic nightmare that became the Crystal Palace Hotel, as well as the environmental damage that may have been caused through the erection of one of the hotel’s towers.
Re-elected in 2002, a new PLP Government would make another fateful and potentially disastrous decision about Cable Beach, reinforcing its record of economic incompetence and mismanagement. Much of the same PLP culture which proved disastrous for Cable Beach under Sir Lynden has resurfaced under Perry Christie.
But back to the 1970s. The then PLP Government purchased three major hotels on Cable Beach: the Sonesta Beach Hotel, the Balmoral and the Hyatt Emerald Beach. The Pindling administration also set up the Hotel Corporation, with Sir Lynden predicting that once the Corporation was doing well financially, shares would be offered to Bahamians.
His prediction was way off the mark. Indeed, the Hotel Corporation would come to have a checkered history, with Sir Lynden serving as Chairman at various junctures. In 1991, Carnival Cruise Lines, the owner-operator of the Crystal Palace Resort experienced considerable losses and threatened to either pull out of the development or declare bankruptcy.
In volume two of her major history of The Bahamas, Dr. Gail Saunders details how the Hotel Corporation responded to this threat:
“The Hotel Corporation, already accused of making an initial ‘sweetheart deal’ with Carnival and using the Crystal Palace to ‘featherbed’ PLP supporters, agreed to yet another bailout. Adding to massive debts, incurred through an unbusinesslike combination of takeovers and extravagant new building, the Hotel Corporation took a 40 percent stake in the Crystal Palace for $70 million.
“Though the government cited the drastic decline in tourist stopovers resulting from the worldwide recession as the cause of the Hotel Corporation’s woes, the opposition charged the corporation with gross irresponsibility as well as corruption and accused the government of virtually printing money to disguise its failures.”
UNTENABLE
State ownership of a large chunk of the hotel sector was rife with internal contradictions, with the Government being in the untenable position of having to act as the regulator and the regulated. In “Pindling: The Life and Times of the First Prime Minister of The Bahamas”, Michael Craton captures how irreconcilable were the contradictions:
“The Hotel Corporation had to weigh and juggle the cost to the Treasury against the benefits of import duty concessions, the advantages against the disadvantages of levying a government tax on rooms, the problem of keeping the owners and managers happy with the level of the wages bill while keeping the workers contented with pay and working conditions, the acceptable balance between Bahamian expatriate employment.”
This defied even the political skills and charm of Sir Lynden. It was akin to asking Moses to keep both the Egyptians and the Israelites happy at the same time. Shockingly, despite this failed history, one of their own making, the PLP condemned the Bahamas to repeating some of this history in the deal with the I-Group in Mayaguana.
By taking a 50 per cent stake in the Mayaguana Development Company, the Government once again placed itself in the role of the regulator and the regulated, an inherent conflict of interest.
But this is indicative of a PLP that refuses to learn the lessons of history, including its own massive failures and endless conflicts of interest. The “All for me baby” mentality in the PLP is alive and well, waiting for the next opportunity for nepotism and deal-making in a hidebound culture of self-entitlement.
After coming to office in 1992, the FNM privatized a number of hotels owned by the Hotel Corporation, including Cable Beach properties now owned by the successful Sandals and Breezes chains. This helped to revive an ailing and ageing Cable Beach.
With its return to office, the Christie administration had an opportunity to demonstrate that it was a new PLP with new ideas for tourism in general and for Cable Beach in particular. Sadly, the re-elected PLP was as clueless about market economics as when it was turned out of office a decade earlier.
This included Mr. Christie, a former Minister of Tourism whose understanding of tourism seems not to have evolved since he held that office. It also includes the former Minister of Financial Services and Investments, who was also involved in the Baha Mar deal.
Senator Allyson Gibson Maynard’s breathless defence of the ill-conceived Mayaguana Project -- with its near give-away of many miles of pristine coastal property to a single foreign developer -- is suggestive of a disturbing mindset in the PLP in terms of national development. It is an essentially neo-colonial mindset for a party still pretending to be progressive and liberal.
RHETORIC
Absent any real ideas to realize its rhetoric of empowerment and Bahamianization, the PLP seized upon all manner of schemes proposed by all manner of developers. Many of those developers had more ideas -- not necessarily good ones -- than they had dollars or good sense.
But no matter, a desperate PLP was prepared to essentially give away Bahamian treasure in the form of land, excessive concessions and cash to lure many of these developers. This was a part of an unreconstructed mindset in the PLP which talks Bahamianization while trashing the best interests of Bahamians in the service of narrower interests.
Cable Beach was in need of redevelopment, but not just by any developer at just about any cost. One of the PLP Government’s lead negotiators on this project, a consummate uber-consultant, continues to defend the original Baha Mar deal in both the print and broadcast media.
The uber-consultant is defending The Bahamas alienating some of our more valuable Crown and government land so that the developer could secure a loan. If this level of extraordinary state beneficence was necessary in order for the developer to receive the loan, we chose the wrong developer, especially for one of our premier touristic sites.
That the developer has laboured to pay back and renegotiate the terms of its major loan is suggestive of many things. All of which should have been taken into consideration before the Christie administration handed over the vision and patrimony of Cable Beach to selective interests.
As egregious, the developer was a middleman with no real track record in such a megaproject. And, the original deal that is being defended was rife with concessions the country never should have granted, a number of which have been clawed back by the Ingraham administration.
To see some of the blunders made at Baha Mar - readers may wish to read Baha Mar: Anatomy of a Big Blunder.
While Baha Mar may bring some short- and medium-term gains, its longer term prospects may be problematic on numerous fronts. The country continues to pay for the mistakes an earlier PLP made at Cable Beach. It may now have to endure the problems of a potentially colossal error that the Christie administration made with Baha Mar.
Baha Mar Drama – (Part 1)
bahamapundit
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Baha Mar Drama - (Part 1)
The Drama at Baha Mar – Part 1
by Simon
Lights, camera, action! At least, that was the theory. With giddy fanfare the Christie administration broke into the ZNS evening news to broadcast live from Cable Beach a deal hyping an agreement with Baha Mar. The made-for-television reality show was obviously and deliberately timed to coincide with the beginning of the evening news, commandeering most of that night’s broadcast.
But after the lights and cameras trekked back to Third Terrace Centreville, nothing happened. Well, quite a bit happened. Except, of course, the construction of the promised mega complex. The original deal, the world economy and the Christie administration all collapsed, though not necessarily in that order.
The impressive architectural models and glittering high-tech videos of the touted development glossed over the realities on the ground. The public relations bonanza also obscured the nature and details surrounding the proposed plans to re-develop the historic Cable Beach.
We have seen this reality show before. It involves the same mindset, plot and cast of PLP cabinet ministers and their associated dealmakers that brought us the Great Mayaguana Land Give-away. The initial arrangements for the Baha Mar deal and the I-Group deal in Mayaguana involved more than rank hypocrisy by the party whose progressive and liberal brand name are whispery echoes of a by-gone era.
More fundamentally, the deals betrayed the PLP’s own nationalist rhetoric and chest-thumping patriotism. At the core of the Cable Beach and Mayaguana deals were stunning betrayals of the very idea of Bahamianization. This included making Bahamians subordinate in the deals, while alienating prime Crown Land and Government real estate to foreigners in perpetuity.
GALLING
Equally galling, was the PLP’s attempt to market these schemes to Bahamians as if we were idiots who could not see the big picture or read the fine print. There was also the smugness and arrogance by PLP hucksters. They pretended that these deals were more for the benefit of ordinary Bahamians than for the self-satisfied oligarchs who brokered them with gleeful abandon.
As recently as the 2010/11 budget debate, the Opposition’s Leader in the Senate, Senator Allyson Maynard Gibson, boasted that the Mayaguana Development Company, the group responsible for a proposed development at our most easterly island, was owned 50/50 by the I-Group and the Bahamas Government.
As noted in Front Porch in July: “This 50/50 arrangement would have eventually sold off nearly 100 per cent of Mayaguana’s coastal area and nearly 10,000 acres to non-Bahamians.
“As Mayaguana, by comparison, is somewhat larger than New Providence, the deal the PLP continues to brag about was the equivalent of turning over to a single developer a stretch of coastal land from the eastern end of New Providence to Lyford Cay. Again, the vast majority of this land would have ended up in foreign hands.”
Back to the drama at Baha Mar. Perry Gladstone Christie and his new PLP sold off at bargain basement prices prime beachfront and other public land at Cable Beach that Sir Stafford Sands and the UBP, Sir Lynden Pindling and an earlier version of the PLP, and Hubert Ingraham and the FNM never did over the course of more than half a century. Mr. Christie now has his place in the history books!
The original Baha Mar deal was a disaster on so many levels. Despite the rhetoric, the supposedly new PLP under Mr. Christie never updated their philosophy and policy ideas. The party simply wanted to be back in power. Upon returning to office they scrambled, cobbling together various slogans, clichés and talking points to justify their old habits of wheeling and dealing.
Perhaps realizing the controversial nature of significant elements of the original Baha Mar deal, Mr. Christie -- who purports to be the man of great consultation -- kept details of the deal secret. It was left to the Ingraham administration to table the Heads of Agreements on the initial deal.
INSULT
This was an insult added to the many injuries inflicted on our national interest in the initial deal, including public land sold at discounted prices and the proposed grant of extraordinarily generous concessions and cash payments. There were initial hints that Goodman’s Bay may have been alienated from the Bahamian people, though somebody appeared to backtrack quickly on this affront.
With Baha Mar and various anchor projects, the PLP failed to embrace newer ideas in terms of our tourism product and economic development. The idea of Baha Mar as essentially another Atlantis may have been a critical mistake. Such a vision stoked the egos of the proponents of the deal and Mr. Christie.
Still, a different type of project or variety of projects at Cable Beach, aimed at a different tourism demographic, would have been the wiser course of action. Moreover, rather than alienating invaluable public land, other arrangements could have been made to secure most of this land for generations of Bahamians.
In the Mayaguana deal the PLP at least pretended to be concerned about the national interest. The deal with Baha Mar was a give-away of monumental proportions.
There could have also been arrangements to enable Bahamians to have various levels of ownership and equity in a development which was to be built on mostly public land. Instead, the Christie administration turned its back on the core ideal of Bahamianization which was at the heart of the movement for Majority Rule.
Sadly, with the conclusion of the original deal with Baha Mar, there was no turning back, one of the slogans beloved by the PLP’s marketers. That other favourite PLP slogan, “Forward Ever, Backward Never”, also crashed and burned in light of the initial deal negotiated by Mr. Christie.
Having set in motion and made unavoidable many of the features of the current deal with Baha Mar, Mr. Christie in his typical political style, has left it up to Prime Minister Ingraham to do the heavy lifting on a final deal which he himself failed to conclude.
TONE!
Now Mr. Christie is commenting on the Prime Minister’s tone – tone! -- on a final deal. This is in keeping with his usual course of inaction in which style and tone are more important than substance. After all, who can forget his gushing and ingratiating tone when the Baha Mar deal was announced live on television? For all of Mr. Christie’s sweet melodies and tone, nothing happened.
Moreover, despite his lovely tone about the initial deal, he brokered an agreement which was wrong for The Bahamas on many levels. Mr. Ingraham has replaced Mr. Christie’s amateur tone with that of a seasoned leader. Whereas Mr. Christie was impetuous and cavalier, Mr. Ingraham has been measured and has driven a harder bargain.
Unlike Sir Lynden and the PLP’s unilateral abrogation of elements of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, Mr. Ingraham negotiated the best deal he could for the Bahamas with Baha Mar. He has struck the right tone in negotiating with others who simply rolled over the hapless Mr. Christie, who was panicked about getting a deal at just about any cost to secure his re-election and legacy.
Short-term, the Prime Minister has sometimes been criticized about his manner and timing in negotiating elements of a final deal. In the longer term the wisdom of his negotiating strategy may prove more beneficial for the country.
In addition to tabling all heads of agreements related to Baha Mar, the Prime Minister is correct in bringing a resolution to the House of Assembly so that the Bahamian people’s elected representatives can express their will.
This will be time for Mr. Christie to do something which he has been reluctant to do from the inception of Baha Mar: To go on record clearly and unambiguously about his party’s stance on many of the controversial issues involved in an agreement whose initial seeds he helped to plant and water.
Baha Mar Drama - (Part 2)
bahamapundit
by Simon
Lights, camera, action! At least, that was the theory. With giddy fanfare the Christie administration broke into the ZNS evening news to broadcast live from Cable Beach a deal hyping an agreement with Baha Mar. The made-for-television reality show was obviously and deliberately timed to coincide with the beginning of the evening news, commandeering most of that night’s broadcast.
But after the lights and cameras trekked back to Third Terrace Centreville, nothing happened. Well, quite a bit happened. Except, of course, the construction of the promised mega complex. The original deal, the world economy and the Christie administration all collapsed, though not necessarily in that order.
The impressive architectural models and glittering high-tech videos of the touted development glossed over the realities on the ground. The public relations bonanza also obscured the nature and details surrounding the proposed plans to re-develop the historic Cable Beach.
We have seen this reality show before. It involves the same mindset, plot and cast of PLP cabinet ministers and their associated dealmakers that brought us the Great Mayaguana Land Give-away. The initial arrangements for the Baha Mar deal and the I-Group deal in Mayaguana involved more than rank hypocrisy by the party whose progressive and liberal brand name are whispery echoes of a by-gone era.
More fundamentally, the deals betrayed the PLP’s own nationalist rhetoric and chest-thumping patriotism. At the core of the Cable Beach and Mayaguana deals were stunning betrayals of the very idea of Bahamianization. This included making Bahamians subordinate in the deals, while alienating prime Crown Land and Government real estate to foreigners in perpetuity.
GALLING
Equally galling, was the PLP’s attempt to market these schemes to Bahamians as if we were idiots who could not see the big picture or read the fine print. There was also the smugness and arrogance by PLP hucksters. They pretended that these deals were more for the benefit of ordinary Bahamians than for the self-satisfied oligarchs who brokered them with gleeful abandon.
As recently as the 2010/11 budget debate, the Opposition’s Leader in the Senate, Senator Allyson Maynard Gibson, boasted that the Mayaguana Development Company, the group responsible for a proposed development at our most easterly island, was owned 50/50 by the I-Group and the Bahamas Government.
As noted in Front Porch in July: “This 50/50 arrangement would have eventually sold off nearly 100 per cent of Mayaguana’s coastal area and nearly 10,000 acres to non-Bahamians.
“As Mayaguana, by comparison, is somewhat larger than New Providence, the deal the PLP continues to brag about was the equivalent of turning over to a single developer a stretch of coastal land from the eastern end of New Providence to Lyford Cay. Again, the vast majority of this land would have ended up in foreign hands.”
Back to the drama at Baha Mar. Perry Gladstone Christie and his new PLP sold off at bargain basement prices prime beachfront and other public land at Cable Beach that Sir Stafford Sands and the UBP, Sir Lynden Pindling and an earlier version of the PLP, and Hubert Ingraham and the FNM never did over the course of more than half a century. Mr. Christie now has his place in the history books!
The original Baha Mar deal was a disaster on so many levels. Despite the rhetoric, the supposedly new PLP under Mr. Christie never updated their philosophy and policy ideas. The party simply wanted to be back in power. Upon returning to office they scrambled, cobbling together various slogans, clichés and talking points to justify their old habits of wheeling and dealing.
Perhaps realizing the controversial nature of significant elements of the original Baha Mar deal, Mr. Christie -- who purports to be the man of great consultation -- kept details of the deal secret. It was left to the Ingraham administration to table the Heads of Agreements on the initial deal.
INSULT
This was an insult added to the many injuries inflicted on our national interest in the initial deal, including public land sold at discounted prices and the proposed grant of extraordinarily generous concessions and cash payments. There were initial hints that Goodman’s Bay may have been alienated from the Bahamian people, though somebody appeared to backtrack quickly on this affront.
With Baha Mar and various anchor projects, the PLP failed to embrace newer ideas in terms of our tourism product and economic development. The idea of Baha Mar as essentially another Atlantis may have been a critical mistake. Such a vision stoked the egos of the proponents of the deal and Mr. Christie.
Still, a different type of project or variety of projects at Cable Beach, aimed at a different tourism demographic, would have been the wiser course of action. Moreover, rather than alienating invaluable public land, other arrangements could have been made to secure most of this land for generations of Bahamians.
In the Mayaguana deal the PLP at least pretended to be concerned about the national interest. The deal with Baha Mar was a give-away of monumental proportions.
There could have also been arrangements to enable Bahamians to have various levels of ownership and equity in a development which was to be built on mostly public land. Instead, the Christie administration turned its back on the core ideal of Bahamianization which was at the heart of the movement for Majority Rule.
Sadly, with the conclusion of the original deal with Baha Mar, there was no turning back, one of the slogans beloved by the PLP’s marketers. That other favourite PLP slogan, “Forward Ever, Backward Never”, also crashed and burned in light of the initial deal negotiated by Mr. Christie.
Having set in motion and made unavoidable many of the features of the current deal with Baha Mar, Mr. Christie in his typical political style, has left it up to Prime Minister Ingraham to do the heavy lifting on a final deal which he himself failed to conclude.
TONE!
Now Mr. Christie is commenting on the Prime Minister’s tone – tone! -- on a final deal. This is in keeping with his usual course of inaction in which style and tone are more important than substance. After all, who can forget his gushing and ingratiating tone when the Baha Mar deal was announced live on television? For all of Mr. Christie’s sweet melodies and tone, nothing happened.
Moreover, despite his lovely tone about the initial deal, he brokered an agreement which was wrong for The Bahamas on many levels. Mr. Ingraham has replaced Mr. Christie’s amateur tone with that of a seasoned leader. Whereas Mr. Christie was impetuous and cavalier, Mr. Ingraham has been measured and has driven a harder bargain.
Unlike Sir Lynden and the PLP’s unilateral abrogation of elements of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, Mr. Ingraham negotiated the best deal he could for the Bahamas with Baha Mar. He has struck the right tone in negotiating with others who simply rolled over the hapless Mr. Christie, who was panicked about getting a deal at just about any cost to secure his re-election and legacy.
Short-term, the Prime Minister has sometimes been criticized about his manner and timing in negotiating elements of a final deal. In the longer term the wisdom of his negotiating strategy may prove more beneficial for the country.
In addition to tabling all heads of agreements related to Baha Mar, the Prime Minister is correct in bringing a resolution to the House of Assembly so that the Bahamian people’s elected representatives can express their will.
This will be time for Mr. Christie to do something which he has been reluctant to do from the inception of Baha Mar: To go on record clearly and unambiguously about his party’s stance on many of the controversial issues involved in an agreement whose initial seeds he helped to plant and water.
Baha Mar Drama - (Part 2)
bahamapundit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)