Justice Adderley Has Spoken
The Bahama Journal Editorial
A number of citizens decided that they would take the Minister of Works to court; they did and today we know that rest of the story – these citizens won.
As one citizen notes of the matter to which we refer: "This case is historic, (it) has proven that the small man can stand up and fight City Hall. There is no reason to be scared.
This citizen is Arnold Heastie, owner of Heastie's Service Station on Baillou Road.
Another citizen, Etheric Bowe, the owner of Advanced Technical Enterprises Ltd, said the ruling gave him faith in the justice system.
In addition, there is also Rupert Roberts, himself another leading citizen who also exulted in the decision to which we shall presently refer.
And for sure, we can also advise that, you should –at least for now- forget that old saw which suggests that, while sticks and stones might break your bones, words can never harm you.
While this might be advice that is good enough for naïve children, the fact remains that, in the very real world that we inhabit, words – particularly those uttered by magistrates, Supreme Court Justices and others such – can and do resonate.
Here we can and will illustrate the point we make by noting some of those poignant words as they were uttered this past weekend by one Supreme Court Justice, K. Neville Adderley.
In a matter that came to his attention, we note some of what this esteemed justice had to says as he expatiated on the bone that had been the nub of contention between the Minister of Works and some of this nation’s leading citizens; concluding [as he did] on this salutary note: "I find that once the Minister (of Works) had embarked on the consultative process by carrying out the road works in the affected area without proper consultation, he thereby did not follow the requirements of the law…”
This broadside was followed by another volley of words that struck their mark. Here Justice Adderley concluded on this note: “…I also find that the road works in substance constitute a public nuisance which has directly contributed to losses, including goodwill, to the businesses of the applicants…"
This is surely some powerful stuff.
And as if this was not enough for the Minister of Works, the learned justice reverted to that question concerning damages.
Here Justice Adderley opined that, "The damages shall relate to their businesses only and to loss cause by the road works. The works on the Baillou Hill Road and Market Street corridors are continuing and there may be time for the minister to mitigate his damages by engaging in proper consultation with the applicants to the extent, if any, is still possible…"
Yet again, we are witness to the power inherent in words when they are words that can and will make a difference as regards the rights of the citizen versus the power of the state.
Such is the stuff of which joyous celebration is both birthed and fashioned; and so it came to be that, Justice Adderley’s ruling was met with jubilation from the Coconut Grove Business League.
But for sure, there is more to this than that it surely does provides a perfect pretext for celebration and jubilation.
Here the truth inherent in the matter at hand has to do with lessons that must be learned. In this regard, then, the current administration, its Official Opposition and [perhaps] most of those men and women who would aspire to leadership in our land must – if for the sake of their own sanity – should take close note of the fact that, there are three branches of government.
They would also be well advised to know and appreciate the importance of the fact that, each branch has its own unique role to play in keeping things on an even keel; and that, when the chips are down, the executive branch of government can and should be over-ruled.
This is precisely what now stands revealed on the morrow of a landmark decision made by Supreme Court Justice K. Neville Adderley, who opined that, the Minister of Works "did not follow the requirements of the law when he effected road works along Baillou Hill Road and Market Street.”
This he said as he ruled in favour of the Coconut Grove Business League yesterday.
We can also note that, Justice K. Neville Adderley also awarded the group unspecified damages for loss of business due to the ongoing road works - damages that will be assessed by the court at a later date if the parties involved cannot come to an agreed amount.
Evidently jubilant, The Coconut Grove Business League –as reported – described Justice Adderley’s ruling as an historic one.
It surely is.
And so, today we give thanks for the fact that, we still live in a land where the Rule of Law yet prevails.
December 20, 2010
The Bahama Journal 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.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Bluewater versus Cable & Wireless - and the Privatisation of Bahamas Telecommunications Company Limited (BTC)
When did the unions purchase BTC?
tribune242 editorial
TODAY MANY Bahamians are confused. They would like to know when the unions purchased the public's telecommunications company, which would give them the right to say whether the company can be sold and to whom.
As far as the public is aware those making the noise in the public square are employees of a publicly owned company with a contract of service that can be terminated by either side to that contract. In other words a union's only argument should be about the employment of its members and the terms of that employment, certainly not about the ownership of the company. However, if unionists believe they have an entitlement -- over an above their contract of service -- then they should bring their papers and publicly prove their point. Otherwise, it is the government -- not the unions-- that was elected to represent the Bahamian people. And it is the people, represented by their MPs in parliament, who will have the final say on the sale of BTC.
Bernard Evans, president of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union, who has taken the union's fight to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has claimed the government was in violation of an ILO convention which calls for the government to engage workers in a "transparent manner to discuss issues of life-changing effect."
How can the union leader support this complaint when he was on the BTC privatisation committee where the matter was discussed and recommendations made to government, and when the Prime Minister himself met with union executives and invited them to meet for discussions with the proposed new owner's chief executive officer? It is understood that at the meeting with the Prime Minister, although the union leaders expressed their displeasure at Cable and Wireless as the new owners, they at least agreed to meet with the company's CEO for a discussion.
David Shaw, CEO of Cable and Wireless, flew in specially for that discussion. The union sent its regrets.
They complain that no one will talk with them, that they do not know what is going on, that what is being done to them is "wicked and intentional" because government never truly wanted them to be "a participant in that discussion." How can there be a discussion if one side to that discussion refuses to come to the table? How can doubts and fears be discussed and removed if a reasonable discussion cannot take place? Bullying tactics will not succeed. The louder they shout in the public square, the more support they lose by a large segment of the population, already dissatisfied with BTC's service.
Mr Evans has accused the government of trying to "muddy" the waters by comparing the PLP's terms of agreement to sell BTC to Bluewater with the terms offered to Cable & Wireless. He claims it is a "non-issue" for the unions and hardly worthy of comment.
Unfortunately, it is not a non-issue and is most worthy of comment, because with the Christie government, it was the union that also agreed to the Bluewater deal. Apparently, the union had no problem with this untried and untested foreigner named Bluewater, nor did it protest the terms of that agreement. Whenever it is referred to by Mr Christie he is careful to make it clear that the union was on board, and until now the union has not protested.
The main dispute is that the PLP offered Bluewater 49 per cent of the company, while the FNM offered Cable and Wireless 51 per cent. Now let's examine the meaning of the two offers in practical terms.
In the Bluewater agreement, management and control of BTC was to be given to Bluewater without it having paid for the majority interest. Bluewater was also given control of the board because it had a greater number of directors on it. It also had complete control of the day-to-day management because it had sole authority to select the company's Chief Executive Officer (CEO). In other words Bluewater with its 49 per cent would have effectively secured majority control of BTC without having paid for it.
On the other hand Cable and Wireless (CWC) paid for its 51 per cent majority. On closing the net cash benefit to the government from the CWC deal will be at least $202 million, whereas the net value of the Bluewater transaction on closing would have been $150 million, and not the $260 million as claimed by the politicians.
Bluewater was granted an exclusivity period of six years for both mobile and fixed line services while CWC's exclusivity period for mobile service is three years, and the fixed line no longer applies as it has already been liberalised.
And so when the facts are examined, not only is government financially better off selling to CWC, but CWC has had to pay for its control of the company, whereas the Bluewater deal -- agreed by the Christie government, and one can assume by the union because of its silence at the time -- received exactly the same control of the company for which it would have paid no extra -- and for which it would have been paying in instalments over a six-year period, instead of cash. The bottom line was that Bluewater with its 49 per cent got complete control of the company without paying any extra, while CWC with its 51 per cent also got complete control of the company, but at a price.
December 17, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
TODAY MANY Bahamians are confused. They would like to know when the unions purchased the public's telecommunications company, which would give them the right to say whether the company can be sold and to whom.
As far as the public is aware those making the noise in the public square are employees of a publicly owned company with a contract of service that can be terminated by either side to that contract. In other words a union's only argument should be about the employment of its members and the terms of that employment, certainly not about the ownership of the company. However, if unionists believe they have an entitlement -- over an above their contract of service -- then they should bring their papers and publicly prove their point. Otherwise, it is the government -- not the unions-- that was elected to represent the Bahamian people. And it is the people, represented by their MPs in parliament, who will have the final say on the sale of BTC.
Bernard Evans, president of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union, who has taken the union's fight to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has claimed the government was in violation of an ILO convention which calls for the government to engage workers in a "transparent manner to discuss issues of life-changing effect."
How can the union leader support this complaint when he was on the BTC privatisation committee where the matter was discussed and recommendations made to government, and when the Prime Minister himself met with union executives and invited them to meet for discussions with the proposed new owner's chief executive officer? It is understood that at the meeting with the Prime Minister, although the union leaders expressed their displeasure at Cable and Wireless as the new owners, they at least agreed to meet with the company's CEO for a discussion.
David Shaw, CEO of Cable and Wireless, flew in specially for that discussion. The union sent its regrets.
They complain that no one will talk with them, that they do not know what is going on, that what is being done to them is "wicked and intentional" because government never truly wanted them to be "a participant in that discussion." How can there be a discussion if one side to that discussion refuses to come to the table? How can doubts and fears be discussed and removed if a reasonable discussion cannot take place? Bullying tactics will not succeed. The louder they shout in the public square, the more support they lose by a large segment of the population, already dissatisfied with BTC's service.
Mr Evans has accused the government of trying to "muddy" the waters by comparing the PLP's terms of agreement to sell BTC to Bluewater with the terms offered to Cable & Wireless. He claims it is a "non-issue" for the unions and hardly worthy of comment.
Unfortunately, it is not a non-issue and is most worthy of comment, because with the Christie government, it was the union that also agreed to the Bluewater deal. Apparently, the union had no problem with this untried and untested foreigner named Bluewater, nor did it protest the terms of that agreement. Whenever it is referred to by Mr Christie he is careful to make it clear that the union was on board, and until now the union has not protested.
The main dispute is that the PLP offered Bluewater 49 per cent of the company, while the FNM offered Cable and Wireless 51 per cent. Now let's examine the meaning of the two offers in practical terms.
In the Bluewater agreement, management and control of BTC was to be given to Bluewater without it having paid for the majority interest. Bluewater was also given control of the board because it had a greater number of directors on it. It also had complete control of the day-to-day management because it had sole authority to select the company's Chief Executive Officer (CEO). In other words Bluewater with its 49 per cent would have effectively secured majority control of BTC without having paid for it.
On the other hand Cable and Wireless (CWC) paid for its 51 per cent majority. On closing the net cash benefit to the government from the CWC deal will be at least $202 million, whereas the net value of the Bluewater transaction on closing would have been $150 million, and not the $260 million as claimed by the politicians.
Bluewater was granted an exclusivity period of six years for both mobile and fixed line services while CWC's exclusivity period for mobile service is three years, and the fixed line no longer applies as it has already been liberalised.
And so when the facts are examined, not only is government financially better off selling to CWC, but CWC has had to pay for its control of the company, whereas the Bluewater deal -- agreed by the Christie government, and one can assume by the union because of its silence at the time -- received exactly the same control of the company for which it would have paid no extra -- and for which it would have been paying in instalments over a six-year period, instead of cash. The bottom line was that Bluewater with its 49 per cent got complete control of the company without paying any extra, while CWC with its 51 per cent also got complete control of the company, but at a price.
December 17, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Friday, December 17, 2010
Say, Sway and Raw Power
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Available evidence suggests that, the Progressive Liberal Party and a number of unions are apparently finding themselves united as regards certain aspects of that deal that would –if approved- provide Cable and Wireless a fifty one per cent stake in BTC.
On the other hand, the governing party seems to be suggesting that they have been blind-sided by union leadership and that, in addition, they are adamant that, the Bahamian people are getting a good deal, moving forward.
These are the bones of contention between the governing party, its Opposition and the unions.
Evidently, politics matters.
And here, as we revert to some of what the Opposition is saying, we note where they say that, “…The PLP holds fast to the belief that the sale of BTC to C&W is a ‘national issue’ and not a political issue as there is a general concurrence on the Privatization of BTC.
“To this end the primary spokespersons outside the Halls of Parliament have been primarily the Party’s Chairman, the Leader and Deputy Leader. This position by the PLP has been clearly demonstrated with the ongoing Senate Debates, as opposition members, despite attempts to be censored, continue to hammer the Government for not making public the details of the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal…”
The PLP concludes on this note of warning, explaining that, “…the government continues to stubbornly proceed with this bad deal despite mounting national opposition by the People of the Bahamas. Considering the above factors, the PLP again call on the Prime Minister to make public the details of the sale by releasing the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal without further delay. More importantly, we call on the government to listen to the majority of the People and cancel the Government’s plans to sell BTC to Cable & Wireless…”
And so, the battle lines have been drawn.
Evidently, these battle lines recapitulate parameters that have proven decisive in times past – with workers and others ranged in alliance with one party or the other.
Only time will tell how this struggle will eventuate.
But even as we wait for time’s verdict, we can say with some high degree of confidence that, the struggle is on; and that, those who oppose the BTC deal are seemingly on the offensive; with their quarry – the governing Free National Movement now pulling out the stops in order to better sell the deal they thought they had in the bag.
But notwithstanding those aspects of this matter that turn on the use of raw power by some in the halls of parliament, we are today somewhat discomfited by some of the tactics used by the Speaker in the Assembly; particularly where it seems as if he ignored the right of Her Majesty’s Opposition to speak, once notice of adjournment was announced.
While –like others- we have no way of divining what could have motivated him to act as he did; suffice it to say that he left us and quite a number of other right-thinking persons with the sense that he was acting in the immediate political interests of the ruling party in the Assembly.
While we would like to think otherwise, the evidence directs us the clear conclusion that, Mr. Speaker erred when he acted as he did this Wednesday past.
But be that as it may, we hope that –in time- Mr. Speaker would have the good grace to explain himself to each and every member of that august assembly; this in order to convince them that he was not biased in his recent decision making.
Now while we are quite aware of some of those other aspects of this matter that now provide the Opposition with so much political fodder; we are still adamant that, they should have been given an opportunity to speak.
In addition, we would have much preferred that things had gone in such a way so that, those who lead and those who would lead might have had an opportunity to say Merry Christmas to each other and to send similar greetings to their constituents.
And clearly, we do believe that, the Opposition should have been given an opportunity – on the notice of adjournment to speak.
This is a time honored tradition in any number of countries that would hew to the democratic way of doing things; where while governments might have their sway, those in Opposition should have their say.
Evidently, while this nostrum might be heeded in other jurisdictions, there seems to be some difficulty with it as parliamentarians dicker and debate the matter concerning the proposed ‘sale’ of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
And so today, we regret the way things have happened in the Assembly; and as they might have done, we wish them all a Merry Christmas.
December 17, 2010
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Available evidence suggests that, the Progressive Liberal Party and a number of unions are apparently finding themselves united as regards certain aspects of that deal that would –if approved- provide Cable and Wireless a fifty one per cent stake in BTC.
On the other hand, the governing party seems to be suggesting that they have been blind-sided by union leadership and that, in addition, they are adamant that, the Bahamian people are getting a good deal, moving forward.
These are the bones of contention between the governing party, its Opposition and the unions.
Evidently, politics matters.
And here, as we revert to some of what the Opposition is saying, we note where they say that, “…The PLP holds fast to the belief that the sale of BTC to C&W is a ‘national issue’ and not a political issue as there is a general concurrence on the Privatization of BTC.
“To this end the primary spokespersons outside the Halls of Parliament have been primarily the Party’s Chairman, the Leader and Deputy Leader. This position by the PLP has been clearly demonstrated with the ongoing Senate Debates, as opposition members, despite attempts to be censored, continue to hammer the Government for not making public the details of the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal…”
The PLP concludes on this note of warning, explaining that, “…the government continues to stubbornly proceed with this bad deal despite mounting national opposition by the People of the Bahamas. Considering the above factors, the PLP again call on the Prime Minister to make public the details of the sale by releasing the Memorandum of Understanding on the BTC / C&W Deal without further delay. More importantly, we call on the government to listen to the majority of the People and cancel the Government’s plans to sell BTC to Cable & Wireless…”
And so, the battle lines have been drawn.
Evidently, these battle lines recapitulate parameters that have proven decisive in times past – with workers and others ranged in alliance with one party or the other.
Only time will tell how this struggle will eventuate.
But even as we wait for time’s verdict, we can say with some high degree of confidence that, the struggle is on; and that, those who oppose the BTC deal are seemingly on the offensive; with their quarry – the governing Free National Movement now pulling out the stops in order to better sell the deal they thought they had in the bag.
But notwithstanding those aspects of this matter that turn on the use of raw power by some in the halls of parliament, we are today somewhat discomfited by some of the tactics used by the Speaker in the Assembly; particularly where it seems as if he ignored the right of Her Majesty’s Opposition to speak, once notice of adjournment was announced.
While –like others- we have no way of divining what could have motivated him to act as he did; suffice it to say that he left us and quite a number of other right-thinking persons with the sense that he was acting in the immediate political interests of the ruling party in the Assembly.
While we would like to think otherwise, the evidence directs us the clear conclusion that, Mr. Speaker erred when he acted as he did this Wednesday past.
But be that as it may, we hope that –in time- Mr. Speaker would have the good grace to explain himself to each and every member of that august assembly; this in order to convince them that he was not biased in his recent decision making.
Now while we are quite aware of some of those other aspects of this matter that now provide the Opposition with so much political fodder; we are still adamant that, they should have been given an opportunity to speak.
In addition, we would have much preferred that things had gone in such a way so that, those who lead and those who would lead might have had an opportunity to say Merry Christmas to each other and to send similar greetings to their constituents.
And clearly, we do believe that, the Opposition should have been given an opportunity – on the notice of adjournment to speak.
This is a time honored tradition in any number of countries that would hew to the democratic way of doing things; where while governments might have their sway, those in Opposition should have their say.
Evidently, while this nostrum might be heeded in other jurisdictions, there seems to be some difficulty with it as parliamentarians dicker and debate the matter concerning the proposed ‘sale’ of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
And so today, we regret the way things have happened in the Assembly; and as they might have done, we wish them all a Merry Christmas.
December 17, 2010
The Bahama Journal Editorial
...the Christie government's secret negotiations with Bluewater...
Bahamians being offered better deal
tribune242 editoial
WE ARE baffled by Opposition Leader Perry Christie's harping on the "secrecy" surrounding government's memorandum of understanding with Cable & Wireless (LIME). Surprised because on the desk in front of us is a file of the Christie government's secret negotiations with Bluewater that were then too sensitive to be shared with the public and of which no one knew the details until the Ingraham government came to office and opened the books. The union, by its own and Mr Christie's admission, was a part of the negotiations and approved the sale.
A week before the election, which resulted in the Christie government's removal from office, it was discovered that the privatisation committee for the Bluewater sale had submitted its report, which was approved by cabinet, but not signed by Mr Christie.
Today the public knows more about the Cable and Wireless proposal than it ever did about the Bluewater deal -- and even now information is coming out about Bluewater that the public is hearing for the first time.
Prime Minister Ingraham has promised that all information on the BTC sale with all documents attached will be made public two weeks before being presented to the House for a vote.
This full disclosure, we can assure our readers -- judging from the PLP's track record, especially recalling the "secret" land-giveaway in the Baha Mar Cable Beach deal -- would have never happened under the Christie government.
And so why does Mr Christie continue to harp on a deal being "clandestinely" dealt with "deep in secret" when there is nothing secret about it?
He believes government, avoided parliament yesterday morning, because it is afraid of the issue.
"They know that they are riding a tiger and you know old Confucius' saying: 'He who ride rides tiger dare not fall off,'" said Mr Christie.
We know that Confucius was a wise man, but this particular saying cannot be attributed to him. It is an ancient Chinese proverb, which says: "He who rides a tiger can never get off or the tiger will devour him."
Is this why Mr Christie cannot give up the secrecy myth? Maybe, he and the union representatives, who admit they were a part of the whole Bluewater negotiations, should come clean and tell the public why they were so secret when they were trying to hand over the Bahamian people's "jewel" to a group that had not been tested and had no track record in communications? No, Mr Christie, this is one tiger you will have to keep riding because if you fall off the people will indeed see that the Emperor has no clothes.
In yesterday's demonstration when a union member broke through the restraining barriers on Bay Street and was confronted by police, he taunted his colleagues, who remained behind the barricades: "They have y'all corralled like a bunch of animals. That is how they have you. Y'all look like a bunch of animals!"
Not only did they look like a bunch of corralled animals, but they were behaving as such without an independent brain in their heads. Imagine mounting a demonstration on the emotional hot air of politicians and union leaders without accepting the invitation to sit down with Cable and Wireless to discover for themselves what the negotiations are all about and the important role Bahamians are to play in it.
Today they now have a chance to sit down in the quiet of their homes and read the Cabinet's statement on page 7 of today's edition and see the bill of goods that the PLP was trying to sell them -- and if it were not for the election would have got away with -- and what they are being offered today.
This week a union leader accused government of giving away the country's cash cow. Indeed it is a cash cow that consumers are paying for dearly and unionists are milking without shame.
The backwardness of BTC has retarded the growth of this country's financial industry as well as local businesses that have been forced -- thanks to the computer -- to try to avoid the BTC monopoly as far as possible.
All we have heard so far is what the unionists want of BTC. It is now time for the consumers to be heard. Consumers want lower prices, better service and an ability to enter the world market without being hemmed in by suffocating monopolies.
Read the Cabinet statement and understand how Bahamians are being hoodwinked by politicians -- there is indeed no comparison with the Christie-backed Bluewater deal to what is being offered today by Cable and Wireless Communications.
December 16, 2010
tribune242 editoial
tribune242 editoial
WE ARE baffled by Opposition Leader Perry Christie's harping on the "secrecy" surrounding government's memorandum of understanding with Cable & Wireless (LIME). Surprised because on the desk in front of us is a file of the Christie government's secret negotiations with Bluewater that were then too sensitive to be shared with the public and of which no one knew the details until the Ingraham government came to office and opened the books. The union, by its own and Mr Christie's admission, was a part of the negotiations and approved the sale.
A week before the election, which resulted in the Christie government's removal from office, it was discovered that the privatisation committee for the Bluewater sale had submitted its report, which was approved by cabinet, but not signed by Mr Christie.
Today the public knows more about the Cable and Wireless proposal than it ever did about the Bluewater deal -- and even now information is coming out about Bluewater that the public is hearing for the first time.
Prime Minister Ingraham has promised that all information on the BTC sale with all documents attached will be made public two weeks before being presented to the House for a vote.
This full disclosure, we can assure our readers -- judging from the PLP's track record, especially recalling the "secret" land-giveaway in the Baha Mar Cable Beach deal -- would have never happened under the Christie government.
And so why does Mr Christie continue to harp on a deal being "clandestinely" dealt with "deep in secret" when there is nothing secret about it?
He believes government, avoided parliament yesterday morning, because it is afraid of the issue.
"They know that they are riding a tiger and you know old Confucius' saying: 'He who ride rides tiger dare not fall off,'" said Mr Christie.
We know that Confucius was a wise man, but this particular saying cannot be attributed to him. It is an ancient Chinese proverb, which says: "He who rides a tiger can never get off or the tiger will devour him."
Is this why Mr Christie cannot give up the secrecy myth? Maybe, he and the union representatives, who admit they were a part of the whole Bluewater negotiations, should come clean and tell the public why they were so secret when they were trying to hand over the Bahamian people's "jewel" to a group that had not been tested and had no track record in communications? No, Mr Christie, this is one tiger you will have to keep riding because if you fall off the people will indeed see that the Emperor has no clothes.
In yesterday's demonstration when a union member broke through the restraining barriers on Bay Street and was confronted by police, he taunted his colleagues, who remained behind the barricades: "They have y'all corralled like a bunch of animals. That is how they have you. Y'all look like a bunch of animals!"
Not only did they look like a bunch of corralled animals, but they were behaving as such without an independent brain in their heads. Imagine mounting a demonstration on the emotional hot air of politicians and union leaders without accepting the invitation to sit down with Cable and Wireless to discover for themselves what the negotiations are all about and the important role Bahamians are to play in it.
Today they now have a chance to sit down in the quiet of their homes and read the Cabinet's statement on page 7 of today's edition and see the bill of goods that the PLP was trying to sell them -- and if it were not for the election would have got away with -- and what they are being offered today.
This week a union leader accused government of giving away the country's cash cow. Indeed it is a cash cow that consumers are paying for dearly and unionists are milking without shame.
The backwardness of BTC has retarded the growth of this country's financial industry as well as local businesses that have been forced -- thanks to the computer -- to try to avoid the BTC monopoly as far as possible.
All we have heard so far is what the unionists want of BTC. It is now time for the consumers to be heard. Consumers want lower prices, better service and an ability to enter the world market without being hemmed in by suffocating monopolies.
Read the Cabinet statement and understand how Bahamians are being hoodwinked by politicians -- there is indeed no comparison with the Christie-backed Bluewater deal to what is being offered today by Cable and Wireless Communications.
December 16, 2010
tribune242 editoial
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Consumer Voices Bahamas (CVB) defends Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) acquisition of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC)
New consumer advocacy group defends BTC acquisition
By Stewart Miller
Guardian Business Reporter
stewart@nasguard.com
A new voice is crystallizing to ensure that consumers do not go unheard beneath the roar of politicians, employees and unions over the sale of 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable & Wireless Communications.
Officials of the new consumer advocacy group Consumer Voices Bahamas (CVB) chose historic Fox Hill Park to present themselves and their case to The Bahamas yesterday, defending CWC’s acquisition of BTC as being best for Bahamian consumers.
“We believe... that as the employees are important to this, the consumers are equally important to the sale of BTC,” Marlene Minus, chairperson of CVB said. She added that it is the consumers “who are paying the high prices for cellular services, who are experiencing the inconsistencies in their service, and in some cases experiencing disruptions in both their cellular and their Internet service.”
CVB is prepared to use the Internet, other forms of media, public meetings and demonstrations to tout the consumer benefits related to BTC having an international strategic partner, according to Minus. She also said that CVB would not be intimidated from their declared purpose to promote and advance the interests of the Bahamian consumer.
“Should this initiative be met with conflict, slander or disdain from union members or union leaders, we understand that, we respect that and in some cases we expect that,” the chairperson said. “But we are not afraid. We are consumers, we are Bahamians, and we believe we have a voice. So we are here to say that from a consumer perspective we believe this is good.”
Minus said that its managerial and technical expertise, along with Cable & Wireless’ international connections, would ensure better and more reliable services and would result in cheaper rates for cellular service, land lines and overseas calls.
Treasurer for CVB David Jordine told Guardian Business that the organization has no political ties or association, but was born out of the need to protect the interests of Bahamians.
“Based on the information that has been made public thus far it seems as if the consumer is being left out of the debate,” Jordine said. He added that a lot of politics and personalities are in the fray, but households, consumers and businesses that are affected should not be forgotten.
“When we mention consumers we also have to realize that a large base of our consumers is the business community,” said Jordine. “The Bahamas strives on tourism and the financial industry and the demand for communications in those sectors is vital to the bottom line, so it’s highly important that they take them into consideration because they represent the lifeblood of this country’s economy.
“We recognize that BTC and the employees of BTC have been doing a wonderful job and we want to express our appreciation to them, however for the customer, it’s cheeper, quicker, better -- that’s the initiative.”
The advocacy group reports membership of about 30 to 40 people presently. Minus said that a research and investigations team has already been formed to go into business houses and report findings back to the organization.
Although the BTC privatization was the genesis of CVB’s formation, Jordine said that the organization will not be limited to that issue.
“This group wishes to speak on behalf of consumers about any industry where we think that the consumer could get a more efficient service, a better price to meet thier needs,” Jordine said. Bahamians who support their position, or have any other ideas or comments are invited to contact the CVB by e-mail at cvb@hotmail.com.
CVB reported that it’s already at work investigating claims that some car repair businesses are gouging customers who are attempting to make sure their seat belts are functioning because of the enforcement of seat belt laws.
12/15/2010
thenassauguardian
By Stewart Miller
Guardian Business Reporter
stewart@nasguard.com
A new voice is crystallizing to ensure that consumers do not go unheard beneath the roar of politicians, employees and unions over the sale of 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable & Wireless Communications.
Officials of the new consumer advocacy group Consumer Voices Bahamas (CVB) chose historic Fox Hill Park to present themselves and their case to The Bahamas yesterday, defending CWC’s acquisition of BTC as being best for Bahamian consumers.
“We believe... that as the employees are important to this, the consumers are equally important to the sale of BTC,” Marlene Minus, chairperson of CVB said. She added that it is the consumers “who are paying the high prices for cellular services, who are experiencing the inconsistencies in their service, and in some cases experiencing disruptions in both their cellular and their Internet service.”
CVB is prepared to use the Internet, other forms of media, public meetings and demonstrations to tout the consumer benefits related to BTC having an international strategic partner, according to Minus. She also said that CVB would not be intimidated from their declared purpose to promote and advance the interests of the Bahamian consumer.
“Should this initiative be met with conflict, slander or disdain from union members or union leaders, we understand that, we respect that and in some cases we expect that,” the chairperson said. “But we are not afraid. We are consumers, we are Bahamians, and we believe we have a voice. So we are here to say that from a consumer perspective we believe this is good.”
Minus said that its managerial and technical expertise, along with Cable & Wireless’ international connections, would ensure better and more reliable services and would result in cheaper rates for cellular service, land lines and overseas calls.
Treasurer for CVB David Jordine told Guardian Business that the organization has no political ties or association, but was born out of the need to protect the interests of Bahamians.
“Based on the information that has been made public thus far it seems as if the consumer is being left out of the debate,” Jordine said. He added that a lot of politics and personalities are in the fray, but households, consumers and businesses that are affected should not be forgotten.
“When we mention consumers we also have to realize that a large base of our consumers is the business community,” said Jordine. “The Bahamas strives on tourism and the financial industry and the demand for communications in those sectors is vital to the bottom line, so it’s highly important that they take them into consideration because they represent the lifeblood of this country’s economy.
“We recognize that BTC and the employees of BTC have been doing a wonderful job and we want to express our appreciation to them, however for the customer, it’s cheeper, quicker, better -- that’s the initiative.”
The advocacy group reports membership of about 30 to 40 people presently. Minus said that a research and investigations team has already been formed to go into business houses and report findings back to the organization.
Although the BTC privatization was the genesis of CVB’s formation, Jordine said that the organization will not be limited to that issue.
“This group wishes to speak on behalf of consumers about any industry where we think that the consumer could get a more efficient service, a better price to meet thier needs,” Jordine said. Bahamians who support their position, or have any other ideas or comments are invited to contact the CVB by e-mail at cvb@hotmail.com.
CVB reported that it’s already at work investigating claims that some car repair businesses are gouging customers who are attempting to make sure their seat belts are functioning because of the enforcement of seat belt laws.
12/15/2010
thenassauguardian
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Many Bahamians are expressing a lack of confidence in the justice system
Bahamians must feel the law is on their side
thenassauguardian editorial
With an increase in housebreaking taking place throughout the country in various communities, residents are appealing for justice to be served on the perpetrators.
Many Bahamians are expressing a lack of confidence in the justice system, claiming that the law does not protect their rights as citizens. In the cases of housebreaking and stealing, these cries are heard even louder.
The expression “justice denied” has become common place.
While housebreaking and stealing is on the rise, the number of people being placed in jail for these crimes has not increased. What has increased are the number of people being let go on bail for these crimes.
It is this perception of injustice that seems to irate Bahamians, perhaps because the crime of housebreaking is more of an invasive act. People feel as if they have been violated when their home has been the target of a housebreaking.
The idea that someone has been digging through drawers, jewelry boxes, cupboards and personal items, leaves the feeling of an invasion of privacy. That in itself stirs up a lot of emotions among the victims of this crime.
To make matters worse, those who are caught and charged with these crimes are then given a slap on the wrist, given a record and let go on bail, pending a hearing.
Then, to add insult to injury, if the criminal is not in possession of the items stolen, the victims cannot get any compensation for those items stolen. They are told that once the person has gotten rid of the items, there is nothing the law can do.
That criminal is not demanded to make restitution in no shape or form.
If your items have been sold or pawned before the criminal is caught, that is the end of it.
So, not only has a person’s home been broken into, their privacy invaded, their items stolen, the criminal set out on bail, but there is no way of getting any kind of compensation.
It has left residents with a sense of being left alone, with no justice served.
There has to be more convictions, at least there has to be an appearance of justice being served.
It’s not enough for those convicted of these crimes just to get a criminal record and that’s it. Letting these criminals out on bail only leaves them with an opportunity to continue their rampage on other homes and other families.
More has to be done to make Bahamians feel as if the law is on their side and that crime does not pay. As it stands now, they feel as if this is not the case.
12/14/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
With an increase in housebreaking taking place throughout the country in various communities, residents are appealing for justice to be served on the perpetrators.
Many Bahamians are expressing a lack of confidence in the justice system, claiming that the law does not protect their rights as citizens. In the cases of housebreaking and stealing, these cries are heard even louder.
The expression “justice denied” has become common place.
While housebreaking and stealing is on the rise, the number of people being placed in jail for these crimes has not increased. What has increased are the number of people being let go on bail for these crimes.
It is this perception of injustice that seems to irate Bahamians, perhaps because the crime of housebreaking is more of an invasive act. People feel as if they have been violated when their home has been the target of a housebreaking.
The idea that someone has been digging through drawers, jewelry boxes, cupboards and personal items, leaves the feeling of an invasion of privacy. That in itself stirs up a lot of emotions among the victims of this crime.
To make matters worse, those who are caught and charged with these crimes are then given a slap on the wrist, given a record and let go on bail, pending a hearing.
Then, to add insult to injury, if the criminal is not in possession of the items stolen, the victims cannot get any compensation for those items stolen. They are told that once the person has gotten rid of the items, there is nothing the law can do.
That criminal is not demanded to make restitution in no shape or form.
If your items have been sold or pawned before the criminal is caught, that is the end of it.
So, not only has a person’s home been broken into, their privacy invaded, their items stolen, the criminal set out on bail, but there is no way of getting any kind of compensation.
It has left residents with a sense of being left alone, with no justice served.
There has to be more convictions, at least there has to be an appearance of justice being served.
It’s not enough for those convicted of these crimes just to get a criminal record and that’s it. Letting these criminals out on bail only leaves them with an opportunity to continue their rampage on other homes and other families.
More has to be done to make Bahamians feel as if the law is on their side and that crime does not pay. As it stands now, they feel as if this is not the case.
12/14/2010
thenassauguardian editorial
Monday, December 13, 2010
Voices Killarney poll shows that many support the proposed BTC sale
Constituency poll shows many support proposed BTC sale
tribune242
A recent poll taken in the Killarney constituency shows that there are many Bahamians who support the government’s intention to sell a 51 per cent stake in The Bahamas Telecommunications Company to the British telecommunication company Cable and Wireless Communications (C&WC).
A recent poll conducted on “Voices Killarney,” an online news letter from the constituency office of Dr Hubert Minnis revealed that 67 people who participated in the poll supported the BTC deal while 50 persons opposed the deal. The poll, which was conducted on December 10 and 11, also revealed that six persons who participated in the poll were undecided.
Among those who supported the sale one person commented, “I think the sale is an excellent idea. C&W are in the Caribbean Islands. Although we are considered ahead of them economically their telephone technology is far ahead of us.” Another posted, “The union just needs to get over it. It is ludicrous that a union dictates who the government sells any corporation to. The government is elected by the people to conduct work on behalf of the people so I believe that every government would make decisions that are in the best interest of the country. Those people at Batelco are lazy and are afraid of privatization.”
Another person in support of the sale commented, “The sale of Batelco is long overdue. We are paying far too much for out dated systems and service that is not customer-oriented. I have been trying to find out for over one year how my land line was turned over in the name of my tenant and they were allowed to transfer my phone line when they gave up the lease on my property. They have also not been able to satisfy me with what has happened to my security deposit. The prices are too high, the service is poor and I think we need to up grade.”
Among those who opposed the decision one person commented, “I agree that staff numbers need to be reduced and employees simply more efficient to cut operation costs. However, if it must be sold, it should be sold to Bahamians with the capital and vision to further advance the company with the latest technologies available in phone and Internet services.”
Another stated, “Batelco belongs to the people of the Bahamas and should not be sold. Bahamians should own and run Batelco.” “I feel that it was a very bad decision because they sold such a great portion of the company for such little money. BTC makes a lot of money just in one year. In two years time BTC would have already made over that amount, so it really made no sense selling for so little,” another person commented.
Among those who were undecided, one stated, “Notwithstanding that the sale is inevitable and probably necessary. I'm curious to know what criteria was laid out to qualify as a purchaser. Does C&W meet the criteria, if they do and other companies also did, what were the track records of the other companies when compared to C&W? Why must we sell 51 per cent as opposed to 49 per cent. Why not consider a group of Bahamians as opposed to foreigners?”
December 13, 2010
tribune242
tribune242
A recent poll taken in the Killarney constituency shows that there are many Bahamians who support the government’s intention to sell a 51 per cent stake in The Bahamas Telecommunications Company to the British telecommunication company Cable and Wireless Communications (C&WC).
A recent poll conducted on “Voices Killarney,” an online news letter from the constituency office of Dr Hubert Minnis revealed that 67 people who participated in the poll supported the BTC deal while 50 persons opposed the deal. The poll, which was conducted on December 10 and 11, also revealed that six persons who participated in the poll were undecided.
Among those who supported the sale one person commented, “I think the sale is an excellent idea. C&W are in the Caribbean Islands. Although we are considered ahead of them economically their telephone technology is far ahead of us.” Another posted, “The union just needs to get over it. It is ludicrous that a union dictates who the government sells any corporation to. The government is elected by the people to conduct work on behalf of the people so I believe that every government would make decisions that are in the best interest of the country. Those people at Batelco are lazy and are afraid of privatization.”
Another person in support of the sale commented, “The sale of Batelco is long overdue. We are paying far too much for out dated systems and service that is not customer-oriented. I have been trying to find out for over one year how my land line was turned over in the name of my tenant and they were allowed to transfer my phone line when they gave up the lease on my property. They have also not been able to satisfy me with what has happened to my security deposit. The prices are too high, the service is poor and I think we need to up grade.”
Among those who opposed the decision one person commented, “I agree that staff numbers need to be reduced and employees simply more efficient to cut operation costs. However, if it must be sold, it should be sold to Bahamians with the capital and vision to further advance the company with the latest technologies available in phone and Internet services.”
Another stated, “Batelco belongs to the people of the Bahamas and should not be sold. Bahamians should own and run Batelco.” “I feel that it was a very bad decision because they sold such a great portion of the company for such little money. BTC makes a lot of money just in one year. In two years time BTC would have already made over that amount, so it really made no sense selling for so little,” another person commented.
Among those who were undecided, one stated, “Notwithstanding that the sale is inevitable and probably necessary. I'm curious to know what criteria was laid out to qualify as a purchaser. Does C&W meet the criteria, if they do and other companies also did, what were the track records of the other companies when compared to C&W? Why must we sell 51 per cent as opposed to 49 per cent. Why not consider a group of Bahamians as opposed to foreigners?”
December 13, 2010
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)