Please Specify the Threat
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Information reaching us notes that, this nation’s armed forces have been put on alert – with this alert being sounded because of some unspecified threat to the national security of the Bahamas.
We are also hearing it said that, the Hon. Orville A. T. ‘Tommy’ Turnquest believes that there is a credible threat to this nation’s security.
While we have our full share of doubts about this matter, we are today respectfully calling on the Minister of National Security to step forward; this with a view to specifying the nature of this threat or – in the alternate- withdraw these remarks.
Indeed, there is information coming in suggests that, the unions' fight to oust Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) as the purchaser of the majority stake in the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) constitutes some kind of threat to this nation’s security; this according to the same Minister of National Security, the Hon. O.A.T. ‘Tommy’ Turnquest.
We cannot and will not believe this of the unions in question; and for sure, we agree with them when they say that, the charge made is unwarranted and unfair.
We are also somewhat discomfited by information coming in that suggests that the same Minister is on record as saying that, the Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF) and Royal Bahamas Defence Force (RBDF) are on alert for any signs of a "threat" as a result of the sale of BTC to CWC.
This statement is at best gratuitous; since the police should always be on alert. The question here should more rightly be turned on the question, alert for what!?
Yet again, new information reaching us indicates that, “…when asked if the unions' fight against CWC represented a national threat, Turnquest said simply, "Absolutely."
This Minister either misspoke or is dreadfully misinformed.
And so today, we make the point – and here point blank – we do believe that workers and their representatives do have a right to protest any decision or proposal made by any administration in a free and sovereign Bahamas.
By necessary implication, then, we are in total disagreement with the Minister of National Security when he intimates that, the unions’ current opposition to the BTC- Cable and Wireless deal for whatever reason represents a so-called threat to either national development or security.
Claiming that he and his colleagues know what they know – and that [furthermore] they are prepared for what they [now] know, the Hon. Tommy Turnquest darkly hints and claims that, they are also quite ready for any threat.
These obscure statements apparently have something or the other to do with demands and statements made by certain union leaders and their followers who are opposed to that deal in the works that seems set to give Cable and Wireless a 51% stake in BTC.
As far as we know and understand the extent to which Bahamians have rights in this country is to the effect that, they surely do have a right to movement, expression and to sharing such with their fellows here, there and all around the world.
These people also have a right to express their [peaceful] opposition to any stance taken by any government. And clearly, when workers vote, they have a right to turf one party out and invite another in.
This is part and parcel of how things are done in a democracy.
By the same token, the government of the day has a duty to do its best within the four corners of the law; all the while knowing that whenever they are so minded, the people can elect and select others to lead them.
Yet again, this is part and parcel of how things are done in a democracy.
Here we are certain that the Hon. Minister of National Security is fully aware of these facts of life in a land where sovereignty inheres in the people.
Clearly then, the ‘rights’ whereof we speak are rights that are guaranteed in the fundamental law of the land as that law is to be found in the Constitution; itself a creation of the Bahamian people –united in service and love.
While not saying what information the RBPF and RBDF have about the unions and their plans, or how the information is being acquired, the minister intimated that both of those entities have credible information.
This report merely begs the question – show us the evidence!
Clearly then, when any Minister suggests that, unions and their leaders might for whatever reason pose a threat to the national security of the Bahamian nation, they should feel honor-bound to back up this statement with facts that are easily verifiable.
Otherwise, he should now specify and substantiate the claim he has made – or do the next best thing.
January 13, 2011
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.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
The love of foreigners over Bahamians by the PLP and FNM when it comes to the BTC privatization process...
Selling BTC a threat to national development
thenassauguardian editorial
National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest escalated the dispute between the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) unions and the government over the sale of the majority stake in BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC), when he described the unions’ protest as a national security threat.
Turnquest, in an interview with The Nassau Guardian, went further and stated that the security forces are on alert for any eventuality regarding the dispute. The BTC unions have threatened, with the support of the national trade union movement, a general strike.
Union leaders always threaten to strike when they don’t get their way. In order to carry out a successful strike, however, a majority of the workers represented by these leaders have to support the strike call. And these workers have to be prepared for pain and loss.
There is no evidence, thus far, proving that the members of these unions are prepared to go down this rough road.
The unions have been annoying to the government, but they have not been a national security threat. In fact, the union opposition has been somewhat weak.
There were only a few hundred people at the union march on Parliament in December – that number includes the members of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and other splinter parties which participated. These unions represent tens of thousands of workers.
Only a few hundred people showed up at the union-organized ‘mass rally’ at R.M. Bailey Park on Monday night.
These unions can’t even bring out a good crowd.
The minister has engaged in hyperbole. And by invoking the security forces under his command – the Royal Bahamas Police Force and Royal Bahamas Defence Force – he appears menacing.
The government and its agencies should be on alert for mass disruptions rather than some nebulous national security threat. The unions are likely to continue with small-scale disruptions.
National security threats are actions that threaten the existence of a state. Strike calls by union leaders who cannot turn out their membership do not threaten the existence of The Bahamas.
The decision to sell a major Bahamian state asset to a foreign company, however, is a threat to the national development of the country.
The policy of all Bahamian governments should be to empower Bahamians. They should especially attempt to create more entrepreneurs and to further empower those already in business.
When Bahamians own enterprises, rather than foreigners, more money stays in the country and more Bahamians are usually hired to operate the business.
Furthermore, empowering Bahamians by making Bahamians owners of BTC would allow those Bahamians to then become players in the regional telecommunications industry. Policymakers should be aiming for Bahamians to someday take over telcos across the Caribbean.
Instead, the PLP and the Free National Movement (FNM) administrations want to sell a major chunk of this major state asset to foreigners.
A privatization policy is needed in The Bahamas. It should state that bidders for state assets either be Bahamian or they should be joint venture partnerships with Bahamians.
The love of foreigners over Bahamians when it comes to the BTC privatization process is the threat Bahamians should be concerned about when it comes to the PLP and the FNM.
1/12/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest escalated the dispute between the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) unions and the government over the sale of the majority stake in BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC), when he described the unions’ protest as a national security threat.
Turnquest, in an interview with The Nassau Guardian, went further and stated that the security forces are on alert for any eventuality regarding the dispute. The BTC unions have threatened, with the support of the national trade union movement, a general strike.
Union leaders always threaten to strike when they don’t get their way. In order to carry out a successful strike, however, a majority of the workers represented by these leaders have to support the strike call. And these workers have to be prepared for pain and loss.
There is no evidence, thus far, proving that the members of these unions are prepared to go down this rough road.
The unions have been annoying to the government, but they have not been a national security threat. In fact, the union opposition has been somewhat weak.
There were only a few hundred people at the union march on Parliament in December – that number includes the members of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and other splinter parties which participated. These unions represent tens of thousands of workers.
Only a few hundred people showed up at the union-organized ‘mass rally’ at R.M. Bailey Park on Monday night.
These unions can’t even bring out a good crowd.
The minister has engaged in hyperbole. And by invoking the security forces under his command – the Royal Bahamas Police Force and Royal Bahamas Defence Force – he appears menacing.
The government and its agencies should be on alert for mass disruptions rather than some nebulous national security threat. The unions are likely to continue with small-scale disruptions.
National security threats are actions that threaten the existence of a state. Strike calls by union leaders who cannot turn out their membership do not threaten the existence of The Bahamas.
The decision to sell a major Bahamian state asset to a foreign company, however, is a threat to the national development of the country.
The policy of all Bahamian governments should be to empower Bahamians. They should especially attempt to create more entrepreneurs and to further empower those already in business.
When Bahamians own enterprises, rather than foreigners, more money stays in the country and more Bahamians are usually hired to operate the business.
Furthermore, empowering Bahamians by making Bahamians owners of BTC would allow those Bahamians to then become players in the regional telecommunications industry. Policymakers should be aiming for Bahamians to someday take over telcos across the Caribbean.
Instead, the PLP and the Free National Movement (FNM) administrations want to sell a major chunk of this major state asset to foreigners.
A privatization policy is needed in The Bahamas. It should state that bidders for state assets either be Bahamian or they should be joint venture partnerships with Bahamians.
The love of foreigners over Bahamians when it comes to the BTC privatization process is the threat Bahamians should be concerned about when it comes to the PLP and the FNM.
1/12/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
The BTC Bad Deal with Cable & Wireless
In Adamant Opposition to a bad Deal
The Bahama Journal Editorial
There are times in life when conscience demands that we set aside petty calculation and yield to its dictates; such a time has come for this Journal as we call on the current administration to heed the voice of the Bahamian people.
This voice – as we have heard it as it echoes and resonates – demands that, all Bahamians who are patriots should rise – as if they were one man- in opposition to any deal that would deny the Bahamian people majority control of entities such as BTC.
Indeed, like so very many other Bahamians who disagree with the current administration’s on that matter which involves giving Cable and Wireless a 51% per cent stake in BTC; we do so based on our studied conclusion that this deal is not in the best interests of either BTC or the Bahamian people.
Contrariwise, we are today quite persuaded that, things would go very differently and much better for all parties concerned were the government minded to make no deal with anyone that does not leave the Bahamas and the Bahamian people in direct control of this entity.
Here we rush to assure the public that our difference with the current administration has next to nothing to do with any position that might seem to be –at least on first blush- barking up the same tree.
And so, while some who oppose the deal may be doing so because they fear some of its implications and ramifications, moving forward; we are where we are based on principle.
That principle has to do with our deeply held conviction that there are certain properties that should never be alienated to the control of any foreign entity; this based on our conclusion that tied up in these entities are values that cut to the very core of what it means to be both sovereign and self-respecting.
We are where we are on this issue based on our fervently held view that, there are properties that are so very valuable and so deeply enmeshed with this nation’s identity and security.
And clearly then, we are fulsome in our support of all those Bahamian nationalists who are not prepared to sit by and watch as BTC – as part of this nation’s patrimony – released into the hands of Cable and Wireless.
Here we hasten to add that, we are not opposed to foreign involvement in BTC or any other Bahamian owned entity; what we resent has to do with giving them the whip-hand that comes with the 51% share.
The BTC deal –as proposed and as debated throughout the length and breadth of the Bahamas – is one that has galvanized a tremendous amount of opposition.
Indeed, so loud and so resonant has the voice of the people been that today, we marvel that those who might yet make the difference have not heeded the call and plea for them to turn around and do what is right.
And as we are led to understand and appreciate what seems to be an emerging consensus, the Bahamian people are –for the most part- opposed to the deal that is set to be struck between BTC and Cable and Wireless.
Those people who oppose the deal [as currently proposed] seem to be of the view that the deal is a bad one.
We agree with them.
And not only do we agree with them, we telegraph our resolve to stand with all Bahamians who would seriously request of the current administration that, they can and should take a while before putting pen to paper on that now vexing matter involving BTC and Cable and Wireless.
But even as we are set on making this principled position known and noted, we are also aware of the fact that, the current administration seems set on its current path.
Here we also note that, no changes have been made to the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Government and Cable & Wireless over BTC's impending sale.
We are also hearing say that, the government is on course to finalizing a contract with C&W which is expected to be signed this month; and that, the said sale should be completed by the middle of February.
But be that as it may – whether the deal with Cable and Wireless is consummated or not – we are opposed to it in its current form.
January 12, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
The Bahama Journal Editorial
There are times in life when conscience demands that we set aside petty calculation and yield to its dictates; such a time has come for this Journal as we call on the current administration to heed the voice of the Bahamian people.
This voice – as we have heard it as it echoes and resonates – demands that, all Bahamians who are patriots should rise – as if they were one man- in opposition to any deal that would deny the Bahamian people majority control of entities such as BTC.
Indeed, like so very many other Bahamians who disagree with the current administration’s on that matter which involves giving Cable and Wireless a 51% per cent stake in BTC; we do so based on our studied conclusion that this deal is not in the best interests of either BTC or the Bahamian people.
Contrariwise, we are today quite persuaded that, things would go very differently and much better for all parties concerned were the government minded to make no deal with anyone that does not leave the Bahamas and the Bahamian people in direct control of this entity.
Here we rush to assure the public that our difference with the current administration has next to nothing to do with any position that might seem to be –at least on first blush- barking up the same tree.
And so, while some who oppose the deal may be doing so because they fear some of its implications and ramifications, moving forward; we are where we are based on principle.
That principle has to do with our deeply held conviction that there are certain properties that should never be alienated to the control of any foreign entity; this based on our conclusion that tied up in these entities are values that cut to the very core of what it means to be both sovereign and self-respecting.
We are where we are on this issue based on our fervently held view that, there are properties that are so very valuable and so deeply enmeshed with this nation’s identity and security.
And clearly then, we are fulsome in our support of all those Bahamian nationalists who are not prepared to sit by and watch as BTC – as part of this nation’s patrimony – released into the hands of Cable and Wireless.
Here we hasten to add that, we are not opposed to foreign involvement in BTC or any other Bahamian owned entity; what we resent has to do with giving them the whip-hand that comes with the 51% share.
The BTC deal –as proposed and as debated throughout the length and breadth of the Bahamas – is one that has galvanized a tremendous amount of opposition.
Indeed, so loud and so resonant has the voice of the people been that today, we marvel that those who might yet make the difference have not heeded the call and plea for them to turn around and do what is right.
And as we are led to understand and appreciate what seems to be an emerging consensus, the Bahamian people are –for the most part- opposed to the deal that is set to be struck between BTC and Cable and Wireless.
Those people who oppose the deal [as currently proposed] seem to be of the view that the deal is a bad one.
We agree with them.
And not only do we agree with them, we telegraph our resolve to stand with all Bahamians who would seriously request of the current administration that, they can and should take a while before putting pen to paper on that now vexing matter involving BTC and Cable and Wireless.
But even as we are set on making this principled position known and noted, we are also aware of the fact that, the current administration seems set on its current path.
Here we also note that, no changes have been made to the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Government and Cable & Wireless over BTC's impending sale.
We are also hearing say that, the government is on course to finalizing a contract with C&W which is expected to be signed this month; and that, the said sale should be completed by the middle of February.
But be that as it may – whether the deal with Cable and Wireless is consummated or not – we are opposed to it in its current form.
January 12, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Labor, Politics and Majority Rule
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Another Majority Rule anniversary has come and has gone.
And so, today we reference matters germane to labor, politics and Majority Rule in the Bahamas.
And for sure – even as this one recedes into the mists that come with memories effaced; another will arrive and some other Bahamians will venture that, the General Strike of 1958 did play a massively important role in the social transformation of the Bahamas.
And so we would argue that those who now go in search of the mainspring governing action in those days might first wish to look at the leadership cadre behind the General Strike; there they would find Randol F. Fawkes [labor’s main man and champion of the so-called grass roots]; Clifford Darling, a taxi-driver [and therefore an owner in his own right of his means of production] and Lynden O. Pindling [as Parliamentary Leader of the then-nascent Progressive Liberal Party].
Fast forward to the social history available to most Bahamians and you would find that, it was the Progressive Liberal Party – with the help of a distinguished cadre of intellectuals and other political savvy men and women [with some of them like Clement Maynard, labor leaders in their own right]; that was able to command the support of the so-called “Majority”.
We would also venture that the role played by Clifford Darling and his men was the maneuver that did more than any other tactic to show the resolve of the Bahamian people not only in the specifics that had triggered the strike, but also in the broader struggle for full adult suffrage in the Bahamas.
And yet again, any fair reading of the social history of the past fifty-plus years would show that it was Pindling’s fate and that of his party to take the mantle and become the pioneers of development in a Bahamas that had entered history’s stream in a truly big way when the case of the Bahamas [that is its case for freedom] was argued before the United Nations.
This was like Black Tuesday of April 27th. 1965 uniquely Pindling’s.
As the record attests, Pindling and his Progressive Liberal Party went on to a series of victories that took them and the people they led to both so-called Majority Rule and Independence.
Evidently, they also faced some major challenges.
Highest on that list would be the damage done by the illicit trade in drugs throughout the Bahamian archipelago; the corrosive effects this trade had - and which it continues to have on social life in our country.
Notwithstanding this challenge and a host of others, there is no doubting the conclusion that the Bahamas built by Pindling endures. In this regard, it is nothing short of exemplary that the man who is today Chief and the man who would be Chief are both distinguished political alumni of the late and truly great Sir Lynden O. Pindling.
And so we would argue that if there is a legacy of 1958 that resounds even now; the resonance is to be found in the ascendancy of the Progressive Liberal Party in the years subsequent.
But even as we make these brief points concerning the General Strike of 1958, the eclipse of Fawkes and his supporters, the subsequent ascendancy of Pindling and the PLP, we also note that, despite their advances and that of the nation itself – there has always been an underclass of workers who have not benefited as much as they might have at one time or the other dreamed.
In addition, there are clearly any number of so-called ‘small’ businesses that have not been able to consolidate themselves in the all the years since the achievement of so-called Majority Rule.
This is not as surprising as it might – on first blush- appear; this because regardless of intention, no government no matter how well-intentioned, can make someone [or better still anyone] succeed in business.
And as an old saying puts it, money goes where money lies – and so it has and so will it continue.
But for sure – even as the evidence mounts that this is so, there remains a persistent cry to the effect that this or that group is being oppressed by another.
This is evidence of the highest order that the real struggle in our country and others has to do with the struggle between classes and the masses; and not that between the so-called ‘races’.
Indeed, such is the current state of political play in the Bahamas that both of this nation’s political parties now vie for the support of practically the same people; and thus the current slide towards a politics of tribalism and personal destruction.
January 11, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Another Majority Rule anniversary has come and has gone.
And so, today we reference matters germane to labor, politics and Majority Rule in the Bahamas.
And for sure – even as this one recedes into the mists that come with memories effaced; another will arrive and some other Bahamians will venture that, the General Strike of 1958 did play a massively important role in the social transformation of the Bahamas.
And so we would argue that those who now go in search of the mainspring governing action in those days might first wish to look at the leadership cadre behind the General Strike; there they would find Randol F. Fawkes [labor’s main man and champion of the so-called grass roots]; Clifford Darling, a taxi-driver [and therefore an owner in his own right of his means of production] and Lynden O. Pindling [as Parliamentary Leader of the then-nascent Progressive Liberal Party].
Fast forward to the social history available to most Bahamians and you would find that, it was the Progressive Liberal Party – with the help of a distinguished cadre of intellectuals and other political savvy men and women [with some of them like Clement Maynard, labor leaders in their own right]; that was able to command the support of the so-called “Majority”.
We would also venture that the role played by Clifford Darling and his men was the maneuver that did more than any other tactic to show the resolve of the Bahamian people not only in the specifics that had triggered the strike, but also in the broader struggle for full adult suffrage in the Bahamas.
And yet again, any fair reading of the social history of the past fifty-plus years would show that it was Pindling’s fate and that of his party to take the mantle and become the pioneers of development in a Bahamas that had entered history’s stream in a truly big way when the case of the Bahamas [that is its case for freedom] was argued before the United Nations.
This was like Black Tuesday of April 27th. 1965 uniquely Pindling’s.
As the record attests, Pindling and his Progressive Liberal Party went on to a series of victories that took them and the people they led to both so-called Majority Rule and Independence.
Evidently, they also faced some major challenges.
Highest on that list would be the damage done by the illicit trade in drugs throughout the Bahamian archipelago; the corrosive effects this trade had - and which it continues to have on social life in our country.
Notwithstanding this challenge and a host of others, there is no doubting the conclusion that the Bahamas built by Pindling endures. In this regard, it is nothing short of exemplary that the man who is today Chief and the man who would be Chief are both distinguished political alumni of the late and truly great Sir Lynden O. Pindling.
And so we would argue that if there is a legacy of 1958 that resounds even now; the resonance is to be found in the ascendancy of the Progressive Liberal Party in the years subsequent.
But even as we make these brief points concerning the General Strike of 1958, the eclipse of Fawkes and his supporters, the subsequent ascendancy of Pindling and the PLP, we also note that, despite their advances and that of the nation itself – there has always been an underclass of workers who have not benefited as much as they might have at one time or the other dreamed.
In addition, there are clearly any number of so-called ‘small’ businesses that have not been able to consolidate themselves in the all the years since the achievement of so-called Majority Rule.
This is not as surprising as it might – on first blush- appear; this because regardless of intention, no government no matter how well-intentioned, can make someone [or better still anyone] succeed in business.
And as an old saying puts it, money goes where money lies – and so it has and so will it continue.
But for sure – even as the evidence mounts that this is so, there remains a persistent cry to the effect that this or that group is being oppressed by another.
This is evidence of the highest order that the real struggle in our country and others has to do with the struggle between classes and the masses; and not that between the so-called ‘races’.
Indeed, such is the current state of political play in the Bahamas that both of this nation’s political parties now vie for the support of practically the same people; and thus the current slide towards a politics of tribalism and personal destruction.
January 11, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Monday, January 10, 2011
Majority Rule is a concept that has long been lost in the everyday Bahamian way of life
Who says the majority rules?
thenassauguardian editorial
Today is being observed as Majority Rule Day in The Bahamas.
Historically, the day represents the emergence of a local, black Bahamian government, with the responsibility of helping Bahamians govern their own affairs and their future, as The Bahamas began its trek to Independence.
Now in its 44th year, Majority Rule Day continues to be observed as a day that honors those who contributed to The Bahamas we know today. However, mention the words “Majority Rule Day” to the average Bahamian and ask them what it is about and more than 85 percent will look at you like a deer staring into headlights.
Ask the average young person (between the ages of 15-25) and more than 90 percent will think you’re speaking a foreign language.
Not enough Bahamian history is being taught. Most Bahamians don’t know their history, and for the most part, many could care less.
But that’s another story for another time.
As far as celebrating Majority Rule Day is concerned, some feel it is pointless, considering the fact that The Bahamas finds itself in a contradiction from a socio-economic point-of-view. We live in a society where the minority rules the majority.
The rich minority controls and dictates the lifestyle of the majority of the poor Bahamians. We live in a society where “the rich gets richer” and the poor remains poor.
In addition, the idea of “government for and by the people” is not based in reality.
The Bahamian Parliament, which is supposed to represent and fight for the rights of Bahamians, seemingly pass laws that burden the average Bahamian and gives more power to the wealthy among us.
Majority Rule is a concept that has long been lost in the everyday Bahamian way of life. What it stood for in the past, seems to have less relevance and meaning today.
One of the co-founders of Majority Rule Day, former Governor General Arthur D. Hanna, noted that Majority Rule Day was an uphill battle “in that we couldn’t get a level playing field.
“The government of the day (United Bahamian Party - UBP) wanted to hold on to power, therefore, they had all kinds of tricks. One was how they dealt with constituencies.”
On the surface, it seems ironic that many of today’s governments have used the same “tricks” during elections in The Bahamas, but when one considers the fact that some of our leaders of today learned from those of the past, then we can understand certain similarities.
The concept which our forefathers fought for, does not hold the same significance today. So, we celebrate a day that has somehow lost its meaning and its focus, which is the Bahamian people.
We celebrate a day where the majority does not rule, but rather where the minority rules the majority.
1/10/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
Today is being observed as Majority Rule Day in The Bahamas.
Historically, the day represents the emergence of a local, black Bahamian government, with the responsibility of helping Bahamians govern their own affairs and their future, as The Bahamas began its trek to Independence.
Now in its 44th year, Majority Rule Day continues to be observed as a day that honors those who contributed to The Bahamas we know today. However, mention the words “Majority Rule Day” to the average Bahamian and ask them what it is about and more than 85 percent will look at you like a deer staring into headlights.
Ask the average young person (between the ages of 15-25) and more than 90 percent will think you’re speaking a foreign language.
Not enough Bahamian history is being taught. Most Bahamians don’t know their history, and for the most part, many could care less.
But that’s another story for another time.
As far as celebrating Majority Rule Day is concerned, some feel it is pointless, considering the fact that The Bahamas finds itself in a contradiction from a socio-economic point-of-view. We live in a society where the minority rules the majority.
The rich minority controls and dictates the lifestyle of the majority of the poor Bahamians. We live in a society where “the rich gets richer” and the poor remains poor.
In addition, the idea of “government for and by the people” is not based in reality.
The Bahamian Parliament, which is supposed to represent and fight for the rights of Bahamians, seemingly pass laws that burden the average Bahamian and gives more power to the wealthy among us.
Majority Rule is a concept that has long been lost in the everyday Bahamian way of life. What it stood for in the past, seems to have less relevance and meaning today.
One of the co-founders of Majority Rule Day, former Governor General Arthur D. Hanna, noted that Majority Rule Day was an uphill battle “in that we couldn’t get a level playing field.
“The government of the day (United Bahamian Party - UBP) wanted to hold on to power, therefore, they had all kinds of tricks. One was how they dealt with constituencies.”
On the surface, it seems ironic that many of today’s governments have used the same “tricks” during elections in The Bahamas, but when one considers the fact that some of our leaders of today learned from those of the past, then we can understand certain similarities.
The concept which our forefathers fought for, does not hold the same significance today. So, we celebrate a day that has somehow lost its meaning and its focus, which is the Bahamian people.
We celebrate a day where the majority does not rule, but rather where the minority rules the majority.
1/10/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Will the BTC protests really turn into a mass public movement, a la 1958, and in turn - into a political jackpot for the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)?
The BTC protest - a political circus
By PACO NUNEZ
Tribune News Editor
After today, it will be even harder than before to keep a straight face when someone tries to tell me there's no political agenda at work in the protest against the sale of BTC.
It might have been possible to overlook the PLP cronies sprinkled throughout the union-led Rawson Square protest before Christmas, or ignore the interesting coincidence of a Trade Union Congress vice president and vocal BTC-sale opponent being chosen as a PLP candidate.
But it would have taken a far larger dose of self-delusion than I am capable of administering to miss the implications of the National Congress of Trade Unions (NCTU) deciding that today, as it commemorates the 1958 general strike, it will also begin recruiting voters for the first time in its history.
I know this is a first, because when the press release was issued on Friday announcing that the NCTU - an umbrella organisation covering a number of unions including the two representing BTC staff - was calling for all its members to descend on the Parliamentary Registration Department at noon on Monday, it struck me as so strange that I sought an explanation.
"Why a voter registration drive?" - a seemingly simple question. It nevertheless met with such a bewildered reaction at NCTU HQ, you'd have thought I'd stumbled on a state secret.
The first person I spoke to declined to offer an answer. The second, very cagey and clearly suspicious, responded, "Because of the anniversary of general strike," as if the one followed logically on from the other.
She seemed very sure this was the reason, repeating her mantra regardless of how I tried to rephrase or qualify the question.
Eventually, she offered the slightly more helpful, "Because of Majority Rule" - which, granted, does seem a better reason to promote the spirit of representative democracy. Except that, as she admitted when asked, the NCTU had never once before, in the organisation's 16-year life, urged its members or affiliates to register as voters.
"Why now?" I asked, but she merely mumbled some blurb to the effect that since they were already planning to commemorate Majority Rule and the General Strike today, they figured, "Might as well add something else to the mix."
It has nothing to do with BTC or the PLP, she insisted.
Now, maybe I'm just a cynic, but it strikes me as highly unlikely that the choice of that specific "something else" while the labour movement is right in the middle of a busy schedule of angry town hall meetings and confrontational press statements - all directed at the government over the BTC sale and all supported by the opposition - was entirely without ulterior motives.
My opinion, I feel, is supported by the fact that the registration drive is being hitched to so emotive an issue as the celebrated General Strike, with all its connotations of taking a stand against injustice, the power of solidarity to overcome adversity and so on.
Then, there's the fact that so many unionists have already sought to tie the protests against BTC to the General Strike, some even threatening a reenactment of the event which paralysed Nassau for around three weeks.
Also, consider that the man who actually announced the voter registration drive on Friday, the NCTU's secretary general Robert Farquharson, is a big fan of the events of 1958, recently conducting a lecture series on their importance and raising the spectre of a repeat performance in 2008 when he threatened a national walkout of 45,000 union members over the BTC privatisation process.
This is the same Robert Farquharson who was lately president of the BCPOU, the union now protesting on behalf of the disgruntled BTC workers.
The same Robert Farquharson who, though vociferously opposed to the government's deal with Cable and Wireless, said nothing when the PLP revealed their earlier deal to sell the company to an unnamed group of foreigners - a decision his successor Bernard Evans distanced himself from, saying he doesn't think any foreign entity should own BTC and that he couldn't speak for Mr Farquharson's actions.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting Mr F is taking instructions from the PLP, or trying to drive voters into their waiting arms in the hopes of some political reward. He, like the other union leaders who've declared against the deal, understand the challenge it represents to their powerful and lucrative positions, and probably feel their potential to recruit for the opposition is nothing more than a threatening stick to wave in front of the government right now.
As an old BCPOU man, the NCTU secretary general will be well aware of this potential. After all, his predecessor as president of that union is now the PLP MP for Golden Gates, Shane Gibson, who led a series of high profile, politically-loaded union protests toward the end of the FNM's first stint in power.
Shane Gibson is also one of the point men on the PLP's BTC controversy-stirring team. He and his cohorts are well aware of the possible benefits of hitching their political cart to the anti-Cable and Wireless bandwagon, and I'd be willing to bet that the seed of this new enthusiasm for "voter registration" was subtly planted in the minds of NCTU members following one of the opposition's strategy sessions.
But will it pay off? Will the BTC protests really turn into a mass public movement, a la 1958, and in turn into a political jackpot for the PLP?
My money is on 'No'.
The reason is, while both the General Strike and today's BTC squabble began as protests by a small group of workers trying to protect their own interests - in the earlier case, taxi drivers - the reaction of the public has not been the same.
Today, the people don't seem to view most BTC workers the helpless victims of ruthless economic and political overlords, but rather highly over-paid, chronically underachieving wasters who have held the rest of us hostage with their incompetence and poor service for far too long.
Consider the fact that only about 300 people showed up at the recent NCTU-TUC Rawson Square demonstration, despite the presence of a large number of labour leaders from a wide array of unions, and that the BCPOU's public town hall meeting last week was attended by only a few hundred people.
As there are 1,200 BTC employees in total, it would seem the union leaders can't even get their own members, let alone the general public, involved in the crusade.
It seems this theory will be tested tonight, as the unions plan to hold a mass anti-BTC sale rally at RM Bailey Park and have invited all members of the public to attend.
We shall see what level of support these union leaders really enjoy - that is, once the crowd estimates have been down-sized to factor in the PLP supporters likely to be bused in to make up the numbers, political rally style.
What do you think?
Email: pnunez@tribunemedia.net
January 10, 2011
Tribune242 Insight
By PACO NUNEZ
Tribune News Editor
After today, it will be even harder than before to keep a straight face when someone tries to tell me there's no political agenda at work in the protest against the sale of BTC.
It might have been possible to overlook the PLP cronies sprinkled throughout the union-led Rawson Square protest before Christmas, or ignore the interesting coincidence of a Trade Union Congress vice president and vocal BTC-sale opponent being chosen as a PLP candidate.
But it would have taken a far larger dose of self-delusion than I am capable of administering to miss the implications of the National Congress of Trade Unions (NCTU) deciding that today, as it commemorates the 1958 general strike, it will also begin recruiting voters for the first time in its history.
I know this is a first, because when the press release was issued on Friday announcing that the NCTU - an umbrella organisation covering a number of unions including the two representing BTC staff - was calling for all its members to descend on the Parliamentary Registration Department at noon on Monday, it struck me as so strange that I sought an explanation.
"Why a voter registration drive?" - a seemingly simple question. It nevertheless met with such a bewildered reaction at NCTU HQ, you'd have thought I'd stumbled on a state secret.
The first person I spoke to declined to offer an answer. The second, very cagey and clearly suspicious, responded, "Because of the anniversary of general strike," as if the one followed logically on from the other.
She seemed very sure this was the reason, repeating her mantra regardless of how I tried to rephrase or qualify the question.
Eventually, she offered the slightly more helpful, "Because of Majority Rule" - which, granted, does seem a better reason to promote the spirit of representative democracy. Except that, as she admitted when asked, the NCTU had never once before, in the organisation's 16-year life, urged its members or affiliates to register as voters.
"Why now?" I asked, but she merely mumbled some blurb to the effect that since they were already planning to commemorate Majority Rule and the General Strike today, they figured, "Might as well add something else to the mix."
It has nothing to do with BTC or the PLP, she insisted.
Now, maybe I'm just a cynic, but it strikes me as highly unlikely that the choice of that specific "something else" while the labour movement is right in the middle of a busy schedule of angry town hall meetings and confrontational press statements - all directed at the government over the BTC sale and all supported by the opposition - was entirely without ulterior motives.
My opinion, I feel, is supported by the fact that the registration drive is being hitched to so emotive an issue as the celebrated General Strike, with all its connotations of taking a stand against injustice, the power of solidarity to overcome adversity and so on.
Then, there's the fact that so many unionists have already sought to tie the protests against BTC to the General Strike, some even threatening a reenactment of the event which paralysed Nassau for around three weeks.
Also, consider that the man who actually announced the voter registration drive on Friday, the NCTU's secretary general Robert Farquharson, is a big fan of the events of 1958, recently conducting a lecture series on their importance and raising the spectre of a repeat performance in 2008 when he threatened a national walkout of 45,000 union members over the BTC privatisation process.
This is the same Robert Farquharson who was lately president of the BCPOU, the union now protesting on behalf of the disgruntled BTC workers.
The same Robert Farquharson who, though vociferously opposed to the government's deal with Cable and Wireless, said nothing when the PLP revealed their earlier deal to sell the company to an unnamed group of foreigners - a decision his successor Bernard Evans distanced himself from, saying he doesn't think any foreign entity should own BTC and that he couldn't speak for Mr Farquharson's actions.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting Mr F is taking instructions from the PLP, or trying to drive voters into their waiting arms in the hopes of some political reward. He, like the other union leaders who've declared against the deal, understand the challenge it represents to their powerful and lucrative positions, and probably feel their potential to recruit for the opposition is nothing more than a threatening stick to wave in front of the government right now.
As an old BCPOU man, the NCTU secretary general will be well aware of this potential. After all, his predecessor as president of that union is now the PLP MP for Golden Gates, Shane Gibson, who led a series of high profile, politically-loaded union protests toward the end of the FNM's first stint in power.
Shane Gibson is also one of the point men on the PLP's BTC controversy-stirring team. He and his cohorts are well aware of the possible benefits of hitching their political cart to the anti-Cable and Wireless bandwagon, and I'd be willing to bet that the seed of this new enthusiasm for "voter registration" was subtly planted in the minds of NCTU members following one of the opposition's strategy sessions.
But will it pay off? Will the BTC protests really turn into a mass public movement, a la 1958, and in turn into a political jackpot for the PLP?
My money is on 'No'.
The reason is, while both the General Strike and today's BTC squabble began as protests by a small group of workers trying to protect their own interests - in the earlier case, taxi drivers - the reaction of the public has not been the same.
Today, the people don't seem to view most BTC workers the helpless victims of ruthless economic and political overlords, but rather highly over-paid, chronically underachieving wasters who have held the rest of us hostage with their incompetence and poor service for far too long.
Consider the fact that only about 300 people showed up at the recent NCTU-TUC Rawson Square demonstration, despite the presence of a large number of labour leaders from a wide array of unions, and that the BCPOU's public town hall meeting last week was attended by only a few hundred people.
As there are 1,200 BTC employees in total, it would seem the union leaders can't even get their own members, let alone the general public, involved in the crusade.
It seems this theory will be tested tonight, as the unions plan to hold a mass anti-BTC sale rally at RM Bailey Park and have invited all members of the public to attend.
We shall see what level of support these union leaders really enjoy - that is, once the crowd estimates have been down-sized to factor in the PLP supporters likely to be bused in to make up the numbers, political rally style.
What do you think?
Email: pnunez@tribunemedia.net
January 10, 2011
Tribune242 Insight
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) is becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity
The BTC Dinosaur
by Simon
The unmistakeable symptom which demonstrated that BTC was becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity surfaced as the bottom fell out of its long distance market almost overnight. On the way to losing its outdated status as a state monopoly, the company started exhibiting the classic stages of grief.
First, BTC stuck its head in the sand, attempting to use legal tactics and lame arguments as to why it should maintain a laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank monopoly with outrageously high rates.
Those rates continued to suck endless millions from businesses and homes despite long distance charges plummeting around the world, thanks to innovations from the internet to fibre optic cable and mobile phones. In addition to rapidly changing technologies, the economics of telecommunications was upended globally even as BTC remained in the first stages of grief: denial and anger.
BTC did attempt the next stage, bargaining. With fanfare it announced its introduction of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) to The Bahamas. The announcement of ViBe was curious as the company tried to convince customers that this was a revolution in long distance service. Too little. Way too late.
STRANGLEHOLD
The revolution had already occurred as Bahamians in droves turned to various VOIP options to circumvent BTC’s stranglehold on long distance. As the revolution, which BTC came too late, quickened, the Vonage boxes were stacked high at various mail courier services which Bahamians were also turning to in avoidance of a postal system which had given a new meaning to snail mail.
Still, BTC lagged behind, late in introducing various services, with all manner of excuses. But it wasn’t simply the new services of which BTC was not yet proficient that annoyed customers. As frustrating were the things it still had not mastered after many decades in operation.
For too many, getting a new landline was the equivalent of root canal with the latter perhaps less painless and quicker. While jurisdictions around the world enjoyed landline voice mail for some time, BTC, despite supposedly having the technology, was once again late in introducing such a relatively simple feature.
It took some time for BTC to respond to the BlackBerry, despite our position as a world financial centre with many travelling here to conduct high-end business. And, despite the millions of tourists we host annually.
BTC’s time problem was at times also comical. A friend recalls dialling 917 to get the time and listening to a time off by several minutes. If you call 917 today, the long pause is a fitting example of the company’s woes. Of course, many people no longer call the time. Instead many consult portable devices especially cell phones now more ubiquitous than watches.
So, starved of overpriced long distance revenues, BTC turned to cellular services to gouge customers to fund its operations and fuel its growth. Today, The Bahamas has some of the highest cell phone rates in the world. It was not too long ago that we stopped paying for making and receiving a call on our cells.
BTC will tell us that they charge what they do in order to invest in new technology, serve a far-flung archipelago, pay decent salaries to valuable employees, while maintaining a certain level of service to customers.
TOO SMALL
And, this is precisely the Catch-22. As a stand-alone entity the company is too small and does not have the economies of scale necessary to compete with other telecoms while providing Bahamians with less expensive and improved service.
BTC is too small to provide, in a more cost-effective manner, the capital expenditure and investments needed to keep pace with advancements in areas from mobile data to broadband. Moreover, as a part of a larger network, BTC will be able to diversify its revenue streams in order to provide cheaper and better service.
One argument making the rounds is that BTC and The Bahamas can mirror Brazil, Singapore, South Korea and Australia in terms of the ability of the governments of those countries to invest in their respective telecommunications sectors. The sheer size of those countries, whether geographically or economically, makes such comparisons unconvincing.
In 2009 terms the gross domestic product of The Bahamas was around $7 billion dollars. Singapore’s was approximately $182 billion, South Korea’s was $832 billion, Australia’s was $924 billion and Brazil’s was a near $1 trillion dollars. In terms of market size and the ability of these governments to invest in telecommunications as opposed to The Bahamas, it is a matter of comparing a single apple and an orange grove.
The case for privatization is clear if The Bahamas is to prevent the lumbering dinosaur of BTC from turning into a fossilized giant. Cable and Wireless is the sort of international partner that may breathe new life into BTC, which, as a stand-alone may only survive through Bahamians endlessly paying exorbitant rates.
The heated rhetoric flowing from the proposed arrangement between BTC and Cable and Wireless has obscured many facts, some out of fear and some out of political manipulation in service of certain interests.
OVERSIGHT
The Bahamas will maintain a 49 percent stake in BTC. This will ensure critical influence in the new BTC. Further, the Government will have significant regulatory and oversight power, to help check and balance Cable and Wireless.
Moreover, Bahamians from every walk of life will be able to purchase shares in BTC as the Government eventually makes 25 percent of its shares available to individuals and groups such as union pension funds. And, within three years, Cable and Wireless will face new competitors, including any consortium of Bahamians interested in the telecoms sector.
So, in relatively short order, Bahamians will enjoy cheaper rates, better service, more communications options and broader economic empowerment through access to shares in a telecom.
Yet, those realities are being drowned out by a dying dinosaur still in denial, still angry and still bargaining, grieving for a past that is gone and a future that is unsustainable as it charges its customers outrageous prices for what others in the region and around the world pay pennies.
Over the many years, BTC has had many dedicated employees who have rendered valuable service to the company and The Bahamas. But collectively, the current company, like the dinosaurs of old, has been hit by life-altering realities in a new global telecommunications landscape forever transformed by the internet.
To provide its customers with less expensive and more reliable service, BTC must act less as an employment bureau for featherbedding cronies and constituents.
For some, the new reality is a depressing, the penultimate step in the stages of grief. Still, it appears that despite all the shouting and screaming and cries of Armageddon, most Bahamians long ago accepted the need for change. While they may be somewhat nostalgic about the old Batelco, this is less an expression of the last stage of grief, and more a celebration of a new chapter in telecommunications.
Of course, for some, acceptance will only come reluctantly and painfully. Yet even for these individuals, indeed for all Bahamians, BTC is one dinosaur from whom the country can still gain significant, though declining benefits, before it slides into possible irrelevance and a weakened state if left in its present form. If that happened we really would have something to mourn.
bahamapundit
by Simon
The unmistakeable symptom which demonstrated that BTC was becoming a dinosaur with diminished capacity surfaced as the bottom fell out of its long distance market almost overnight. On the way to losing its outdated status as a state monopoly, the company started exhibiting the classic stages of grief.
First, BTC stuck its head in the sand, attempting to use legal tactics and lame arguments as to why it should maintain a laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank monopoly with outrageously high rates.
Those rates continued to suck endless millions from businesses and homes despite long distance charges plummeting around the world, thanks to innovations from the internet to fibre optic cable and mobile phones. In addition to rapidly changing technologies, the economics of telecommunications was upended globally even as BTC remained in the first stages of grief: denial and anger.
BTC did attempt the next stage, bargaining. With fanfare it announced its introduction of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) to The Bahamas. The announcement of ViBe was curious as the company tried to convince customers that this was a revolution in long distance service. Too little. Way too late.
STRANGLEHOLD
The revolution had already occurred as Bahamians in droves turned to various VOIP options to circumvent BTC’s stranglehold on long distance. As the revolution, which BTC came too late, quickened, the Vonage boxes were stacked high at various mail courier services which Bahamians were also turning to in avoidance of a postal system which had given a new meaning to snail mail.
Still, BTC lagged behind, late in introducing various services, with all manner of excuses. But it wasn’t simply the new services of which BTC was not yet proficient that annoyed customers. As frustrating were the things it still had not mastered after many decades in operation.
For too many, getting a new landline was the equivalent of root canal with the latter perhaps less painless and quicker. While jurisdictions around the world enjoyed landline voice mail for some time, BTC, despite supposedly having the technology, was once again late in introducing such a relatively simple feature.
It took some time for BTC to respond to the BlackBerry, despite our position as a world financial centre with many travelling here to conduct high-end business. And, despite the millions of tourists we host annually.
BTC’s time problem was at times also comical. A friend recalls dialling 917 to get the time and listening to a time off by several minutes. If you call 917 today, the long pause is a fitting example of the company’s woes. Of course, many people no longer call the time. Instead many consult portable devices especially cell phones now more ubiquitous than watches.
So, starved of overpriced long distance revenues, BTC turned to cellular services to gouge customers to fund its operations and fuel its growth. Today, The Bahamas has some of the highest cell phone rates in the world. It was not too long ago that we stopped paying for making and receiving a call on our cells.
BTC will tell us that they charge what they do in order to invest in new technology, serve a far-flung archipelago, pay decent salaries to valuable employees, while maintaining a certain level of service to customers.
TOO SMALL
And, this is precisely the Catch-22. As a stand-alone entity the company is too small and does not have the economies of scale necessary to compete with other telecoms while providing Bahamians with less expensive and improved service.
BTC is too small to provide, in a more cost-effective manner, the capital expenditure and investments needed to keep pace with advancements in areas from mobile data to broadband. Moreover, as a part of a larger network, BTC will be able to diversify its revenue streams in order to provide cheaper and better service.
One argument making the rounds is that BTC and The Bahamas can mirror Brazil, Singapore, South Korea and Australia in terms of the ability of the governments of those countries to invest in their respective telecommunications sectors. The sheer size of those countries, whether geographically or economically, makes such comparisons unconvincing.
In 2009 terms the gross domestic product of The Bahamas was around $7 billion dollars. Singapore’s was approximately $182 billion, South Korea’s was $832 billion, Australia’s was $924 billion and Brazil’s was a near $1 trillion dollars. In terms of market size and the ability of these governments to invest in telecommunications as opposed to The Bahamas, it is a matter of comparing a single apple and an orange grove.
The case for privatization is clear if The Bahamas is to prevent the lumbering dinosaur of BTC from turning into a fossilized giant. Cable and Wireless is the sort of international partner that may breathe new life into BTC, which, as a stand-alone may only survive through Bahamians endlessly paying exorbitant rates.
The heated rhetoric flowing from the proposed arrangement between BTC and Cable and Wireless has obscured many facts, some out of fear and some out of political manipulation in service of certain interests.
OVERSIGHT
The Bahamas will maintain a 49 percent stake in BTC. This will ensure critical influence in the new BTC. Further, the Government will have significant regulatory and oversight power, to help check and balance Cable and Wireless.
Moreover, Bahamians from every walk of life will be able to purchase shares in BTC as the Government eventually makes 25 percent of its shares available to individuals and groups such as union pension funds. And, within three years, Cable and Wireless will face new competitors, including any consortium of Bahamians interested in the telecoms sector.
So, in relatively short order, Bahamians will enjoy cheaper rates, better service, more communications options and broader economic empowerment through access to shares in a telecom.
Yet, those realities are being drowned out by a dying dinosaur still in denial, still angry and still bargaining, grieving for a past that is gone and a future that is unsustainable as it charges its customers outrageous prices for what others in the region and around the world pay pennies.
Over the many years, BTC has had many dedicated employees who have rendered valuable service to the company and The Bahamas. But collectively, the current company, like the dinosaurs of old, has been hit by life-altering realities in a new global telecommunications landscape forever transformed by the internet.
To provide its customers with less expensive and more reliable service, BTC must act less as an employment bureau for featherbedding cronies and constituents.
For some, the new reality is a depressing, the penultimate step in the stages of grief. Still, it appears that despite all the shouting and screaming and cries of Armageddon, most Bahamians long ago accepted the need for change. While they may be somewhat nostalgic about the old Batelco, this is less an expression of the last stage of grief, and more a celebration of a new chapter in telecommunications.
Of course, for some, acceptance will only come reluctantly and painfully. Yet even for these individuals, indeed for all Bahamians, BTC is one dinosaur from whom the country can still gain significant, though declining benefits, before it slides into possible irrelevance and a weakened state if left in its present form. If that happened we really would have something to mourn.
bahamapundit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)