Maynard: BTC/CWC Issue Damaging Bahamians’ Psyche
By IANTHIA SMITH
Golden Isles Member of Parliament Charles Maynard said he believes Bahamians have been brainwashed into thinking that the deal between the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) is more controversial than it really is.
Mr. Maynard said as much as he led off day two of debate on the BTC privatisation in the House of Assembly Tuesday afternoon.
In fact, he said it was a plan masterminded by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) that has obviously been working as tensions mount in the country over the pending BTC/CWC deal.
He added that ever since the government made steps to privatise the state-owned company the official Opposition has played an "evil role" in the entire process, a process he said has toyed with the minds of the Bahamian people, and that he added was more then evident at those mass rallies, motorcades and protests that grabbed the country’s attention.
"They have done considerable damage to the psyche of many Bahamians," Mr. Maynard said. "They have stirred up emotions that really didn’t need to be stirred up and I think that the worst victims are the employees of BTC.
"What I don’t understand and cannot appreciate is why would you play with the emotions of the hardworking people at BTC, why would you do that? Why would you make people feel uncertain about their futures, why would you encourage them not to meet with who could be their potential new bosses? What benefit would that have to them?"
To say that the BTC/CWC issue has drawn battle lines in the country would be an understatement.
Free National Movement (FNM) and PLP supporters, BTC union representatives and workers and the general public are either for it or against it, but whatever their position they made it known with posters, bullhorns and even blood, sweat and tears.
But according to Mr. Maynard these actions are being fuelled by the PLP who he said is "behind all of the civil unrest in the country right now."
North Andros and Berry Islands MP Vincent Peet would tell you that while he has no problem privatising BTC, however, he said he does have a problem with the lack of transparency with the process.
"It appears to me that Cable &Wireless is the only winner here," he said. "Why is there a two per cent fixed operating fee to be paid to Cable &Wireless for managing BTC?
"It is highly improper for an entity to purchase another entity and then be paid to manage that new entity. This is a guaranteed amount and they get this money even if BTC doesn’t make a cent."
Mr. Peet also accused the government of "selling Bahamians’ generational property" to CWC.
However, Montagu MP Loretta Butler-Turner was quick to shoot down that thought as she claimed she has too strong of an attachment to the country to ever stand for such a thing.
"My grandfather Sir Milo Butler fought for the rights of Bahamians and (you) dare say I, who still live among my people would come in here and sell out our birthright for the Bahamians I live with and see everyday," she said.
"I am a third generation Bahamian. I don’t have to buy the loyalty of Montagu, I live among my people I have to pass them everyday. These are people that I go to church with, went to school with, that I live with, that I work with, they know me. They don’t have to worry about their MP selling out their birthright."
The debate is expected to end on Thursday.
March 23rd, 2011
jonesbahamas
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
W. A. Branville McCartney - M.P. for Bamboo Town - Contribution on the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BTC) / Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) Debate - 23rd, March 2011
Mr. Speaker, my aim is not to lecture, chastise, or insult the intelligence of any person in this Honourable House, and whereas, I may have only been a sitting member for a short time, I came in to this great place either knowing of and/or admiring many of these Honourable Men.
In fact, on many occasions, I remember silently thinking - in awe - what an honor and privilege it is to be sitting among the Members for North Abaco and Farm Road; indeed men who once spoke out emphatically on issues of truth, justice, and equality. So, in saying all that I have said before this, I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that my words – in any way – will not be an affront to any person and I hope that persons do not take offense to them. I would want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that, it is as a result of the courage and boldness that I have seen in some of these Honourable Men over the years, particularly when confronting issues of national importance, I am now emboldened to speak the following.
When I made the decision to enter into politics, I made that decision based on what I saw taking place in my social environment. Among other things, crime was rampant and people were no longer feeling safe in their own environment; dysfunction was at an all time high among our young people and they were failing out of society in larger numbers than ever before; for various reasons, political leaders were continuing to dishonor their office and bring shame on our sovereign nation; while the average Bahamian worked and struggled, the nation was coming undone at its seams. And it seemed as if no one cared; while the people suffered, it appeared to be all politics as usual.
At the time, I thought about my young daughters and wondered if the Bahamas that I saw unfolding before my eyes was the same Bahamas that I wanted for them. I thought about my wife going about her business, not knowing if, at anytime, she would or could become another robbery or murder statistics. I felt compelled to step forward and offer myself as a change agent, not just for my family but for all Bahamians and Bahamian families who were feeling trapped and powerless in a society that was imploding all around us. I was motivated by the idea that I could possibly be one of a few who could be that difference, indeed the difference maker, when it came to shaping the future direction of what is, potentially, the greatest nation in the world. My intention was and is to “be the change I want to see in the world”.
The question for me was, however, how did we allow this situation to occur? I think many of us can remember the excitement that Bahamians from all walks of life felt on July 10, 1973 when the Black, Gold, and Agua Marine was hoisted for the first time to signifying that the Bahamas was a free and independent nation. With this new flag replacing the old Union Jack, no longer were we going to be considered second class citizens in our own society, in our own country. No longer would we be, as Sir Etienne Dupuch puts it in his Tribune Story, seen so “far behind to be conscious of a destiny.” Independence was the promise of a new destiny. And the courage and boldness of a few exceptional men gave all of us - all Bahamians – the courage to dream again. We all become enchanted by the thought of the economic prosperity and social mobility that independence would bring us. We were all enchanted, as a nation, with the promise of empowerment that was to come with independence – a kind of empowerment that was unconceivable before 1973. What a concept:
· Economic empowerment – the thought that we would each have sufficient wealth to take care of our own personal needs;
· Political empowerment – the right to have a voice and say in the way our society is organized and how decisions are made; and
· Societal empowerment – where we would be treated fairly and equally.
For the average Bahamian this was the vision.
Empowerment! What a vision.
We are here today at each other’s throats, not just because the people are angry and worked up at the impending sale of BTC, but we are here today because, some forty years after independence, after decades of dangling the carrot of empowerment before them - offering a pittance here and a pittance there - Bahamian people are disillusioned, fed up with, and angry at feeling disempowered in their own land. And whereas the proposed sale of BTC is the matter before us today, this same sale of the telecommunications corporation is only a symbol of the disenfranchisement and lack of vision that continues to be a slap in the face to the average Bahamian who bought into the dream of independence – a dream that many have given up on as only an illusion.
I hope that, by making my statements today, my intentions in advocating for Bahamian empowerment will not be misconstrued, as I would be remised and, somewhat disingenuous, in not acknowledging the benefits which foreign investors and foreign investments have brought our people and our nation. However, to spend a great deal of time elaborating on that would serve no real purpose at this time, particularly since it has been “thrown” in the face of Bahamian people from time in memoriam. The point of the matter however, at this stage, is that Bahamian people, after decades and decades of educating themselves in some of the finest colleges and universities that the world has to offer, with the hopes of proving themselves, should now – my God - have an opportunity to prove their worth – to the highest degree – in their own country.
If Cable and Wireless is as great as our leaders are purporting them to be, let the government take it hands out of BTC’s operations, open up the market, let Cable and Wireless, Verizon, Sprint, Digicel, and any other provider who wish to enter the market come in. Let them “duke” it out, and may the best man win. But at the end of the day, Bahamians would have to prove their value and their worth,their intelligence and their ingenuity, and if they fail at it, then so be it. But, again, why does Cable and
Wireless need a three year head start on the competition? Politics, nothing more than pure politics.
I will paraphrase a good friend of mine who said that “some of us in society have allowed, and continue to allow our political leaders to us the time proven strategy of divide and conquer to cast one as
the enemy of the other, pitting us imprudently against each other to achieve their goals, while at the same time preventing us from achieving the simple ones we have set for ourselves and have worked so tirelessly to see actualized as a people – the creation of a nation that is a reflection of our collective and intellectual wills.
“At some point, however,” this friend continues, “we must recognize that we are not the enemy of each other, and no matter what our station or position is within society, we are all categorized and classified as Bahamians, and it is under this umbrella that we must collectively assemble” and challenge the political status quo that, for decades, has denied us as a people the right to have the semblance of power that independence has promised us.
What we have seen outside these walls in the past few weeks and days is a challenge to that very same political status quo; what we have seen is a new awakening in a generation that has been disenfranchised for too long – a new people who are crying out to be rescued from, as Martin Luther King calls it, a false sense of inferiority and a feeling of nobodiness.
On January 30, 1997, in one of his last addresses as leader of the Progressive Liberal Party, Sir Lynden Oscar Pindling said his vision for the Bahamas is that it becomes:
· “a nation built on Christian principles and consisting of a citizenry dedicated to respecting and defending human rights, human dignity, and the equal value of all mankind; a nation committed to the reverence for God, the sanctity of the traditional family, equal opportunity, diligent work for the welfare of all its citizens.
· He says the future Bahamas should be “a nation where the people are the most precious resource over and above all natural and material resources, and the national prosperity is measured by the quality of the health, education, and social environment and self esteem of its people;
· He says it should be “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with self-worth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation;”
· But most importantly, he says that the Bahamas should be “a nation where economic diversity creates a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the people, thus producing an atmosphere of variety, healthy competition, and entrepreneurship.”
Now, I have heard all of the colorful commentary over the past few years and month, as people have sought to offer up their analysis and interpretations of me, my actions and my intentions.
Some have said that I am a show-boater and that I like to showboat or indeed grandstand; some who doubt my ability to lead say that I am unqualified, but as one gospel psalmist says, God may not call the most qualified, but he qualifies those whom he calls; and some add that I am a young upstart, and that I should wait for my time; but King says, time is always ripe to do right, and now is the time to make real the promises of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. And over the next few weeks and months, and even years, as I seek to continue serving the people of Bamboo Town and the Bahamas, I am sure that the colorful commentaries, criticisms, and characterizations will only intensify as the naysayers will naysay in their attempts to discredit me and send me to my political graveyard. But I can assure you here today, as I stand in opposition to the offering up of the majority holdings in the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation, no matter what commentaries are offered up about and against me, I promise the Bahamian people, from Grand Bahama in the north to Inagua in the south, Long Island to Rum Cay, from Baintown to Bamboo Town, from Ft. Charlotte to Ft. Fincastle, that God willing, I will continue to do what I entered politics in 2007 to do, and that is work to ensure that The Bahamas becomes a society free from the force of complacency brought on us by years and years of oppression, insensitivity, bitterness, and self-hate – a place where people can begin to feel a true sense of “somebodiness.”
Because, despite what some may say about us - despite what we have been fooled into believing about ourselves - we are a great people, and we have one of the greatest country in the world. As a matter of fact, Dr Miles Munroe always says and I agree, that ”The Bahamas is the place where God lives”.
That is why almost everyone in the world wants a piece of the Bahamian rock. But the time has come for us to stop giving ourselves away, particularly for cheaper cell phone rates! My Lord, my Lord.
Now, because I am reminded that our own dear Prime Minister is himself a transplant from the Progressive Liberal Party of old - (thank God for
radicalism, freedom of expression, and the freedom not to bandwagon) - and the illustrious leader of the opposition has remained a true stalwart, I say what I am about to say without fear of reprisal; In an attempt to get our country back on track, it is time for a revisiting of Sir Lynden’s vision for The Bahamas.
It is time for us to come up with strategies where, as a nation and people, we can continue to use and sustain a moderate tourism and financial product as revenue generators, while at the same time, find new ways to diversify our economy by creating a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the Bahamian people; our country is brimming with a whole generation of young people out there waiting to take up the call. I know!!!!! I speak with young people everyday!! I am a young person and the young people are listening and they will make the difference!!!!!!
We must begin to lay the framework for an economy that is less based on physical capital in favor of one that is more dependent on human capital, for as Ralph Massey says, “human capital is more important to the public welfare than is physical capital.”
We must move away from an economy that thrives primarily on imported goods and servitude, and create one which is more of a producer model, driven primarily on exported goods and services – in many forms – created by manufacturing innovation and invention.
We must have a plan for the mobilization of our land mass, where each island will be developed and advanced so as to play an integral part in the country’s well being.
We must see to it that education is harnessed and used as the tool by which Bahamians, using the ingenuity derived from a quality education, will be able to meet more of their own consumer needs, and at the same time, meet and fulfill the needs of many of the global neighbors, particularly those in other Caribbean nations.
We must clearly define our national needs and stop allowing others to come in from the outside to define them for us. The future model for The Bahamas must be one in which we have a clear vision of the direction that we want our country to go in, and – God forbid – in the absence of qualified Bahamians, we invite a qualified labor force in to assist us with the building of our national dreams – instead of us using our labor to continually build the dreams of others.
Only when we begin to move in these directions, valuing the people as the most precious resource, will we become “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with selfworth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation”
Again it is unfortunate that we have gotten to this day such a day in our history, and I am being put in a position such as this, but what is becoming evident all around us, once again quoting Martin Luther King, “oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself;” this is what we are now experiencing at this momentous time in our history.
The uprising taking place in our country says that we as a people have come full circle in our quest for true independence. And we have lost faith in our chosen leaders to deliver on the promises made decades ago, even years ago.
Disappointingly, I bring my contribution on this debate to a close by quoting from the Honourable Member from North Abaco who once said, among other things, that his job, as leader, is to “anticipate the future as best as he can and to act in the people’s interest.” At that time in 1997, our Prime Minister said to the people of the nation, “because I believe that Bahamians ought to own the majority in Batelco, I shall never, never, ever sell the majority holding in Batelco to anyone other than Bahamians.”
He also said, “I have stated often that I do not want to be elected to office promising one thing, knowing I am going to do another, but neglecting to say what I am going to do, just to get elected.” What a difference 14 years makes. At the time, it was just a matter of trust.
Now, however, some 14 years later, it is regrettable that the promise of empowerment made to the people of the Bahamas - captured in the phrase “never, never, ever” - a promise that they were told that they could trust, is being flagrantly tossed aside as a miscalculation of the time; Time and time Bahamians have showed that they are a trusting people, willing to take any old thing at face value because they want to believe in truth and honesty.
But how many more broken political promises can an already broken people take before they say enough is enough?
I hope that when we see the marches and the demonstrations, and hear of resignations, and other forms of civil protests, we will not be so quick to deplore these marches and demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of protest without expressing similar, strong criticism for the
conditions that brought about the marches and the demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of civil protests.
As I take my seat, I think it is quite obvious that I have no intentions of lending my support to the government’s plan to give over to Cable and Wireless a majority holding in the country’s telecommunications corporation. For the sake of a brighter future for our country, I hope that there will be others of my former colleagues who will be ready to rise above the fray and put aside political allegiances and alliances, to give our people - your people - a vote of confidence in their ability to be innovators, to be owners, and to be operators in a democratic, free market economy; I hope today that we will be affording them some semblance of pride and dignity by voting against this that is before us, and where and when they falter, be a source of encouragement for their betterment; I hope that some of my fellow colleagues will find the courage to show their individual character, and join me in attempting to begin the process of delivering to the Bahamian people the economical, political, and societal empowerment that they have so long been promised but denied.
It is not just me, not just those on the opposite side of the isle, and not just those demonstrating and protesting outside these walls who are making this request; if you have really looked around at our society in the last decade or so, you will have recognized that our entire society is, in some ways, crying out for a vote of confidence. Let us do what is right for a nation. I ask that you and other Bahamians join me and let us turn back the tides of injustice by saying NO to Cable and Wireless as majority owners in BTC.
Bahamas Blog International
In fact, on many occasions, I remember silently thinking - in awe - what an honor and privilege it is to be sitting among the Members for North Abaco and Farm Road; indeed men who once spoke out emphatically on issues of truth, justice, and equality. So, in saying all that I have said before this, I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that my words – in any way – will not be an affront to any person and I hope that persons do not take offense to them. I would want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that, it is as a result of the courage and boldness that I have seen in some of these Honourable Men over the years, particularly when confronting issues of national importance, I am now emboldened to speak the following.
When I made the decision to enter into politics, I made that decision based on what I saw taking place in my social environment. Among other things, crime was rampant and people were no longer feeling safe in their own environment; dysfunction was at an all time high among our young people and they were failing out of society in larger numbers than ever before; for various reasons, political leaders were continuing to dishonor their office and bring shame on our sovereign nation; while the average Bahamian worked and struggled, the nation was coming undone at its seams. And it seemed as if no one cared; while the people suffered, it appeared to be all politics as usual.
At the time, I thought about my young daughters and wondered if the Bahamas that I saw unfolding before my eyes was the same Bahamas that I wanted for them. I thought about my wife going about her business, not knowing if, at anytime, she would or could become another robbery or murder statistics. I felt compelled to step forward and offer myself as a change agent, not just for my family but for all Bahamians and Bahamian families who were feeling trapped and powerless in a society that was imploding all around us. I was motivated by the idea that I could possibly be one of a few who could be that difference, indeed the difference maker, when it came to shaping the future direction of what is, potentially, the greatest nation in the world. My intention was and is to “be the change I want to see in the world”.
The question for me was, however, how did we allow this situation to occur? I think many of us can remember the excitement that Bahamians from all walks of life felt on July 10, 1973 when the Black, Gold, and Agua Marine was hoisted for the first time to signifying that the Bahamas was a free and independent nation. With this new flag replacing the old Union Jack, no longer were we going to be considered second class citizens in our own society, in our own country. No longer would we be, as Sir Etienne Dupuch puts it in his Tribune Story, seen so “far behind to be conscious of a destiny.” Independence was the promise of a new destiny. And the courage and boldness of a few exceptional men gave all of us - all Bahamians – the courage to dream again. We all become enchanted by the thought of the economic prosperity and social mobility that independence would bring us. We were all enchanted, as a nation, with the promise of empowerment that was to come with independence – a kind of empowerment that was unconceivable before 1973. What a concept:
· Economic empowerment – the thought that we would each have sufficient wealth to take care of our own personal needs;
· Political empowerment – the right to have a voice and say in the way our society is organized and how decisions are made; and
· Societal empowerment – where we would be treated fairly and equally.
For the average Bahamian this was the vision.
Empowerment! What a vision.
We are here today at each other’s throats, not just because the people are angry and worked up at the impending sale of BTC, but we are here today because, some forty years after independence, after decades of dangling the carrot of empowerment before them - offering a pittance here and a pittance there - Bahamian people are disillusioned, fed up with, and angry at feeling disempowered in their own land. And whereas the proposed sale of BTC is the matter before us today, this same sale of the telecommunications corporation is only a symbol of the disenfranchisement and lack of vision that continues to be a slap in the face to the average Bahamian who bought into the dream of independence – a dream that many have given up on as only an illusion.
I hope that, by making my statements today, my intentions in advocating for Bahamian empowerment will not be misconstrued, as I would be remised and, somewhat disingenuous, in not acknowledging the benefits which foreign investors and foreign investments have brought our people and our nation. However, to spend a great deal of time elaborating on that would serve no real purpose at this time, particularly since it has been “thrown” in the face of Bahamian people from time in memoriam. The point of the matter however, at this stage, is that Bahamian people, after decades and decades of educating themselves in some of the finest colleges and universities that the world has to offer, with the hopes of proving themselves, should now – my God - have an opportunity to prove their worth – to the highest degree – in their own country.
If Cable and Wireless is as great as our leaders are purporting them to be, let the government take it hands out of BTC’s operations, open up the market, let Cable and Wireless, Verizon, Sprint, Digicel, and any other provider who wish to enter the market come in. Let them “duke” it out, and may the best man win. But at the end of the day, Bahamians would have to prove their value and their worth,their intelligence and their ingenuity, and if they fail at it, then so be it. But, again, why does Cable and
Wireless need a three year head start on the competition? Politics, nothing more than pure politics.
I will paraphrase a good friend of mine who said that “some of us in society have allowed, and continue to allow our political leaders to us the time proven strategy of divide and conquer to cast one as
the enemy of the other, pitting us imprudently against each other to achieve their goals, while at the same time preventing us from achieving the simple ones we have set for ourselves and have worked so tirelessly to see actualized as a people – the creation of a nation that is a reflection of our collective and intellectual wills.
“At some point, however,” this friend continues, “we must recognize that we are not the enemy of each other, and no matter what our station or position is within society, we are all categorized and classified as Bahamians, and it is under this umbrella that we must collectively assemble” and challenge the political status quo that, for decades, has denied us as a people the right to have the semblance of power that independence has promised us.
What we have seen outside these walls in the past few weeks and days is a challenge to that very same political status quo; what we have seen is a new awakening in a generation that has been disenfranchised for too long – a new people who are crying out to be rescued from, as Martin Luther King calls it, a false sense of inferiority and a feeling of nobodiness.
On January 30, 1997, in one of his last addresses as leader of the Progressive Liberal Party, Sir Lynden Oscar Pindling said his vision for the Bahamas is that it becomes:
· “a nation built on Christian principles and consisting of a citizenry dedicated to respecting and defending human rights, human dignity, and the equal value of all mankind; a nation committed to the reverence for God, the sanctity of the traditional family, equal opportunity, diligent work for the welfare of all its citizens.
· He says the future Bahamas should be “a nation where the people are the most precious resource over and above all natural and material resources, and the national prosperity is measured by the quality of the health, education, and social environment and self esteem of its people;
· He says it should be “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with self-worth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation;”
· But most importantly, he says that the Bahamas should be “a nation where economic diversity creates a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the people, thus producing an atmosphere of variety, healthy competition, and entrepreneurship.”
Now, I have heard all of the colorful commentary over the past few years and month, as people have sought to offer up their analysis and interpretations of me, my actions and my intentions.
Some have said that I am a show-boater and that I like to showboat or indeed grandstand; some who doubt my ability to lead say that I am unqualified, but as one gospel psalmist says, God may not call the most qualified, but he qualifies those whom he calls; and some add that I am a young upstart, and that I should wait for my time; but King says, time is always ripe to do right, and now is the time to make real the promises of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. And over the next few weeks and months, and even years, as I seek to continue serving the people of Bamboo Town and the Bahamas, I am sure that the colorful commentaries, criticisms, and characterizations will only intensify as the naysayers will naysay in their attempts to discredit me and send me to my political graveyard. But I can assure you here today, as I stand in opposition to the offering up of the majority holdings in the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation, no matter what commentaries are offered up about and against me, I promise the Bahamian people, from Grand Bahama in the north to Inagua in the south, Long Island to Rum Cay, from Baintown to Bamboo Town, from Ft. Charlotte to Ft. Fincastle, that God willing, I will continue to do what I entered politics in 2007 to do, and that is work to ensure that The Bahamas becomes a society free from the force of complacency brought on us by years and years of oppression, insensitivity, bitterness, and self-hate – a place where people can begin to feel a true sense of “somebodiness.”
Because, despite what some may say about us - despite what we have been fooled into believing about ourselves - we are a great people, and we have one of the greatest country in the world. As a matter of fact, Dr Miles Munroe always says and I agree, that ”The Bahamas is the place where God lives”.
That is why almost everyone in the world wants a piece of the Bahamian rock. But the time has come for us to stop giving ourselves away, particularly for cheaper cell phone rates! My Lord, my Lord.
Now, because I am reminded that our own dear Prime Minister is himself a transplant from the Progressive Liberal Party of old - (thank God for
radicalism, freedom of expression, and the freedom not to bandwagon) - and the illustrious leader of the opposition has remained a true stalwart, I say what I am about to say without fear of reprisal; In an attempt to get our country back on track, it is time for a revisiting of Sir Lynden’s vision for The Bahamas.
It is time for us to come up with strategies where, as a nation and people, we can continue to use and sustain a moderate tourism and financial product as revenue generators, while at the same time, find new ways to diversify our economy by creating a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the Bahamian people; our country is brimming with a whole generation of young people out there waiting to take up the call. I know!!!!! I speak with young people everyday!! I am a young person and the young people are listening and they will make the difference!!!!!!
We must begin to lay the framework for an economy that is less based on physical capital in favor of one that is more dependent on human capital, for as Ralph Massey says, “human capital is more important to the public welfare than is physical capital.”
We must move away from an economy that thrives primarily on imported goods and servitude, and create one which is more of a producer model, driven primarily on exported goods and services – in many forms – created by manufacturing innovation and invention.
We must have a plan for the mobilization of our land mass, where each island will be developed and advanced so as to play an integral part in the country’s well being.
We must see to it that education is harnessed and used as the tool by which Bahamians, using the ingenuity derived from a quality education, will be able to meet more of their own consumer needs, and at the same time, meet and fulfill the needs of many of the global neighbors, particularly those in other Caribbean nations.
We must clearly define our national needs and stop allowing others to come in from the outside to define them for us. The future model for The Bahamas must be one in which we have a clear vision of the direction that we want our country to go in, and – God forbid – in the absence of qualified Bahamians, we invite a qualified labor force in to assist us with the building of our national dreams – instead of us using our labor to continually build the dreams of others.
Only when we begin to move in these directions, valuing the people as the most precious resource, will we become “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with selfworth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation”
Again it is unfortunate that we have gotten to this day such a day in our history, and I am being put in a position such as this, but what is becoming evident all around us, once again quoting Martin Luther King, “oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself;” this is what we are now experiencing at this momentous time in our history.
The uprising taking place in our country says that we as a people have come full circle in our quest for true independence. And we have lost faith in our chosen leaders to deliver on the promises made decades ago, even years ago.
Disappointingly, I bring my contribution on this debate to a close by quoting from the Honourable Member from North Abaco who once said, among other things, that his job, as leader, is to “anticipate the future as best as he can and to act in the people’s interest.” At that time in 1997, our Prime Minister said to the people of the nation, “because I believe that Bahamians ought to own the majority in Batelco, I shall never, never, ever sell the majority holding in Batelco to anyone other than Bahamians.”
He also said, “I have stated often that I do not want to be elected to office promising one thing, knowing I am going to do another, but neglecting to say what I am going to do, just to get elected.” What a difference 14 years makes. At the time, it was just a matter of trust.
Now, however, some 14 years later, it is regrettable that the promise of empowerment made to the people of the Bahamas - captured in the phrase “never, never, ever” - a promise that they were told that they could trust, is being flagrantly tossed aside as a miscalculation of the time; Time and time Bahamians have showed that they are a trusting people, willing to take any old thing at face value because they want to believe in truth and honesty.
But how many more broken political promises can an already broken people take before they say enough is enough?
I hope that when we see the marches and the demonstrations, and hear of resignations, and other forms of civil protests, we will not be so quick to deplore these marches and demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of protest without expressing similar, strong criticism for the
conditions that brought about the marches and the demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of civil protests.
As I take my seat, I think it is quite obvious that I have no intentions of lending my support to the government’s plan to give over to Cable and Wireless a majority holding in the country’s telecommunications corporation. For the sake of a brighter future for our country, I hope that there will be others of my former colleagues who will be ready to rise above the fray and put aside political allegiances and alliances, to give our people - your people - a vote of confidence in their ability to be innovators, to be owners, and to be operators in a democratic, free market economy; I hope today that we will be affording them some semblance of pride and dignity by voting against this that is before us, and where and when they falter, be a source of encouragement for their betterment; I hope that some of my fellow colleagues will find the courage to show their individual character, and join me in attempting to begin the process of delivering to the Bahamian people the economical, political, and societal empowerment that they have so long been promised but denied.
It is not just me, not just those on the opposite side of the isle, and not just those demonstrating and protesting outside these walls who are making this request; if you have really looked around at our society in the last decade or so, you will have recognized that our entire society is, in some ways, crying out for a vote of confidence. Let us do what is right for a nation. I ask that you and other Bahamians join me and let us turn back the tides of injustice by saying NO to Cable and Wireless as majority owners in BTC.
Bahamas Blog International
The Perry Christie camp is certainly desperate to win an election
Election tactics to fool Bahamians in full swing
tribune242 editorial
DURING yesterday's rally Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union president Bernard Evans expressed the hope that "between now and the vote something will happen to derail the sale" of BTC to Cable & Wireless.
We are certain that the Bahamian woman who called a radio show yesterday morning to complain that she tried to pay her telephone bill but found no cashier on duty at any of the outlets-- except at the BTC Marathon office -- to assist her is anxious for the sale to go through. She is probably among the many Bahamians who -- unlike Mr Evans -- cannot wait for the company to be privatised so that persons like herself will get the standard of service they have every right to expect.
It is presumed that instead of manning their stations yesterday many of the missing staff were on Bay Street protesting the sale of BTC. Lower fees, better service and more choice in their public communications is what the public wants -- as far as many of them are concerned, it cannot come soon enough. Sunday night an internal e-mail, claiming to have been sent by Philip "Brave" Davis to six party members, mysteriously found its way to the desks of several newspaper editors and reporters.
With daily information being supplied by TV, Twitter, Face book and all the other new fangled means of information, Bahamians are sufficiently well informed not to buy into the PLP's propaganda blaming the Bahamas' economic downturn on the Ingraham government, rather than where it rightfully belongs -- the world economic crash.
"We have not been able to persuade the electorate that it is management and not the global economy that is causing the woes today..." said the e-mail. Party members have been advised to change their tactics. The e-mail claims that what is "resonating is the intentional delay and slothfulness to get things started that was left in place." We do not think that what the PLP like to call "stop, review and cancel" will resonant with Bahamians either if they fully understand what the Ingraham government has saved for them by going over all agreements left in place by the Christie government. When they realise what they would have lost had this not been done, we do not believe that even this propaganda slogan will resonate with anyone.
The Davis e-mail suggested that the chorus line to this week's debate about the sale has to be the five reasons why the "BTC deal stinks and this word has to be the chorus line to all contributions." Taking Mr Davis' advice yesterday, Fort Charlotte MP Alfred Sears during his contribution to the debate called for a Commission of Inquiry because the deal "does not pass the smell test."
The Christie camp is certainly desperate to win an election. They are clutching at any and every straw that passes their way to try to capture votes.
The e-mail advised the party stalwarts to be "dismissive" of the rally. This was a reference to Saturday night's FNM rally attended by a large, enthusiastic and orderly crowd. We presume that the directive was to ignore it, but one intrepid PLP MP broke ranks and suggested that the FNM were disappointed by the poor turnout to their rally. The police estimated that on Saturday night the rally drew a crowd of about 7,000-- hardly a poor turnout.
One bystander watching yesterday's demonstration outside the House believed the people should protest, but wondered if "anyone is listening." Why should anyone listen when reports persist that "party operatives" are paying many of them to be there.
We have been told by eyewitnesses that when the House broke for lunch around 1pm yesterday, a long line --"from the top to the bottom of the stairs" -- of demonstrators waited outside the Opposition's office door in the Bayparl building, demanding payment for doing what they claimed they were paid to do at the rally. "One of them urinated on the stairs, they were smoking grass, swearing and saying they wanted their money," an eyewitness said.
We then had reports of another disturbance at the PLP's Gambier headquarters last night when a fight broke out and police and an ambulance had to be called. Again, according to an eyewitness, it was claimed that a bus load of persons arrived demanding payment. How can anyone listen to demonstrators, a large number of whom are being paid by "party operatives" to swell the ranks. Obviously many of them neither understand nor care about the issues. Despite these alleged inducements, the turnout has been sparse, especially for an issue about which Opposition politicians claim the people are so passionate. Paid protesters do not reflect the opinion of the general public and, therefore, cannot be taken seriously.
This tactic of paying this type of person-- some of whom the police say are "well known" to them -- to disturb the peace is dangerous. One only has to look at what eventually happened to politicians in Jamaica who played this game too long. Bruce Golding is a case in point.
It would be wise for Bahamian politicians -- especially after what must be to them an embarrassing episode -- to call a halt and change course. Bahamians want to know the truth for a change. They are tired of propaganda.
March 22, 2011
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
DURING yesterday's rally Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union president Bernard Evans expressed the hope that "between now and the vote something will happen to derail the sale" of BTC to Cable & Wireless.
We are certain that the Bahamian woman who called a radio show yesterday morning to complain that she tried to pay her telephone bill but found no cashier on duty at any of the outlets-- except at the BTC Marathon office -- to assist her is anxious for the sale to go through. She is probably among the many Bahamians who -- unlike Mr Evans -- cannot wait for the company to be privatised so that persons like herself will get the standard of service they have every right to expect.
It is presumed that instead of manning their stations yesterday many of the missing staff were on Bay Street protesting the sale of BTC. Lower fees, better service and more choice in their public communications is what the public wants -- as far as many of them are concerned, it cannot come soon enough. Sunday night an internal e-mail, claiming to have been sent by Philip "Brave" Davis to six party members, mysteriously found its way to the desks of several newspaper editors and reporters.
With daily information being supplied by TV, Twitter, Face book and all the other new fangled means of information, Bahamians are sufficiently well informed not to buy into the PLP's propaganda blaming the Bahamas' economic downturn on the Ingraham government, rather than where it rightfully belongs -- the world economic crash.
"We have not been able to persuade the electorate that it is management and not the global economy that is causing the woes today..." said the e-mail. Party members have been advised to change their tactics. The e-mail claims that what is "resonating is the intentional delay and slothfulness to get things started that was left in place." We do not think that what the PLP like to call "stop, review and cancel" will resonant with Bahamians either if they fully understand what the Ingraham government has saved for them by going over all agreements left in place by the Christie government. When they realise what they would have lost had this not been done, we do not believe that even this propaganda slogan will resonate with anyone.
The Davis e-mail suggested that the chorus line to this week's debate about the sale has to be the five reasons why the "BTC deal stinks and this word has to be the chorus line to all contributions." Taking Mr Davis' advice yesterday, Fort Charlotte MP Alfred Sears during his contribution to the debate called for a Commission of Inquiry because the deal "does not pass the smell test."
The Christie camp is certainly desperate to win an election. They are clutching at any and every straw that passes their way to try to capture votes.
The e-mail advised the party stalwarts to be "dismissive" of the rally. This was a reference to Saturday night's FNM rally attended by a large, enthusiastic and orderly crowd. We presume that the directive was to ignore it, but one intrepid PLP MP broke ranks and suggested that the FNM were disappointed by the poor turnout to their rally. The police estimated that on Saturday night the rally drew a crowd of about 7,000-- hardly a poor turnout.
One bystander watching yesterday's demonstration outside the House believed the people should protest, but wondered if "anyone is listening." Why should anyone listen when reports persist that "party operatives" are paying many of them to be there.
We have been told by eyewitnesses that when the House broke for lunch around 1pm yesterday, a long line --"from the top to the bottom of the stairs" -- of demonstrators waited outside the Opposition's office door in the Bayparl building, demanding payment for doing what they claimed they were paid to do at the rally. "One of them urinated on the stairs, they were smoking grass, swearing and saying they wanted their money," an eyewitness said.
We then had reports of another disturbance at the PLP's Gambier headquarters last night when a fight broke out and police and an ambulance had to be called. Again, according to an eyewitness, it was claimed that a bus load of persons arrived demanding payment. How can anyone listen to demonstrators, a large number of whom are being paid by "party operatives" to swell the ranks. Obviously many of them neither understand nor care about the issues. Despite these alleged inducements, the turnout has been sparse, especially for an issue about which Opposition politicians claim the people are so passionate. Paid protesters do not reflect the opinion of the general public and, therefore, cannot be taken seriously.
This tactic of paying this type of person-- some of whom the police say are "well known" to them -- to disturb the peace is dangerous. One only has to look at what eventually happened to politicians in Jamaica who played this game too long. Bruce Golding is a case in point.
It would be wise for Bahamian politicians -- especially after what must be to them an embarrassing episode -- to call a halt and change course. Bahamians want to know the truth for a change. They are tired of propaganda.
March 22, 2011
tribune242 editorial
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The national spotlight is now on Branville McCartney
The next step for Branville McCartney
thenassauguardian editorial
Branville McCartney is no longer a member of the Free National Movement (FNM) and he will remain outside the FNM as long as Hubert Ingraham is in control of the party.
On the day Ingraham made his statement to the House of Assembly in the debate on the sale of 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC), McCartney upstaged the prime minister and the governing party by resigning.
McCartney must now consider his steps carefully, or he will be remembered as someone who had potential.
His options are to run as an independent; to join the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP); to form a political party; to join a coalition of candidates; or to retire and leave politics.
Clearly McCartney wants to continue in politics, so retirement won’t happen.
If McCartney joined the PLP, he would be at the end of a long line of people who want to be leader after Perry Christie. Those men and women would let him know right away that he could not jump that line.
Running as an independent, forming a party or joining a coalition of independents all appear more likely options for the Bamboo Town MP.
If McCartney wants to form a party, he needs to get to work on that right away. He needs to find candidates and money. To run a serious campaign, McCartney would need millions. He would also need to find serious people to stand with him.
The problem small parties such as the Workers Party, the National Development Party and the Bahamas Democratic Party have is that they are not comprised of enough people capable of governing a country.
Standing as an independent, or with a group of independents, would be simpler. The key here would be for McCartney to try and win his seat, challenged by both the PLP and FNM. He should not assume that Christie and the PLP would cut a deal with him. The PLP needs every seat it can get in what looks like another close election.
McCartney has repeatedly said his move away from the Ingraham Cabinet and the Ingraham-led party was based on conscience. If he is to be an enduring force in Bahamian politics he must now prove to his constituency and the country that he has a vision for The Bahamas and that he has the intelligence and will to execute that vision.
So, the Bamboo Town MP needs to start talking. And he needs to talk often. His constituents and the country want to know if he has what it takes.
The national spotlight is now on “Bran.” We’ll shall all see if he can harness the mass dissatisfaction with the old political order, transforming that raw energy into results at the next general election.
3/22/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
Branville McCartney is no longer a member of the Free National Movement (FNM) and he will remain outside the FNM as long as Hubert Ingraham is in control of the party.
On the day Ingraham made his statement to the House of Assembly in the debate on the sale of 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC), McCartney upstaged the prime minister and the governing party by resigning.
McCartney must now consider his steps carefully, or he will be remembered as someone who had potential.
His options are to run as an independent; to join the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP); to form a political party; to join a coalition of candidates; or to retire and leave politics.
Clearly McCartney wants to continue in politics, so retirement won’t happen.
If McCartney joined the PLP, he would be at the end of a long line of people who want to be leader after Perry Christie. Those men and women would let him know right away that he could not jump that line.
Running as an independent, forming a party or joining a coalition of independents all appear more likely options for the Bamboo Town MP.
If McCartney wants to form a party, he needs to get to work on that right away. He needs to find candidates and money. To run a serious campaign, McCartney would need millions. He would also need to find serious people to stand with him.
The problem small parties such as the Workers Party, the National Development Party and the Bahamas Democratic Party have is that they are not comprised of enough people capable of governing a country.
Standing as an independent, or with a group of independents, would be simpler. The key here would be for McCartney to try and win his seat, challenged by both the PLP and FNM. He should not assume that Christie and the PLP would cut a deal with him. The PLP needs every seat it can get in what looks like another close election.
McCartney has repeatedly said his move away from the Ingraham Cabinet and the Ingraham-led party was based on conscience. If he is to be an enduring force in Bahamian politics he must now prove to his constituency and the country that he has a vision for The Bahamas and that he has the intelligence and will to execute that vision.
So, the Bamboo Town MP needs to start talking. And he needs to talk often. His constituents and the country want to know if he has what it takes.
The national spotlight is now on “Bran.” We’ll shall all see if he can harness the mass dissatisfaction with the old political order, transforming that raw energy into results at the next general election.
3/22/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Economic nationalism and crony capitalism in The Bahamas
Lessons for BTC from Bahamas Airways
by Simon
A recent editorial cartoon of MPs bearing a coffin labelled Bahamianization was cute as a caricature but unconvincing as commentary. The cartoon represents a polar extreme from the left. From the right is another polar extreme claiming that Bahamianization has been tried and has failed.
As usual, the truer picture is somewhere in the middle beyond the hyperbole and casual analysis. Certainly, we are not where we want to be, but to deny various advances since independence, of which both extremes are prone, betrays many examples of progress despite the distance we have to travel.
All of which begs the question: What constitutes Bahamianization? Like all strands of nationalism, notions of Bahamianization are often driven by romanticism, ideological purity tests, prejudice and fear. At its most extreme, nationalism can explode into jingoism, xenophobia and racism.
At the heart of nationalism is a sense of identity and belonging to a place and may include political, social and economic nationalism. The highly emotive debate about the future of BTC has triggered various waves of economic nationalism which concern issues of opportunity, ownership and empowerment.
INSTRUCTIVE
But if the issues are about the greater empowerment of and opportunities for Bahamians, the BTC question is not as simplistic as the ardent nationalists suggest. The aviation industry offers an instructive case study in economic nationalism.
In 1968 Cathay Pacific Airways agreed to a partnership with the Bahamas Government in the development of Bahamas Airways as our national airline. The Hong Kong-based carrier was given exclusive rights to a number of important routes while providing the country with deep pockets and expertise in the airline industry, as well as an extensive international travel network.
Cathay Pacific (CP) invested heavily in the aircraft, marketing and training needed to develop routes between The Bahamas and tourist markets like New York and other cities. Once profitable, CP agreed to sell a 25 percent stake to the Bahamas Government at the initial share price of Bahamas Airways, which would have resulted in a windfall profit for the country.
The Bahamas would have had a national flag carrier able to compete with the big American carriers. Today we own 100 percent of a carrier that cannot compete. Is this Bahamian pride and nationalism? With crocodile tears about nationalism, Sir Lynden unilaterally and underhandedly broke the agreement with Cathay Pacific whom he himself courted and brought to The Bahamas.
Our national airline would have been integrated into the global aviation network decades before the more recent wave of globalization, providing guaranteed airlift for our tourist market, business passengers and cargo.
Imagine the possibilities of The Bahamas as a regional hub for Bahamas Airways/Cathay Pacific with direct flights to Latin America years ago, flying directly to many cities in the U.S., expanding our access to European capitals and better linking the country to the Pacific and China.
Sir Lynden and others defended his about-face by saying that Bahamians should fully own the routes Bahamas Airways had been granted. In the event, his waving the nationalist’s banner was a cover for crony capitalism as he awarded the routes to a crony who failed to get his airline off the ground.
SCANDAL
The result was the collapse of the arrangement with Cathay Pacific, a blow to the credibility of the government with investors and a big scandal for the country. The crony airline became known as “the paper airline” and became a laughing-stock.
Sir Lynden’s decision on Bahamas Airways was one of the pivotal issues which provoked increasing dissatisfaction with his leadership, eventually resulting in the break from the PLP of the Dissident Eight and others.
The founders of the FNM and other nationalists who remained in the Pindling government had to take tough and pragmatic decisions early on in the greater national interest of making the Bahamian dream more accessible and advancing the promises of majority rule.
They overwhelmingly and correctly concluded that to expand tourism and economic access and opportunities for Bahamians, and in order to grow the Bahamian economy to fund priorities such as education, that the Cathay Pacific partnership was an exceptional deal for The Bahamas.
Sir Lynden’s decision was tragic. In significant ways it set the country back decades. While it may be difficult to calculate the lost opportunities and economic benefits to the country and the Public Treasury, we know what Bahamasair has cost taxpayers -- now approaching half a billion dollars.
For point of reference, our total national debt today is approximately $4.2 billion dollars. Over the years Bahamasair constantly flew off course with poor service and incompetent management, various scandals and rip-offs, political interference and featherbedding of supporters, as well as wasteful spending.
Four decades after the Bahamas Airways debacle, the country owns 100 percent of a national airline that has been a significant failure in many respects. Is this more preferable than a 25 per cent stake in an airline that would have been more profitable, that would not have cost the Public Treasury the mind-boggling sums expended on Bahamasair, and would have guaranteed airlift into our prime tourism markets?
Then there are the opportunity costs of millions which could have been invested in education, health care, the arts, infrastructure and other areas. In all probability our national debt would also have been lower and our public finances healthier.
RATIONAL
Such rational cost-benefits analysis does not hold the emotional appeal of thumping our chests, waving the national colours and proclaiming that we are the majority owners of our national airline. Still, Bahamian pride must be more than nostalgia, unthinking nationalism and outdated economic thinking.
Surely we cannot fully know what the future of Bahamas Airways would have been amidst the turmoil that has roiled the airline industry over the decades from oil shocks to mergers to intense competition.
What we do know is that Cathay Pacific is still a healthy and competitive airline and that many of Bahamasair’s domestic routes are now in the hands of private fully Bahamian-owned companies that are profitable. The model Bahamas Airways could have followed is a concentration on international routes leaving domestic routes to local carriers with, in some instances, government subsidies to less profitable inter-island routes.
Suppose that in the 1980s The Bahamas was again offered a partnership with an international carrier to buy a majority stake in Bahamasair, with an agreement similar to the proposed BTC and Cable & Wireless partnership?
The agreement would have entailed the Government maintaining a significant though not majority stake, veto power over key decisions and significant board seats. The new partnership would leverage the resources of the well-established airline including extensive capital investments and other resources made available to Bahamasair that it could not access on its own.
The new partnership would also help to integrate the new Bahamasair into a global travel network of expanded routes with significantly better economies of scale in a more competitive global airline industry. Eventually, shares would be also sold to the Bahamian public
If this was the deal on the table, what would those who oppose the new partnership between BTC and Cable & Wireless, have thought and argued? Clearly, one could not plausibly argue that the national interest would have been better served by insisting on a 51 percent stake.
Undoubtedly the airline and telecommunications industries are different. Yet, there are parallels between the Bahamas Airways story and the proposed new partnership for BTC.
March 18, 2011
bahamapundit
by Simon
A recent editorial cartoon of MPs bearing a coffin labelled Bahamianization was cute as a caricature but unconvincing as commentary. The cartoon represents a polar extreme from the left. From the right is another polar extreme claiming that Bahamianization has been tried and has failed.
As usual, the truer picture is somewhere in the middle beyond the hyperbole and casual analysis. Certainly, we are not where we want to be, but to deny various advances since independence, of which both extremes are prone, betrays many examples of progress despite the distance we have to travel.
All of which begs the question: What constitutes Bahamianization? Like all strands of nationalism, notions of Bahamianization are often driven by romanticism, ideological purity tests, prejudice and fear. At its most extreme, nationalism can explode into jingoism, xenophobia and racism.
At the heart of nationalism is a sense of identity and belonging to a place and may include political, social and economic nationalism. The highly emotive debate about the future of BTC has triggered various waves of economic nationalism which concern issues of opportunity, ownership and empowerment.
INSTRUCTIVE
But if the issues are about the greater empowerment of and opportunities for Bahamians, the BTC question is not as simplistic as the ardent nationalists suggest. The aviation industry offers an instructive case study in economic nationalism.
In 1968 Cathay Pacific Airways agreed to a partnership with the Bahamas Government in the development of Bahamas Airways as our national airline. The Hong Kong-based carrier was given exclusive rights to a number of important routes while providing the country with deep pockets and expertise in the airline industry, as well as an extensive international travel network.
Cathay Pacific (CP) invested heavily in the aircraft, marketing and training needed to develop routes between The Bahamas and tourist markets like New York and other cities. Once profitable, CP agreed to sell a 25 percent stake to the Bahamas Government at the initial share price of Bahamas Airways, which would have resulted in a windfall profit for the country.
The Bahamas would have had a national flag carrier able to compete with the big American carriers. Today we own 100 percent of a carrier that cannot compete. Is this Bahamian pride and nationalism? With crocodile tears about nationalism, Sir Lynden unilaterally and underhandedly broke the agreement with Cathay Pacific whom he himself courted and brought to The Bahamas.
Our national airline would have been integrated into the global aviation network decades before the more recent wave of globalization, providing guaranteed airlift for our tourist market, business passengers and cargo.
Imagine the possibilities of The Bahamas as a regional hub for Bahamas Airways/Cathay Pacific with direct flights to Latin America years ago, flying directly to many cities in the U.S., expanding our access to European capitals and better linking the country to the Pacific and China.
Sir Lynden and others defended his about-face by saying that Bahamians should fully own the routes Bahamas Airways had been granted. In the event, his waving the nationalist’s banner was a cover for crony capitalism as he awarded the routes to a crony who failed to get his airline off the ground.
SCANDAL
The result was the collapse of the arrangement with Cathay Pacific, a blow to the credibility of the government with investors and a big scandal for the country. The crony airline became known as “the paper airline” and became a laughing-stock.
Sir Lynden’s decision on Bahamas Airways was one of the pivotal issues which provoked increasing dissatisfaction with his leadership, eventually resulting in the break from the PLP of the Dissident Eight and others.
The founders of the FNM and other nationalists who remained in the Pindling government had to take tough and pragmatic decisions early on in the greater national interest of making the Bahamian dream more accessible and advancing the promises of majority rule.
They overwhelmingly and correctly concluded that to expand tourism and economic access and opportunities for Bahamians, and in order to grow the Bahamian economy to fund priorities such as education, that the Cathay Pacific partnership was an exceptional deal for The Bahamas.
Sir Lynden’s decision was tragic. In significant ways it set the country back decades. While it may be difficult to calculate the lost opportunities and economic benefits to the country and the Public Treasury, we know what Bahamasair has cost taxpayers -- now approaching half a billion dollars.
For point of reference, our total national debt today is approximately $4.2 billion dollars. Over the years Bahamasair constantly flew off course with poor service and incompetent management, various scandals and rip-offs, political interference and featherbedding of supporters, as well as wasteful spending.
Four decades after the Bahamas Airways debacle, the country owns 100 percent of a national airline that has been a significant failure in many respects. Is this more preferable than a 25 per cent stake in an airline that would have been more profitable, that would not have cost the Public Treasury the mind-boggling sums expended on Bahamasair, and would have guaranteed airlift into our prime tourism markets?
Then there are the opportunity costs of millions which could have been invested in education, health care, the arts, infrastructure and other areas. In all probability our national debt would also have been lower and our public finances healthier.
RATIONAL
Such rational cost-benefits analysis does not hold the emotional appeal of thumping our chests, waving the national colours and proclaiming that we are the majority owners of our national airline. Still, Bahamian pride must be more than nostalgia, unthinking nationalism and outdated economic thinking.
Surely we cannot fully know what the future of Bahamas Airways would have been amidst the turmoil that has roiled the airline industry over the decades from oil shocks to mergers to intense competition.
What we do know is that Cathay Pacific is still a healthy and competitive airline and that many of Bahamasair’s domestic routes are now in the hands of private fully Bahamian-owned companies that are profitable. The model Bahamas Airways could have followed is a concentration on international routes leaving domestic routes to local carriers with, in some instances, government subsidies to less profitable inter-island routes.
Suppose that in the 1980s The Bahamas was again offered a partnership with an international carrier to buy a majority stake in Bahamasair, with an agreement similar to the proposed BTC and Cable & Wireless partnership?
The agreement would have entailed the Government maintaining a significant though not majority stake, veto power over key decisions and significant board seats. The new partnership would leverage the resources of the well-established airline including extensive capital investments and other resources made available to Bahamasair that it could not access on its own.
The new partnership would also help to integrate the new Bahamasair into a global travel network of expanded routes with significantly better economies of scale in a more competitive global airline industry. Eventually, shares would be also sold to the Bahamian public
If this was the deal on the table, what would those who oppose the new partnership between BTC and Cable & Wireless, have thought and argued? Clearly, one could not plausibly argue that the national interest would have been better served by insisting on a 51 percent stake.
Undoubtedly the airline and telecommunications industries are different. Yet, there are parallels between the Bahamas Airways story and the proposed new partnership for BTC.
March 18, 2011
bahamapundit
Monday, March 21, 2011
Branville McCartney - Member of Parliament for the Bamboo Town Constituency Resigns from the Governing Free National Movement (FNM) Party
Branville McCartney's facebook RESIGNATION NOTE: Due to personal convictions, today I have resigned from the Free National Movement. I remain your representative for the Bamboo Town Constituency and be assured that the level of true representation that you have become accustomed to will not change. I remain your humble employee. Bran.
Bamboo Town Branville McCartney on facebook
Monday March 21, 2011
Bamboo Town Branville McCartney on facebook
Monday March 21, 2011
The Bluewater Ventures Limited / Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) Privatization deal that came close to reality
Bluewater Unveiled
By CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
A look at the BTC deal that almost was
The veil of secrecy surrounding the group that almost purchased 49 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) under the Christie administration is being lifted.
According to a closely guarded document obtained by National Review, Bluewater is a privately held entity, which does not have audited statements or disclose financial statements publicly.
“However, at signing or immediately prior to signing the [letter of intent] we are prepared to disclose relevant financial information and give the relevant assurances on Bluewater’s acquisition vehicle, including its financial capacity to complete the transaction,” the company said in 2006.
The response came as part of the due diligence exercise carried out by the Privatization Committee under the Christie administration, which subsequently recommended to the government that negotiations should proceed with Bluewater.
Members of that committee included the financial secretary, the legal advisor to the Ministry of Finance, BTC union officials, private sector members and telecommunications consultants.
As the government gets closer to closing a deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) to sell 51 percent of BTC, the Bluewater deal that almost came to be remains highly controversial.
Speaking at his party’s rally on Clifford Park Saturday night, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said if the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) had its way BTC would have been sold off to Bluewater, which “had no experience in telecommunications. The company wasn’t even traded on the stock market.”
Ingraham said, “We still aren’t exactly sure who had their hands in that Bluewater pot or who the real players were behind a deal that would have purchased BTC on credit…”
Details of the deal that almost came to be are likely to be discussed in greater details in the BTC privatization debate, which gets underway in the House of Assembly today.
Ingraham has already promised to have more to say about Bluewater and what the Christie administration had planned.
In 2006, the privatization committee posed a number of questions to Bluewater, which were answered in detailed form in a document to the committee dated September 13, 2006.
One revelation made in that document is that Bluewater was formed to invest in and manage companies in the telecom and media industries.
According to the document, there was no plan for any layoffs. Between 2006 and 2011, average salary at BTC was projected to rise from $43,332 to $48,780.
Bluewater said in 2006 it would negotiate contracts with the existing management team between signing the letter of intent and closing the transaction.
“We anticipate that as a part of their package executive management will receive equity participation in BTC,” Bluewater said.
“Bluewater also anticipates that all board members will receive industry standard board compensation packages.”
A PLAN FOR BTC
Bluewater outlined 25 key initiatives to target in the first two years of purchasing the BTC shares.
It committed to plugging revenue leakages; reducing discounts to prepaid vendors; reducing bad debt charges; charging for in-home wiring to recoup costs; tightening the pre-paid card distribution process; instituting a new sales incentive scheme; reducing fleet maintenance costs; reducing overtime expenses and reducing contract service costs by 20 percent.
The company said that in the first year of the BTC acquisition it expected $92.5 million to be spent in capital expenditure to focus on consumers and core networks.
Asked to provide the supporting details and data for Bluewater’s proposed debt to equity ratio and any plans for external financing, Bluewater said it “does not intend to leverage BTC, so the net debt to equity ratio does not change during our projections.”
It also said it expected “all free cash flow after capital expenditure to be dividended to shareholders. This excludes current cash on the balance sheet which will be left at the company for working capital purposes.”
Bluewater also advised that it expected the cost of management and consultant contracts to be covered by the employee costs and the consultant costs in the business plan.
“In addition, we anticipate setting aside 10 percent of the equity of BTC for employees,” said Bluewater in 2006.
Under current plans for BTC, which appear poised to go through, the government says it will, by the end of this year, sell nine percent or approximately $40 million of the shares in BTC to the Bahamian public.
Bluewater said in 2006 that it did not intend to transfer or sell any of BTC’s shares for three years or any longer period of time as agreed by the shareholders.
The Bluewater plan also called for an improvement of EBITDA margins from 26 percent in 2005 to 39 percent in 2008.
The company said the improvement in EBITDA would have been achieved through the streamlining of operations.
The 2006 document to the Privatization Committee added, “Bluewater also intends to offer better value to its customers through reductions in wireless and international long distance tariffs as laid out in our business plan.”
The company had planned to launch an IPTV offering in 2009.
This would have included more than 1,000 movies on-demand “available to watch exactly when you want”; interactive music channels; on-demand movies and TV that you can stop, rewind, pause or fast-forward.
IPTV revenues were projected to be more than $9 million by this year.
The deal that came close to reality also included a plan for improving telecommunication services on less developed Family Islands.
THE BLUEWATER PLAYERS
The Privatization Committee asked Bluewater to provide the propose management candidates for BTC.
Several board members were named.
One of them was Trinidad and Tobago native Roger Ames, who served as chairman and chief executive officer of Warner Music Group and president of Warner Music International between August 1999 and August 2004.
Carlos Espinal who in 2006 was CEO of TSTT, the national telephone company of Trinidad & Tobago, was named as another Bluewater executive.
Prior to joining TSTT in 2004, he spent eight years with Verizon as senior vice president international - Latin America.
During his time with Verizon, he worked as a turn-around specialist for Verizon’s Latin American and Caribbean businesses, Bluewater said.
John Gregg was listed in the document sent to the Privatization Committee as managing director of Bluewater. According to that 2006 document, he had 15 years of building companies in the media and telecom industry in Europe, the U.S. and Asia.
Another board member named was Andrew Sukawaty, who was named as the chairman and CEO of Inmarsat, which Bluewater said was the world leader in global satellite communications.
According to the document, Sukawaty served as president and CEO of Sprint PCS, one of America’s largest mobile phone providers. It said he grew Sprint from a start up to a company with 9.5 million subscribers and approximately $6.6 billion in revenue.
Bluewater also named several operational advisors, a finance team and a legal team.
The document said Bluewater’s principals intended to invest in BTC through a standalone Bahamian entity that would have been capitalized and controlled by Bluewater’s principals. It said Bluewater is an entity controlled by John Gregg.
DEFENDING THE DEAL
Today, Bluewater of course is a dead deal, but what the Christie administration had proposed continues to come up in the current privatization debate.
The Christie administration had agreed to sell a 49 percent stake in the national telecommunications provider for $260 million shortly before the May 2007 general election.
However, after the Free National Movement was returned to power, Ingraham vowed to review the deal, claiming that Christie and the former Cabinet were planning to sell BTC "on credit" and that Bluewater would enjoy too lengthy an exclusivity period as a monopoly in an industry that his administration was keen on liberalizing.
According to documents previously obtained by The Nassau Guardian, Bluewater had agreed to pay $220 million for BTC in cash at closing, $25 million at the end of the fifth year following closing and $15 million at the end of the sixth year.
Under the deal, Bluewater would have been granted mobile and landline licenses with five and six-year exclusive periods, respectively.
Speaking at a press conference at PLP headquarters on Farrington Road yesterday, Christie again defended the deal.
“By innuendos and suggestions he (Ingraham) started off immediately after he became prime minister to suggest that there was something crooked about our involvement in Bluewater,” Christie said.
“The Progressive Liberal Party structured an approach to privatization that relied on the integrity and leadership of the financial secretary (at the time) Mrs. Ruth Millar.
“To ensure that we were on safe grounds we placed the leaders of the management union of BTC and the workers, BCPOU (Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union), as full members of the negotiating team.
“That team, including the union leaders, would come into Cabinet and brief Cabinet. We took a transparent and accountable approach to it.”
Referring to the prime minister, Christie said, “…If he really wants to look for something, tell the Bahamian people whether or not there are deals in this BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.
“That’s where he should be looking at. The Progressive Liberal Party lost the elections. We can explain the positions we took.”
3/21/2011
thenassauguardian
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)