Campaign finance reform deserves a place on the Bahamian political agenda... It is not a new idea, but it's one worth repeating as often as possible until something is done about it

Campaign finance reform

thenassauguardian editorial

In the House of Assembly recently, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham put MPs on notice that they are expected to submit public disclosure records for 2009 and 2010 in accordance with the Public Disclosure Act.

The prime minister also threatened to make public the list of MPs who have not yet done so. MPs,along with numerous other public officials, have until March 31 of each year to disclose their financial records for the previous calendar year. The last records made public were for the year 2007, and not all MPs disclosed that year.

It is up to the Public Disclosure Commission to make those records public. Senior public officers who fail to disclose, their and their immediate families' assets, interests and income could be subject to a $10,000 fine, up to two years in jail or both.

And where the offense involves the deliberate non-disclosure of the property of a senator or MP the court could order the property forfeited to the government.

While The Bahamas is well ahead of some of its regional counterparts in requiring individual public officers to disclose their financial records, it's time to take it one step further in the form of campaign finance regulations.

As it now stands, the financing of political campaigns in The Bahamas is considered an entirely private affair between party candidates and political parties and their contributors.

And it's apparent that there is no real political will to change that arrangement.

The idea to regulate campaign contributions has received a lukewarm response at best, and if raised at all often results in vague, empty promises.

In a democratic society, donating to a campaign is a right. Through a campaign donation an individual or group can show support and belief in a particular candidate or political party.

Political parties obviously need to raise funds. But the concern is that if left unregulated, donations from private sources, such as wealthy individuals, foreign investors or large companies can lead to undue influence on the political system, drowning out the interests of the poor and less powerful. There is also the very serious concern about tainted funds.

Election campaigns are an expensive venture. And while money does not ensure victory, lack of money will almost always mean defeat. The high cost of election paraphernalia and the long-time tradition of money in the hope of getting votes only exacerbate the situation.

Both Ingraham and Opposition Leader Perry Christie have commented publicly on the high cost of election campaigns.

The Ingraham administration recently fulfilled one of its key legislative promises when it tabled the long overdue Freedom of Information Bill. It did so as part of its pledge to promote greater transparency and accountability.

The governing party, opposition and all political organizations that one day hope to lead this country should all get behind campaign finance reform in a meaningful way.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution to campaign finance reform. The context and political culture must be taken into account, and regulations should not hinder healthy competition. But no one would argue that the process should not be made more transparent. Legislation should be developed that regulates media policy, what donors are allowed to do, how much parties are allowed to spend, what they must disclose and to whom, and what meaningful penalties would be imposed for non-disclosure.

Campaign finance reform deserves a place on the political agenda. It is not a new idea, but it's one worth repeating as often as possible until something is done about it.

Dec 03, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

In these uncertain times, any Bahamian political leader must be able to speak to the emotions, hopes and dreams of his or her people

Why we need a Churchill

By Rishard P. O. Cooper

As I take in the news from around our majestic archipelago, and observe our seemingly downward social and economic spiral, I cannot help but be reminded of the appeasement policy British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and other European leaders followed during the late 1930s.  Chamberlain’s appeasement policy has been hotly debated ever since.  Some historians have concluded that the policy allowed Nazi Germany to grow too powerful.  Others argue that Chamberlain had no other choice under the circumstances.  In any event, Chamberlain lost the 1940 general election to Winston Churchill, a man who realized Adolf Hitler for who he was.  Churchill understood that negotiations with Hitler would bring neither peace nor security.  Churchill was a complex fellow, a heavy drinker, clairvoyant, witty, and an unabashed imperialist who was deeply loyal to his homeland.  No matter the odds, Churchill was literally prepared to fight until the end to preserve his country.  He was also an eloquent speaker who was able to inspire his people during some of his nation’s darkest hours.

We face serious problems

Churchill was the right person for the time, but woe to the country that needs a Churchill!  What I am getting at is that a country should not be taken to the brink of destruction or permit destructive forces to threaten its existence and way of life.  Here in The Bahamas, it appears that our country is in a similar predicament to the UK in the late 1930s.  Let me be clear, The Bahamas is not facing a threat on the scale of Nazi Germany, which committed some of the most unthinkable atrocities known to man.  Instead, my point is that we as Bahamians are at a point where the future direction of our country, our way of life, our culture, our standards of living, are in danger.  Already, this year we have had a record-breaking year in terms of murders, not to mention other violent crimes.  WWII arguably changed the fate of Europe drastically.  After the war, the United States became the dominant superpower, European colonialism began to crumble and to this day the Europeans have not been able to gain their pre-eminence on the international stage.

Churchill led Britain during turbulent, perilous times that required a leader who was up to the task.  Churchill possessed a rare combination of decisiveness, eloquence, tenacity and charm that made him a great leader.  Given the circumstances The Bahamas currently finds itself in, we need a leader who possesses a similar complement of talents such that he or she is able to speak to both the hearts and minds of Bahamians.  In these uncertain times, any Bahamian political leader must be able to speak to the emotions, hopes and dreams of his or her people.  Yes, a modern political leader must have a firm grasp of finance and economics.  However, any future prime minister of The Bahamas must also be a great communicator.  The reality on the ground is that many Bahamian people are disaffected and dejected.  To address this, our “Churchillian” leader must craft governmental policies to provide opportunity to the people and at the same time regularly and forcefully uplift and inspire the people.  This must be done hand in hand and with equal vigor and determination.  One without the other will not be enough.

Inspiration

Modern leaders have a lot more competition in capturing the attention of their people.  Today Bahamians are able to log on to the Internet with their laptops, iPads, Blackberries, or turn on cable and watch any number of entertaining programs from around the world.  In the 1930s when Roosevelt and Churchill dominated the political scene, there were less options to distract or attract citizens.  A skillful and innovative leader must realize this and formulate strategies to communicate with Bahamians on their own terms and in an entertaining and captivating manner.  Currently, many political videos are disseminated online via Facebook and Twitter.  I would encourage our government leaders to implement and create a series of short, inspirational videos targeting Bahamians in general.  However it is not enough to simply inspire through the use of flowery and hortatory language.  People want action.  Churchill said he would fight the enemy in the air, in the streets, in the hills, in the landing grounds, and he would never surrender!  That’s exactly what Churchill went about doing.  Our leaders must do the same.

 

Rishard Cooper is an international corporate attorney. Email feedback to: rishard.cooper@gmail.com

Dec 02, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

...the United States is proud to partner with The Bahamas in the global fight against HIV/AIDS

Op-Ed by U.S. Chargé d’Affaires John Dinkelman - U.S. Embassy in Nassau - - Working Towards an AIDS-Free Generation




On World AIDS Day, we pay tribute to the millions of people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide as well as the millions of lives have been saved, as HIV treatment and prevention efforts continue to show results. The number of new HIV infections has fallen by more than 20 percent since 1997. New infections are continuing to decline in most parts of the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, the region most affected by the AIDS epidemic, HIV incidence has decreased in 22 countries. Never before in the history of AIDS have we reached a moment where we are able to stand up and say with conviction the end of AIDS is in sight.

Since the inception of The U.S. President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in 2003, the United States has led the response to the global epidemic. To date, PEPFAR is the largest commitment in history by any nation to combat a single disease. To commemorate World AIDS Day, PEPFAR is promoting the global theme "Leading with Science, Uniting for Action" with the goal of highlighting recent scientific advances that will help us move toward the goal of an AIDS-free generation.

Building on the success of PEPFAR and other global health programs, U.S. President Barack Obama has put forward an ambitious Global Health Initiative (GHI); a unified strategy to save lives and maximize investments to address the most challenging health issues. These gains have also translated into better health for millions of people around the world.

Through its partnerships with more than 30 countries, PEPFAR directly supported 11 million people with care and support, including nearly 3.8 million orphans and vulnerable children, in fiscal year 2010 alone. PEPFAR directly supported HIV counseling and testing for nearly 33 million people in fiscal year 2010, providing a critical entry point to prevention, treatment, and care.

Smart investments have also maximized the human impact of resources. Experience in the field has taught us how to use every dollar invested in battling HIV/AIDS more effectively and efficiently. This means we are getting value for our money - every dollar is going farther, allowing us to increase our impact and save more lives.

Within the PEPFAR Caribbean Program, the United States Government is actively partnering with Caribbean Governments in making smarter investments in these difficult economic times with an increased focus on the efficient use of health sector funding to save as many lives as possible. For example, working with the national laboratories in Jamaica, Barbados, Bahamas, Belize and Trinidad and Tobago, the PEPFAR Caribbean Program has supported the strengthening of laboratory systems throughout the Caribbean, resulting in a significant increase in the quality of services being provided by national laboratories.

By working closely with laboratory staff in 12 Caribbean countries, including The Bahamas, PEPFAR has also facilitated the creation integrated laboratory systems in support of HIV surveillance, prevention, care and treatment programs. Ultimately, this work contributes to the larger vision of strengthening national HIV/AIDS programs and improving local capacity to address public health priorities.

As we move forward with PEPFAR, the United States is proud to partner with The Bahamas in the global fight against HIV/AIDS. The road before us is clear. Evidence-based programs have played a key role in our success to date, and new scientific discoveries provide an opportunity to expand our impact. United in action, we can build on our successes, save even more lives and above all work towards the ultimate goal – an AIDS-free generation.

November 30, 2011

nassau.usembassy.gov

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The protection of animals from abuse and neglect in The Bahamas: There is a widespread culture of brutality against animals...The stories of dogs and cats being beaten to death, lit on fire, decapitated, are too numerous to ignore... And, the links uncovered by mental health experts between animal cruelty and the other forms of violence and deviance makes this an issue that should be on everyone's agenda in a country plagued with crime and anti-social behaviour

Is animal protection in the wrong hands?




"The picking up of dogs
is not going to cure the problem - what's going
to cure the problem is
getting the animals spayed and neutered, keeping
dogs in your yard, and if
you want it to have puppies, you must find homes for those puppies and then
have them spayed. It's a
people problem, it's not
an animal problem."
-- Bahamas Humane Society President Kim Aranha





By PACO NUNEZ
Tribune News Editor



Animal rights activists say they were caught off guard by Minister of Agriculture Larry Cartwright's announcement that Animal Protection and Control Act has been in effect in New Providence for the greater part of a month.

The Act contains provisions for an animal control board and corps of wardens with the power to investigate claims of abuse and neglect, but the Bahamas Humane Society and other groups say they haven't been contacted to take part in either, despite being promised they would.

Instead, it seems the government has chosen to rely on authorities already in existence before the new Act was passed, particularly the Animal Control Unit that runs the notorious government pound.

In making this announcement, Mr Cartwright said: "The laws are only as good as the enforcement. That is our hope."

But how far the minister can have cause to be hopeful depends on how qualified members of this unit are to enforce the provisions of the new law, and animal rights campaigners who spoke to Insight are somewhat less than optimistic.

As the name implies, there are two aspects to the Act - animal protection and animal control. The unit has always been associated with the latter.

When interviewed in 2009, its supervisor Kirkland Glinton characterised their role as controlling a potential public health issue.

Their task, he said, is to round up stray animals in order to "remove the disease element from the population."

The unit captures and euthanises around 50 dogs a week, but this has little impact on the number wandering the streets of New Providence.

Mr Glinton admitted that by the time 50 dogs are collected and killed, another 50 have already appeared in the same areas.

To make any progress at all on the control front, the unit's staff require more support, training and education, the administrators said in 2009.

They also called for an additional 15 or 20 staff to help run the unit; more equipment, ranging from vehicles and traps to animal food, cleaning agents and syringes; building repairs, and a facility where animals can be tested for diseases to separate the healthy from the ill.

According to a number of animal rights activists that take an interest in the unit's activities, nothing has changed over the last two years.

One said: "There has been no training of any kind. The unit is still manned by the same number of people and conditions haven't improved at all."

So much for control.

But what of the other aspect of the Act - the protection of animals from abuse and neglect?

That there is a widespread culture of brutality against animals no one denies. The stories of dogs and cats being beaten to death, lit on fire, decapitated, are too numerous to ignore.

And, the links uncovered by mental health experts between animal cruelty and the other forms of violence and deviance makes this an issue that should be on everyone's agenda in a country plagued with crime and anti-social behaviour.

But far from contributing to the protection of animals, the unit has been accused in the past of actually adding to the problem.

Before the Tribune's interview with the unit's administrators in 2009, a 14-year-old student wrote to the newspaper to share the horrors he claimed to have seen at the pound.

He described: a live dog locked in a kennel with a dead dog, faeces covering the floors of the kennels, and animals locked up without food and water.

His complaints sparked public outrage and the formation of an activist group demanding better conditions at the pound. It quickly attracted more than 500 members.

The Ministry of Agriculture was quick to issue a statement denying the claims and chastising the young boy, but an unannounced visit from The Tribune confirmed the substandard conditions.

If there have been any changes in the past two years, they have been invisible to animal cruelty campaigners.

How then, are we to trust this unit to protect animals from violence at the hands of humans?

The new Act does contain stiffer fines and penalties for those who abuse and neglect their pets, but the problem was never that an offender could not be deterred because the consequences were too light; but rather that he or she usually never actually faced any - despite the existence of fines and penalties under the old laws.

The Cabinet has chosen to implement the act in New Providence first, precisely because there is an Animal Control Unit here. Yet in Grand Bahama, where the lack of a government agency has caused the local Humane Society to take the lead, much more has been done in recent years to enforce animal cruelty laws.

This included one or two high profile prosecutions and awards being offered for information when an abused animal is discovered. I don't remember the last time any of this happened in Nassau.

The example of Grand Bahama points the way to how the Act should be implemented: those who have been trained and have experience in animal control should be better supported in their efforts, but wherever possible, the power of enforcement should be placed in the hands of the campaigners and volunteers who care deeply about animals and who already dedicate time and energy to the improvement of their lot.

These should be the government's new wardens, and should be given the authority to call in law enforcement at the slightest sign of animal abuse or neglect.

Only then can we have any real hope of breaking the culture of contempt for the rights of animals which has led to our stray problem in the first place.

At the end of the day, protection is the best form of control.

* What do you think?

pnunez@tribunemedia.net

November 28, 2011

tribune242 Insight

Caribbean Blog International

The current state of Bahamian politics and suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people (Part-2)

Who’s looking in the mirror? Part II

By Raynard Rigby

This is the second and final part of a two-part series which examines the current state of Bahamian politics and makes suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people.  In Part I, we examined the state of our current political leadership and the need for new dynamic visionary leadership.

A vision for the future

A compelling argument can be made that The Bahamas has not really had a progressive agenda since the 1980s.  We have been on a singular path to economic development: foreign intervention by an investor directed at the tourist sector and real estate sales.  This has led to a narrowed path to development.  Both the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM), under Christie and Ingraham, have not sought to craft a meaningful policy so as to lead to the Bahamianization of the economy.  Christie as prime minister often boasted about the billions of dollars that were attracted to the country during his single term.  This was the clearest sign that his ideology was grounded in a view of the country that the economy could only be expanded by the foreign ‘savior’.  His philosophy was identical to that of Ingraham, who is able to take credit for the rejuvenation of the tourism sector when Sol Kerzner came off the plane and transformed the Paradise Island plant.  No one can honestly criticize the brilliance of Kerzner and his long-term impact on the national tourism product.

In the midst of our economic successes (limitedly defined by the provision of meager paying jobs) there has been no public recognition for the gifts that are housed in the Bahamian soul; of industry, hard work, creativity and a unique spirit to withstand poverty and economic downturns.  Yet, there are those who wear red, gold and now green, who in their quiet moments, dream of a better Bahamas. This dream is centered on a better life and a larger share of the economic pie.

In the recent PLP mini-convention on the economy, I was shocked that no substantive talk was centered on the expansion of the economy to allow for greater Bahamian participation.  No talk of economic diversification with the attendant specific plans.  No promise of a LNG industry with the introduction of stiff regulations.  Not a whisper of oil exploration and the introduction of the comprehensive regulatory laws.  No promise to establish a Ministry of National Development to ensure that within a specific targeted period that there will be a deliberate push to create an expanded entrepreneurial base.  Not even a whisper for the need, a national imperative, to craft a policy to guarantee the ownership by Bahamians of banks and hotels and major businesses.  So for me, there was a deep sense of disappointment and a confirmation that there still remains today a profound lack of vision in framing a progressive statement by the PLP, as many would expect.  The PLP is expected to be the premier champion of an agenda that has at its core the principles of shared-prosperity amongst the citizenry.  This event was for me a startling confirmation that the PLP today, some months from a general election, still lacks a vision for the future (perhaps other than Urban Renewal 2.0).

Our future – what about crime?

In my discussions with many young and middle-aged Bahamians I sense a growing frustration about what they perceive the future will bring.  Many have fears of crime and the increasing criminality, yet they know that both parties are guilty of playing politics with crime, blaming each other and demanding the then sitting minister to resign.  It was then Deputy Prime Minister Cynthia Pratt in 2002-2007;  and now Minister Tommy Turnquest has had to face the same silly and naive onslaught.  Sensible Bahamians know that no politician can fix the crime issue.  And those same Bahamians know that Urban Renewal (whether 1.0 or 2.0), the stellar PLP solution, is not the panacea for crime.  The truth is that the FNM’s and the PLP’s so-called solutions for crime are similar in that they are both predominantly focused on the aftermath of crime – that is, the steps to catch the criminal and keep him locked away for years.  No politician and no leader have addressed the question about the lack of assimilation by the majority of Bahamians of Haitian lineage; and they have been deathly silent on the effects and frustrations of those who are stateless.  And what about the fact that too many young Bahamians have no path and no interest in playing a meaningful role in the mainstay economy.

Too, we must recognize that we are reaping the effects of the drug culture, the get rich fast and easy culture.

No plan has addressed the systematic challenges that increased poverty has brought on for far too many families, some due to the fact that they are single parent homes, underpayment of salaries and a lack of educational opportunities for mobility.  On the latter, I have been so disappointed in the PLP by the fact that we kept in place a loan scholarship program which is a failure of the realities that there are still far too many Bahamians who cannot afford a tertiary or post graduate education.  I know that I would not have earned two degrees without the bonded scholarship scheme.  The PLP has betrayed its philosophy on this (and other) issue(s).

Many too have a deepening frustration about the state of the educational system and the high percentage of those who still graduate without being able to read, write or do basic arithmetic.  Perry Christie has promised to double the national budget’s contribution to education.  He has on two separate occasions failed to explain where he is going to increase the nation’s revenue stream to make this promise a reality.  He has also failed to explain to the public how the money will be spent and what will be the measurable and attainable goals.  He has not said that the school year and days will be extended.  He has not promised to increase the salaries of teachers to encourage an expansion in the local talent pool.  And he has not even suggested that there will be attempts to determine and thereby to introduce same-sex schools to foster improved performance amongst boys.  In this era of increased knowledge, our political leaders must talk sense and this means sharing details and not engaging in sheer rhetoric and bald empty promises.  The leader must have credibility of ideas and must recognize that there are intelligent Bahamians who will dissect ideas to ensure that they follow a pattern of logic and commonsense.

On the other hand, Hubert Ingraham boasts that he is a doer, and that Christie is a mere talker.  This descriptive analogy of the two was made during the recent debate on the rules to govern the multimillion dollar straw market.  Well, truth is that the PLP didn’t build the market in its term (2002 to 2007), notwithstanding the fact that the profile of a straw vendor is expected to be a PLP supporter or sympathizer.  For some voters, Ingraham’s characterization of Christie bears truth.  Ingraham though is no angel.  He has some challenges in his style of governance.  In this era of informed-participation, the Bahamian people expect a leader who can make decisions but who is also prepared to engage the electorate in national conversations and constructive dialogue.

Additionally, the Bahamian people expect a leader who has a vision for the country that is beyond a five-year cycle.  Both the PLP and the FNM have published limited manifestos or action agendas that only set out their promises for a single term in office.  Cassius Stuart, when he was leader of the Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM) (I struggled to remember the party’s name), often spoke of a national development plan spanning beyond 10 years.  He was dead right and on point.  None of our current leaders understand this.  They are lazy dreamers.  They are not long-term planners and they have no sense that they are called upon to lead a people.  Sir Lynden Pindling was masterful at this.  He shared a vision and a plan.  You could close your eyes and see where you or your children could be in 10 or 20 years.  He campaigned on a message that gave goosebumps because it revealed a future that was far beyond one’s own imagination.  He forced people to think of themselves, of better, of the future as a success for them, and for our nation as having an untapped potential.  He was a visionary par excellence.  But, Christie and Ingraham have failed their teacher.  They have brought our local politics to a five-year plan – shortsighted, easy and small achievements, no large plan that transcends generations and that causes for a transformation in our thinking and our individual approaches.  And as a result, the country and her people are stagnated in a fixed circle of small and meaningless achievements and potential and we are being dragged down a road of a hopeless and less rewarding future.

What is now needed is leadership on ideas

The Bahamas is at the stage that we require a new league of leaders.  Where are the Lynden Pindlings, Arthur Hannas and men like Arthur Foulkes and Stafford Sands (yes I called his name) of this century and time?  Where are the men of vision who are prepared to try new things and prepared to think big?  Where are the thinkers, the dreamers?

I believe that there is an abundance of talented and visionary (should I say young) leaders in this country.  But they are shy of the profound silliness that occurs in the political process.  They do not propose to worship mediocre leaders who are frightened to recognize that their time has come and gone.  They too are not so naive to believe that the presence of one of them on the stage signals a dramatic change in our politics.  They are convinced that far too many Bahamians do not wish to be ‘saved’ from the idiosyncrasies of a political system that favors and graduates the corrupt and the fool.  So, they retreat to a solemn place of thinking, analysis and private conversations where their frustrations are felt in every word and their passion for a better future is unmatched and unsurpassed by anyone in elected office.

There should be a recognition that we need them now; that they must step forth and be the promoters of ideas and of sound thinking.  Our country’s current path mandates that they step forth with boldness and with a passion to serve the people, not a political party or an undeserving and ill-prepared leader, but the people.  But then they look in the mirror and see a face of discontent and of a hypocrisy that they once criticized.  And then they realize their presence whilst critical will not change the current dispensation because there are far too many ‘unbelievers’ on the stage who demand prominence and in whose hands lay the guided trust of the same undeserving leader, and so they smartly retreat.

So, the question remains where are our new visionary leaders?

I am sure that it is a matter of choice.  Do you step forth and be a part of the push towards a sensible solution for the national good even if it means that your voice will stand alone?  Or do you play a role outside of politics to compel those in office to recognize that they are not ‘gods’ but servants of the people who are subject to public criticism and scrutiny?  They must follow the path that will be true to the Bahamian people and that will lead to a more fair and just nation.  This means that there must be a willingness by all Bahamians to openly speak about our future and to chart a course that guarantees our collective and national development towards a future that is progressive and prosperous for the vast majority of Bahamians; not just the white Bay Street or the small black elite.

Our course must be to deepen our economic opportunities to ensure that there are no glass ceilings and an economic elevator that goes freely to all floors landing some on paths of surpassed economic expectations and that allows others to flow to the top based on their commitment to hard work, creativity, non-discriminatory access to capital and a nation that rewards its best and brightest.

These are not easy goals, yet they are all attainable if we work together to craft a national resolve to discipline, hard work and industry.  The standards of mediocrity must be buried and in its place must shine a national call to sacrifice, to ‘We-ism’ and a unified commitment to pursue a vision, and its clearly defined course, that provides a better future for our people.  This is hard work.  But we must pursue it to fulfill the hopes, vision and the expectations of our forefathers and foremothers.

Pindling, like Martin Luther King Jr. who dreamed of a better America, dreamed of a better Bahamas for all Bahamians.  In his lifetime, he achieved much for his people and he lived long enough to know that we still had much ‘land to possess’.  If he was alive I am sure that he would be demanding a return to national excellence and would be exhorting all of us to not rest on our laurels but to continue to uphold the old Bahamian traditions of sacrifice and hard work.  For me, Pindling remains an inspiration for what can be achieved with great and visionary leadership, called and inspired by God.

I remain hopeful that this present course that we are on will end when the two leaders of the FNM and the PLP will look in the mirror and say to themselves ‘I have done my part, time for me to leave this office and pass the baton to those who are ready to lead and to usher in a new era of great and visionary leadership’.  I often wonder if they ever look into the mirror and hear loud voices ringing in their heads, not cries of exhortations but of despair and a dying hope.  Perhaps we should stand in their paths with our individual mirrors so that they can hear our loud voices, so that they can do what honorable men are expected to do in such times of crisis and national yearning.

My mirror is always in my pocket waiting and hoping for that moment when I will see them so that the process can begin of bringing about a new era of our politics, one based on vision, a progressive agenda and leadership of substance over style, dance moves and empty rhetoric.  Where is your mirror?  Is it ready for a generational change in our nation’s leadership?  I hope so.  This boat is sinking.

Writer’s Note: It is a fact that in the PLP cabinet of 2002 to 2007, no minister was under the age of 40 years.  The same cannot be true of other administrations after Independence, including that of Ingraham.   There were three PLP cabinet ministers in the PLP government in 2002 who were under the age of 45 in 2002 at the time of their appointment.  This corrects an error that appeared in Part I.

Raynard Rigby is a practicing attorney-at-law and he is a former national chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (Nov. 2002-Feb. 2008).  He is the author of “A Blueprint for the Future of The Bahamas” (July, 2008) and “The Urgency for Change in the PLP” (2009).  He remains an avid commentator on matters of national interest and importance.

Nov 21, 2011

The current state of Bahamian politics and suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people (Part-1)

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Meet the candidates: A look at the prospective future leaders of the Free National Movement (FNM)

Meet the candidates: A look at the prospective future leaders of the FNM

By ADRIAN GIBSON

ajbahama@hotmail.com



With the 2012 general elections likely being the last election that PM Hubert Ingraham would lead the FNM into, one notes that in a post-Ingraham era—perhaps 2017—the FNM may find itself at a crossroad in terms of leadership. Whenever the Chief decides to depart the political scene, the impending leadership showdown within the FNM will be great theatre. As it stands, there is a conga line of leadership hopefuls, minor also-ran pretenders and plenty of peripheral figures.

No doubt, there will be persons vying for the leadership whose smug giddiness, jack-in-the-box outlooks and sulfurous presence in a runoff could setoff alarm bells. One can only imagine the great setback the party would suffer if such individuals were designated as leader. These days, Bahamians are tired of hearing meaningless missives by garrulous airheads seeking their support only to disappear into the abyss once they have it.

When it comes to the future leadership of both major parties, as it currently stands, the political cupboards are somewhat bare. Although there is a fluid field littered with leadership contenders and pretenders, there is no heir apparent for the FNM’s leadership. Frankly, when the time comes for the FNM to choose a future leader, there will be a need for a far-sighted, energetic and inspiring leader who can articulate a vision for our nation and who is decisive, reasonable and a good listener. As I look at the prospective future leaders of the FNM, if anyone has been overlooked or left out, it means that—at present— their candidacy would be of no significance in any leadership race within the FNM.

PM Ingraham, the FNM’s current leader, is a political legend who overthrew a political godfather (Sir Lynden Pindling) in a head-to-head matchup. Mr Ingraham, who is seen as a man of the people, has connected with a broad swath of the public and has rightly become a feared, revered and beloved figure. Since this is likely the last election he would lead the FNM into battle—he has indicated that he would retire after another term or if the FNM loses the election—today we’ll examine the chances of the persons seen as likely successors of Mr Ingraham.

Tommy Turnquest, the former leader of the FNM, appears to be too indistinct and unpopular to win a caucus within the party and, even more, win a general election. His term as leader was mired in mediocrity and, his current term as National Security minister, has been a long, stupendously ineffective blur!

It is difficult to describe Mr Turnquest as politically analytical and intuitive and, moreover, he seems remote—constantly being read as emanating a sense of separateness. The minister has been able to competently manage Parliamentary affairs as the leader of government business in the House of Assembly. Mr Turnquest is likely to be a part of any leadership clash as he has a prominent name in the FNM and his political naval string is buried in the party.

Carl Bethel has become the nowhere man of Bahamian politics. Mr Bethel has been said to have alienated many voters—both in the internal fabric of the FNM and within his constituency—and was previously beaten by DPM Brent Symonette in the deputy leadership race during the party’s 2005 convention.

Party sources assert that Mr Bethel considers himself a strong contender to succeed Mr Ingraham. That said, Mr Bethel is seen to be an arrogant no-hoper who could only win a race for the FNM’s leadership in his fitful and fanciful dreams. There are those in the hierarchy of the FNM and among the party’s council members who consider Mr Bethel a posturing wannabe whose fantasies about becoming Prime Minister will follow him into old age!

Due to Carl Bethel’s calamitous political record, particularly during his last posting at the Ministry of Education—of which he was relieved by PM Ingraham—one party insider wondered if he could effectively run a concession stand, weighed against a political party or our archipelagic country?

Bran McCartney. Surprise! Yes, I said it.

Bran McCartney was on the fast track to becoming the face of the FNM. The current leader of the DNA, who emerged from the belly of the FNM, may not be seen as trustworthy if he abandons the DNA and returns to the FNM. I think that one day, after PM Ingraham leaves the front line, he will!

So, does McCartney stand a chance in a hall of convention delegates after “severing” all ties with the party? Will he remain divorced from the FNM or seek a remarriage? Is the DNA Mr McCartney’s stage for his very own bigheaded and self-important posturing and pontificating with the expectation of impressing the council of the FNM with his organizational and leadership abilities? After all, he would be the only challenger—post-Ingraham—who has ‘leadership experience’, right?

Desmond Bannister has been the most competent Minister of Education in many moons. His youth, coupled with his attention to detail, energy and poise and political appeal, makes him a strong contender to succeed PM Ingraham as FNM leader. If Mr Bannister wins the North Andros seat—leaving a relatively secure seat in Carmichael to vie to represent his traditionally PLP hometown—it would be a strategic move that should make a statement as to his future in the FNM and about his ability to capture even the imagination of the PLP’s base.

Bannister is intelligent, erudite and cool under fire. His sober minded outlook and perceived common touch makes him one of the best bets to lead the FNM in a post-Ingraham era.

Dion ‘The Bruiser’ Foulkes, who is also a hands-on people’s person, will no doubt throw his hat into the leadership rumble. Foulkes is a charismatic politician whose family ties are entrenched in the FNM. If he wins his seat, that would bring added credence to his leadership chances.

Although he’s currently playing second banana, Brent Symonette is not to be underestimated politically. Whilst there are some who would vigorously oppose his ascension to the leadership, Mr Symonette is said to be a down-to-earth chap who has one of the safest seats in Parliament and is said to be so good on the ground that he’s referred to as a political groundhog during campaigns. That said, Mr Symonette’s detractors feel that he could alienate some voters, thereby making his trek to the top even more difficult.

Dr Duane Sands—whilst at this juncture a political featherweight—could win a seat and purportedly garner support in succeeding Mr Ingraham. I have long heard that Sands would be one of Mr Ingraham’s favorites in the race to succeed him. That said, will Dr Sands have the political horsepower to successfully overthrow a long line of seasoned contenders for the leadership?

Zhivargo Laing will lose his voice after Mr Ingraham’s departure. Frankly, his political career might simply implode! There are many persons who have come to see Laing as a second-rate imitator of PM Ingraham and as another man with forlorn hopes of leading the FNM. By all accounts, Mr Laing is not well-liked, seems intolerant to divergent views and, relative to the leadership, is attempting to step into a pair of oversized shoes.

If Mr Laing is thrusted to the leadership of the party, I doubt that the national electorate would have much to do as his constituents will likely ensure that he doesn’t have a chance—and, frankly, one must be elected to become Prime Minister. Mr Laing would need to be situated in a 100 per cent guaranteed FNM seat.

Dr Hubert Minnis is a respected voice who is gliding under the radar and quietly becoming one of the strongest contenders for the leadership. Dr Minnis is a one-of-a-kind presence and a tactical populist, who would be a top-tier candidate. He is one of the odds-on favorites to lead the party post-Ingraham, has eclipsed many longer tenured MPs in popularity and has proven to be a good policy administrator in his capacity as Health Minister.

So, who will it be? Could either Bannister or Minnis emerge as leader? It is likely.

Is the next FNM leader among the other potential challengers? Or, is the next FNM leader a dark horse candidate who has yet to grace the political scene or could it be someone from outside of the traditional FNM core, perhaps from another party? Admittedly, we’ve also seen that before. Time will tell…...in the meantime, next week I’ll take a look at the PLP’s likely leadership challengers post-Perry Christie.

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) political con game on the Bahamian electorate

By Dennis Dames



I have received a number of comments on my initial piece in relations to the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) election strategy - dated November 26, 2011, from a number of supporters of the party in question. The gist of their reactions was that if the DNA wins a few seats, they feel that they would have enough turncoats in the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), and Free National Movement (FNM) to form a Democratic National Alliance (DNA) government in The Bahamas.

Well what is this!?

How could a minor political party expect elected members of two major organizations to join them in mass to form an administration in The Bahamas? The DNA is obviously living a political fantasy in a castle in the sky; and so called intelligent Bahamians have bought in to the Democratic National Alliance con game on the nation.

They don’t expect to win outright, they don’t expect to pull any deals with the major parties to form a government - if the opportunity presents, and they are blindly confident of PLP and FNM elected traitors coming over to their side to form the next Bahamas government – if push comes to shove.

It is safe to assume that the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is banking on political chaos after the results are confirmed following the 2012 general election. In this way, the spotlight and pressure could be on the respective leaders of the PLP and FNM; Messrs Christie and Ingraham. The Progressive liberal Party, and Free National Movement supporters could turned against their skippers in an atmosphere of political confusion and turmoil; and the Democratic National Alliance would relish irrationally in the uncertainty.

There must be a winner when the smoke clears though, even if it means a re-run of the election.
Here is where we the Bahamian people need to seriously consider who we are going to vote for, and our reasons for doing so. Are we going to vote for a DNA political stalemate and service Branville McCartney and Co’s ego or what?

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is not ready to govern on day one, because they expect to fall well short of the new 20 (twenty) member majority needed for a decisive victory. They would tell anyone who would listen, that they do not expect to win the 2012 election. They are relying on FNM and PLP double agents to pull them through.

It’s a long shot, and a very unrepresentative diversion being played on the Bahamian electorate by the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) – in my humble opinion.

Caribbean Blog International