The state of our Bahamian economy, multiple downgrades of The Bahamas by credit rating agencies, shrinking revenues, growing debt levels and deficits are clear handwritings on the wall... ...Will the next government have the will, fortitude and courage to rescue us from this downhill motion? ...The Bahamas is crying out for and earnestly awaits the emergence of statesmen and stateswomen in place of politicians

Self-imposed austerity measures advisable for next government

By Arinthia S. Komolafe

As we enter into another election season and the next general elections of our beloved nation approaches, one of the greatest uncertainties that dominates the thoughts and minds of the average Bahamian is the current crippled state of our economy.

Our national debt has increased during this economic crisis to more than $4 billion today with no end in sight to this spate of government borrowing.

In the last 2-3 months alone, the government has borrowed more than $200 million for the Water & Sewerage Corporation, roadworks in Andros and construction of bridges in Abaco. The spending spree embarked upon by the government could erroneously suggest that The Bahamas government has been issued a blank check or a credit card that has no limit.

The reality remains however, that these loans will have to be serviced in the interim and ultimately repaid by current and successive generations of Bahamians with the debt to GDP expected to climb to an estimated 70 percent by 2016.

Despite this massive borrowing, the real unemployment rate (including discouraged individuals) remains at more than 18 percent and no new industries have been created or expanded by the government.

An economic recovery in which the working class can return to work is desperately needed. The hope of realizing the Bahamian dream of receiving quality education, a well-paying job, owning a home and savings toward retirement must be rekindled within our nation.

With the current state of affairs, it is clear that the successful political party at the polls this year will have to take a hard-lined approach toward fiscal policy and make tough decisions which may include self-imposed austerity measures to curb the current rising debt.

Currently, all eyes are on Europe and the Eurozone, which is experiencing what has been termed as the euro-debt crisis. The European Commission has given strict orders to members of the European Union to carry out austerity measures to reduce their growing debts and deficits. The ultimate reason for such a hard-line approach is to sustain the Eurozone and save the Euro; the failure of which will spell a major disaster for the world economy and impede the ability of the global economy to climb out of this economic crisis in the near future. British Prime Minister David Cameron has failed to fall to pressures to cut back on austerity measures and has gone as far as declaring that “we are living in the age of austerity”.

Even more profound is Cameron’s articulation that he was prepared to be a one term prime minister who did the right thing as opposed to a two-term prime minister who did the wrong thing. He asserted that this was the right route to create jobs and an environment for economic growth.

The prime minister of Spain in the same vein recently announced further austerity measures to the tune of $11 billion and has committed to reducing his country’s deficit to 4.4 percent using measures such as a freeze on public wages and tax hikes on the wealthiest Spaniards. Greece has also taken measures to carry out deep pay and pension cuts, tax increases and has committed to carry out changes to collective bargaining agreements. France will increase its Value Added Tax (VAT) from 5.5 percent to 7 percent on many consumer goods except goods like produce, non-alcoholic beverages and water.

Meanwhile in the U.S., President Barack Obama has already signed $11 trillion in spending cuts into law and proposes more cuts. He has also committed to reforms on the cost of Medicare and Medicaid.

It would be unreasonable for The Bahamas to sit back and do nothing to help our own economy while the U.S., the EU and countries around the world are carrying out radical reforms to curb spending and revive their economies. Countries that have been inclined to borrow from International Financial Institutions (IFI) like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have had to use austerity measures to reform their economic policy to reduce their dependency on borrowing. We must be proactive and do something before we are told to. It is time to face the music, stop the rhetoric and make diversification of our economy a reality. The government of the day will have to become innovative and strategic to attract Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) and create opportunities and jobs for Bahamians outside of the unstable and vulnerable industries of tourism and financial services. Understanding that FDI inflows are currently constrained due to the current state of the global financial markets, it must find new ways of creating revenue to service the national debt and fund essential social programs like education and healthcare. In the short-term, reforms must be made to the public service to achieve efficiency gains. This may mean job cuts where necessary, revisiting the statutory retirement age and improving tax collection.

The continuous excessive subsidies allocated to government-owned enterprises must be reduced and eventually eliminated, with privatization of these enterprises being looked at more seriously. With the reality of wage expense approaching 50 percent of government revenue, job and pay freezes may have to be initiated by the government with job freezes on essential services like education, healthcare and national security being exceptions. The government will also have to consider welfare reform and a reform of its pension policies in a manner similar to that of the private sector.  In the medium to long term, the reform of the existing tax code is inevitable; a progressive form of taxation must be implemented and the feasibility of a Value Added Tax (VAT) regime should be explored. The next government must commence the process for revamping the existing tax code in the best interest of the country and of generations yet unborn. No one will argue that the current tax code which combines indirect and direct taxation is regressive and disproportionate to say the least. The tax structure in The Bahamas does not factor in the disparity in purchasing powers of individuals and corporate entities. While it may be argued that in the case of individuals, it boils down to better paying jobs and/or qualifications, the reality remains that the absence of a progressive form of income tax guarantees that the less privileged will always pay more and have less at their disposal. It goes without saying therefore, that the gap between the rich and the poor will continue to widen unless the tax code among other things is addressed.

The above recommendations may be a hard pill to swallow for many not least the government and ‘special interests’ who form part of the ruling economic class that have for decades failed to pay their fair share of taxes. It is imperative to state that the positive affect of such a bold stance toward the fiscal prudence and the financial position of this country will not produce positive results right away, but if carried out with due care and diligence, they will produce positive results in due time.

The socialist former prime minister in Canada, Chretien was faced with a similar challenge when his government was forced to carry out self-imposed austerity measures due to the rising debt in Canada. His government cut government spending across departments drastically and increased taxes on the rich. Cabinet ministers were given marching orders to reduce spending. The government witnessed a reduction in the debt-to-GDP ratio from 67 percent in 93-94 to 34 percent in 1997. More importantly, the resilience of Canada during the recent financial crisis was attributed to his tough actions several years ago. The next government can take a page out of Canada’s book which has proved to be successful and must make tough decisions for our country’s sake. The state of our economy, multiple downgrades of The Bahamas by credit rating agencies, shrinking revenues, growing debt levels and deficits are clear handwritings on the wall.

Will the next government have the will, fortitude and courage to rescue us from this downhill motion? Will they put country over self and party politics? The Bahamas is crying out for and earnestly awaits the emergence of statesmen and stateswomen in place of politicians.

Jan 12, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Whitney Bastian says he was denied a nomination to run on the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) ticket in South Andros because some members of the organization were afraid that party leader - Branville McCartney would not win his Bamboo Town seat... and if Mr Bastian won in South Andros, he would become leader of Branville McCartney's party

BASTIAN BLASTS BRAN IN DNA ROW



By SANCHESKA BROWN
Tribune Staff Reporter
sbrown@tribunemedia.net

BAMBOO Town MP Branville McCartney appointed himself leader of the DNA despite suggestions that he was elected internally, former party member Whitney Bastian has claimed.

In an interview with The Tribune, Mr Bastian said he cannot accept the official story of how Mr McCartney became leader of the party - because it was he, Mr Bastian, who had made up that story in the first place.

He said: "I advised them to tell to people the elections were over, when the truth is there were no elections. He appointed himself leader.

"When we had a meeting with potential members, we told them there was an election and the leader post was taken, but that was not true," he said.

"I dare him to say otherwise. He knows he appointed himself. If he says he didn't, let him produce the minutes of this so-called meeting where he was elected. Where was it? When was it? Who was there?

"He couldn't tell you because there was no election."

Mr Bastian said he originally planned not to say anything, but because Mr McCartney refuses to acknowledge that the former South Andros MP helped start the party, he feels compelled to speak out.

"I did not want people to think just because I did not get the nomination I was bitter and was making up things about Mr McCartney.

"I was just going to let him get beat up from the PLP and the FNM, but he started this so I'll finish it.

"He is still a novice in politics and he still has a lot to learn.

"He seems to forget I went to the Parliamentary Commissioner to negotiate on behalf of the DNA to use the lighthouse as the symbol for DNA. I didn't do that as a potential candidate, I did that as a partner.

"He seems to forget I encouraged him to leave the FNM. I told him if he didn't the Prime Minister would chap him at the knee and kill him politically."

Mr Bastian said he was going to form a party on his own, but Mr McCartney asked him to wait.

"We both decided that he would leave the FNM when the BTC issue came up. When I went to Panama, he called me and told me he couldn't wait until then. I told him I would support him in whatever he decided. After that we began working on the DNA and having long meetings. He constantly asked my advice and I have emails to the effect.

"Did he do that with every potential candidate? No, he didn't," Mr Bastian replied.

On Monday, Mr McCartney denied he started the DNA with Mr Bastian. In fact, he said, if Mr Bastian really did help form the DNA, he would have never been denied a nomination to run on the DNA ticket in South Andros.

In response, Mr Bastian said he was denied because some members of the party were afraid Mr McCartney would not win his seat and if Mr Bastian won, he would become leader of the party.

Mr Bastian said he still considers Mr McCartney to be "a brother," but said he could let his involvement in the DNA be misrepresented.

Mr Bastian is now running in the South Andros constituency as an independent candidate.

Mr McCartney could not be reached for comment last night.

January 11, 2012

tribune242

With a general election that must be called by May of this year, Hubert Ingraham has let it be known that this time around he is bringing forward a new, younger slate of Free National Movement (FNM) candidates

Ingraham’s changing party

A new generation of FNMs expected to come forward as candidates

By Brent Dean
Guardian Associate Editor
brentldean@nasguard.com

After coming so close for so long, the Free National Movement (FNM) found gold in the last decade of the twentieth century.  Hubert Ingraham, the former Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) minister and chairman, led the opposition party out of the wilderness and to victory.

Two decades later, that same party is depending on that same leader to win it a fourth mandate.  To do so, he has pledged change.  This change is not philosophical or organizational.  He’s changing faces – this in an effort to win a contest in tough times.  Some have already started complaining and calling ‘the chief’ names.  But being the only man to ever lead the party to success, is anyone in the FNM qualified to question his decisions?

 

Where they came from

The FNM is a coalition movement – as is any lasting party.  Remnants of the old United Bahamian Party (UBP) and rebels from the PLP formed the organization.  Its first general election was in 1972 and it lost that vote.  The FNM won 39.3 percent of the votes cast – the PLP won 59 percent.

The FNM struggled for the next two decades, losing the 1977, 1982 and 1987 elections to Sir Lynden Pindling’s party.  Ingraham joined the FNM in 1990 and led it to victory on August 19, 1992.  He, the poor boy who grew up in Abaco, ended the 25-year rule of Sir Lynden.

Over the next five years Ingraham took the FNM to its pinnacle.  It won in 1997 by a landslide margin, with Ingraham declaring after the poll that he could have won them all.

The PLP only secured six seats in that race – it lost one of those seats in a by-election following Sir Lynden’s retirement.

In the 1997 election, Ingraham cut the number of seats in the House of Assembly from 49 to 40 and he took the FNM to 57.7 percent of the popular vote. This was a massive swing from where the party was when it first took on the PLP in 1972.

What Ingraham brought to the FNM was winning.  Though Sir Kendal Isaacs and Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield are regarded as historic figures, those former FNM leaders could not deliver the ultimate prize. And in politics, winning is the only marker of judgment for leaders.

 

Who will run in 2012?

Ingraham won the FNM’s third mandate in 2007 by securing just under 50 percent of the vote.  The term has been difficult, however.  The financial crisis of 2008 was devastating and its effects persist.  The unemployment rate was 8.7 percent then.  It is now above 13 percent.  There have been four murder records in five years.  The $120 million road work upgrade for New Providence has been poorly managed by the contractor, Jose Cartellone Construcciones Civiles, and the government.  And Atlantis, the project initiated during Ingraham’s first term, has been taken by a creditor.  The prosperity resulting from that resort contributed to the FNM’s landslide win in 1997.

For the FNM, this election will not be easy.  Despite the efforts by the government to push back against the effects of the most significant recession since the Great Depression, voters often blame those in charge when things are not going well.

With an election that must be called by May of this year, Ingraham has let it be known that this time around he is bringing forward a new, younger slate of candidates.

No one will know for sure until the final names are listed, but from either public statements made by Ingraham, ‘word on the street’ or statements by candidates, the team will look quite different.

We know Kenneth Russell won’t be an FNM candidate again under Ingraham.  Clifton MP Kendal Wright is probably in that same category.  Also in the not-running-again group is Larry Cartwright, who has made it known he is bowing out.  North Eleuthera MP and House Speaker Alvin Smith too is out, seemingly along with Marathon MP Earl Deveaux.

Quite a few people are rumored to be in the ‘moving category’ – that is, sitting MPs or candidates who are leaving the areas they ran in last election.  Desmond Bannister is moving from Carmichael to North Andros.  And Zhivargo Laing, Loretta Butler-Turner, Dion Foulkes and Phenton Neymour are also said to be going elsewhere.

 

Reshaping the party is wise

For Ingraham this is likely his last general election.  Having sat in Parliament as an MP for Abaco consecutively since 1977, he has done it all.  He has even done something Sir Lynden could not.  He regained power in 2007 after stepping aside following his party’s 2002 defeat.  Sir Lynden, his mentor, tried but was unable to get back in the throne after his 1992 defeat.

Many tangible things have occurred during this FNM term.  The straw market was finished; the national stadium was completed; a terminal at the airport was built, and others are under construction; the unemployment and prescription drug benefits were created; millions of dollars have been spent on the water system and roads in New Providence; the Bahamas Telecommunications Company was privatized; the container port is almost built; major investment is underway to upgrade the hospital; the magistrates complex is almost done; and there have been upgrades to the Supreme Court complex.  Even more accomplishments could be listed.

The FNM during its campaign will argue that it is the party of doing and Perry Christie and his party are the party of talk.  Ingraham will list what he has done and ask the people to choose between talk and action.  At this stage of his career he will fight hard to win, but if the people want what he would describe as ‘mere talk’ over action and doing, then I suspect that he would be quite happy to say he did his best and to retire.

But before going, if that is to be Ingraham’s fate, it is wise to give the next generation a chance.  One of the major criticisms many

Bahamians have of the PLP and the FNM is that both Ingraham and Christie have stayed too long.  One of the ways to push back against this criticism is to empower the young now.

If the FNM wins, those young people would be in positions to lead right away.  If the FNM loses, those young people would have the experience of an election.

Those old FNMs who have had multiple opportunities to run should not feel badly if Ingraham tells them it’s over.  It is his party.  And that is so because he is a proven winner.  Within the party, he has earned the authority to set his line-up for an election.  Is a man a tyrant, as he was called by Russell, simply because he makes political moves to best position his party, in his mind, for an election?  Of course not.

In politics there are no friendships.  There are just alliances of convenience.  In the weeks to come as Ingraham refines his list of candidates, more FNMs will come to learn this – which is something they should have known when they entered politics.

I have always thought that both leaders should have retired by now, but that is neither here nor there at this stage.  For each to allow the next generation to step to the frontline at this election is a reasonable compromise in our centralized political system.  Those they used to get this far, who have been or will be discarded before the election, should look back fondly on the time they spent ‘in the mix’.  You were the tools of great men.

Jan 09, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Bahamian Hero Sir Clifford Darling was a man who, even at the end, was not really given the accolades he deserved... not even a memorial service before his funeral by those in the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) he helped to shape

Sir Clifford Darling: A fixed star

Consider this

By Philip C. Galanis

“If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,

Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch,

if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you

If all men count with you, but none too much;”

- Rudyard Kipling

 

At a wonderfully choreographed home-going ceremony for Sir Clifford Darling at Zion Baptist Church on Thursday past, His Excellency Sir Arthur Foulkes noted: “As a great man who belonged to a great generation goes to his rest, the curtain of living memory is slowly but inexorably closing on a defining era in the history of The Bahamas.  As with great sadness we mourn his passing, we also, as is our custom, take the opportunity to celebrate a life that was well lived and wonderfully fruitful.”  Therefore, this week, just one day before what is arguably the second most important date in Bahamian history, the anniversary of Majority Rule, we thought it would be instructive to Consider This... how do we briefly characterize the life and contributions of the man from Chesters, Acklins?

Darling (also affectionately called ‘Sir Cliff’) has been described as one who represented the best of the Bahamian spirit, a civil man of integrity, a nationalist and a humble soul who rose from poverty on Acklins Island to become the head of state, our fourth Bahamian-born governor general.

 

His record

No other Bahamian has matched his record.  Darling was unique in that he alone, like no other Bahamian before or since, served the Bahamian people as a senator, a member of the House of Assembly, cabinet minister, speaker of the House, and ultimately governor general.

His 89-year sojourn was punctuated by conflicts and challenges, disappointments and disenchantments as well as superlative successes, all of which contributed to the building of a nation by a solitary soul which is not likely to be repeated anytime soon.

Whether it was during his time on the contract in the United States, his tenure as president of the The Bahamas Taxi Cab Union (BTCU), his 25-years as the PLP MP for the constituency of Englerston, or in his capacity as the cabinet minister who inaugurated the National Insurance Board, he exuded a quiet confidence that endeared him to all who came into contact with him.

 

Achievements

Few Bahamians would know that Darling never lost an election in his life, starting with the time he ran and won the election as the representative of the workers in his camp in the United States while on the contract in 1943.  Darling served eight consecutive years as the secretary of the BTCU, never losing an election that was held every year.  He then won 10 consecutive elections when he ran for president of the union, despite facing opposition each year that he ran.

Few Bahamians would know that the PLP did not want him to run in Englerston in 1967 and he was actually told that if he lost, he would not be reappointed to the senate.  He went on to win by the largest majority of any candidate in 1967, ultimately winning six general elections in Englerston from 1967 to 1992.

 

Disappointments

Few Bahamians would know how surprised and disappointed Darling was that Sir Lynden Pindling did not invite him to join his first cabinet after Majority Rule.  In fact, Darling recounts how it was actually Jeffery Thompson who proposed that ‘Sir Cliff’ should be offered the position of deputy speaker in 1967, which was eventually agreed.

In discussions with Darling, he remembered his relationship with Sir Stafford Sands, who he described as a racist, and with whom he had many squabbles dating from the time that Sands tried to destroy the BTCU.  Darling recalls that when he became deputy speaker of the House, he was the first black man to sit in that chair and Sands did not like that at all.  Darling recounted that when members entered or exited the House, they had to bow to the chair in deference to the speaker or deputy speaker.  Although it only happened a few times before he left The Bahamas and died abroad, Sands had to respect the chair by bowing. Whenever he did so, Darling could clearly see the resentment in Sands’ face.

One of Darling’s biggest disappointments occurred shortly after the FNM won the general elections in 1992 when he was serving as governor general. It was then that the Ingraham administration politicized that office which is conventionally set above partisan politics, and prevented Darling from reading the speech from the throne at the commencement of Parliament.  ‘Sir Cliff’ recalled that he was told that the government would pay for him to go anywhere in the world and he decided to go to Canada. He also recalls that he was extremely hurt and sat in his hotel room in Canada, while Sir Kendal Isaacs read the speech from the throne in his stead.  Could that be the reason that the prime minister did not pay personal tribute to Darling at the funeral on Thursday, perhaps because the hurt was still deeply felt by Darling’s family even in death?

At all times, Darling presented himself as a nationalist even after demitting office as governor general.  This writer recalls an occasion shortly after receiving the PLP nomination for Englerston in 1997, asking ‘Sir Cliff’ for advice about the constituency. Unhesitatingly, he replied that as the former governor general, he does not get involved in politics.

 

Conclusion

In his tribute, Sir Arthur Foulkes observed about an earlier time that: “There was no shortage of flamboyant politicians, but Clifford Darling was more of a fixed star than a shooting star, an inspiring presence, the perfect mix of necessary patience and steely determination.”

Darling was a man who, even at the end, was not really given the accolades he deserved, not even a memorial service before his funeral by those in the party he helped to shape.

In the final analysis, although on occasion he was let down by some of his closest friends and political colleagues, no matter what, Darling never, ever let his country down. His legacy will endure in the firmament of Bahamian politics for generations to come.

 

Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis & Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament.  Please send your comments to:pgalanis@gmail.com

Jan 09, 2012

thenassauguardian

Less than 17 per cent of poor Bahamian households are receiving social security benefits... ...an Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) report highlighting a dysfunctional welfare system that is failing to reach those most in need... and where the potential for fraud and abuse is rampant

JUST 17% OF POOR GETTING BENEFITS



By NEIL HARTNELL
Tribune Business Editor


LESS than 17 per cent of poor Bahamian households are receiving social security benefits, an Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) report highlighting a dysfunctional welfare system that is failing to reach those most in need, and where the potential for fraud and abuse is rampant.

The IDB report, which has been obtained by Tribune Business, also reveals that just 45 per cent of the Food Stamps issued by the Department of Social Services go to the poorest 20 per cent of Bahamian households, raising immediate questions of whether the system is being abused by wealthier persons and those with the right 'connections'.

Noting that there was no 'means testing' of applicants for social security benefit payments in the Bahamas, the IDB report said government officials found difficulty in accessing even the most basic information on welfare programmes, such as how may people were benefiting from them.
Evaluations of the Government's various social security initiatives, to determine whether they were functioning efficiently and reaching their targets, were described as "virtually non-existent".

The IDB report is part of an initiative to Strengthen Social Protection Programmes in the Bahamas, which is seeking to consolidate the various welfare benefits into a more streamlined package targeting the most vulnerable in Bahamian society.

It is also targeting waste, fraud and inefficiency in the system, in a bid to reduce the burden social security spending places on the Government's finances.

"The Bahamas has a range of non-contributory social protection programmes. However, there is considerable scope for consolidating, redesigning and strengthening programmes so that the safety net is better positioned to protect the poor and promote their human capital development," the IDB report said.

"The Ministry of Labour and Social Development implements over 10 cash-in-kind programmes, and households could potentially benefit from all of these."

These initiatives included the Food and Financial Assistance Programmes; the School Uniform and Footwear Programme; School Feeding Programme; Rent Programme; Water Programme; Electricity Programme; Disability Allowance; Emergency Assistance; Medical Care Assistance; and Residential and Non-residential Social Care Services.

Yet the IDB report warned: "Multiple small programmes are administratively burdensome, and increase possibilities for abuse. At the same time, gaps in coverage are present, with only 16.7 per cent of poor households in receipt of safety net benefits.

This suggests that the Bahamas' social security/welfare system is failing abysmally where it is most needed, in providing help to the poorest in society.

The IDB report said all the Government's benefits "rely on inefficient targeting mechanisms", with both those under the Ministry and the National Insurance Board (NIB) involving different applications and targeting procedures.

"Each programme has its own criteria for approval," the report added. "Applications for assistance to the Ministry of Labour and Social Development go through a labour intensive seven-step review process.

"Even with this multi-tiered approval process, only 45 per cent of Food Coupon benefits go to households in the poorest quintile, and this is despite the fact that the programme is ostensibly targeted to the indigent."

All of which suggests that the majority of Food Stamps, some 55 per cent, go to those who have no, or minimal need, for them - indicating the system is being abused.

"Information and monitoring systems are weak," the IDB report added. "Programme information is not fully computerised, and programme officials have difficulty accessing even basic programme information, such as how many programme beneficiaries there are, or beneficiaries' geographic and demographic composition.

"Programme evaluations are virtually non-existent. As a result, we do not know which programmes are achieving their objectives, and if they are efficient and cost-effective."

The IDB said the Government wanted to "improve the efficiency and effectiveness" of its social security spending. As a result, the project aimed "to help lessen, in the medium term, the fiscal burden of the welfare system by reducing leakages of transfers to non-eligible beneficiaries".

Administration was also targeted for improvement, and rationalising the Government's various benefit programmes "to avoid duplication, and restructuring to enhance efficiency and impact, is needed". Consolidation was a priority, along with expanding social security coverage "to a greater share of the poor".

"The consolidated programme should focus on protecting the most vulnerable and on promoting human capital development among children, including promoting healthy nutrition and keeping adolescents in school," the IDB report said.

Means testing, to ensure those actually needing social security support, are set to be introduced. The welfare programmes to be consolidated are the Food and Financial Assistance (rent, water and electricity) programmes; the School Uniform and Footwear programme; School Lunch programme; and Disability Allowance.

The IDB report acknowledged that the programme could be "politically sensitive" given the upcoming election, but the Government is moving to counter this by appointing a broad-based social protection reform working group.

January 06, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

...the Jamaicans rejected the People's National Party (PNP) in 2007 just like the Bahamians rejected the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) in 2007... but that’s the unique beauty of democracy which we in the English-speaking Caribbean are proud of ...which has significantly contributed to the progress of our nation... The question remains however, will the Bahamian people just like their Jamaican counterparts vote the PLP back into power?

Jamaican elections 2011: A prediction of what to expect in The Bahamas in 2012?

By Arinthia S. Komolafe

On December 29, 2011, we witnessed the People’s National Party (PNP) in Jamaica command a landslide victory against the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in the country’s 16th general election since Jamaicans were able to vote for the first time in 1944.  The elections came at a time when there were growing concerns among the electorate, as the country’s national debt climbed to approximately 130 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), a reported 12-13 percent unemployment rate, high crime rate, budget overrun on road works and corruption at the government level, including the most recent scandal of the JLP government and its connection to Christopher “Dudus” Coke that led former Prime Minister Bruce Golding to step down in favor of the now defeated Prime Minister Andrew Holness.

More than 1.6 million Jamaicans cast their votes in a hotly contested election, which opinion polls had suggested would be close.  The Jamaica Gleaner, the country’s oldest daily, even went as far as to predict a victory in favor of the JLP suggesting a 34-29 win.  However, the PNP under the leadership of 66-year-old Portia Simpson Miller returned to power after a close defeat in the 2007 general election, taking 41 of the 63 available seats in Parliament, the remainder going to the JLP and no seats going to independents or third parties.  The number of constituencies and available parliamentary seats in Jamaica were increased from an even number of 60 to an odd number of 63 in order to prevent a potential deadlock – a decision that may not have been unconnected to the close elections in 2007.

In light of the foregoing and looking closer on the home front, one cannot help but ask why Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and the boundaries commission agreed to a reduction of seats from an odd number of 41 to an even number of 38.  Considering the closeness of our 2007 general election and slim margins of victories by candidates seeking parliamentary seats, the wisdom of maintaining an odd number of constituencies should have been taken into consideration and ultimately prevailed.  At the very least, there should have been a minimum of 39 parliamentary seats to offer for in the next general election.  However, as we have witnessed the events unfold over the past few weeks and played out in the press, politics seems to have overridden any sense of logic.

The challenges facing us

Nevertheless, the challenges plaguing Jamaica are similar to those that we are faced with here in The Bahamas.  Voters are intelligent enough to recognize that the entire world has fallen victim to this global economic and financial crisis.  However, the electorate is not buying the use of the aforesaid as a valid excuse for things being the way they are – an excuse which governments around the world have politicized and are selling to their citizens.

The Jamaican elections were a prime example of the often underestimated wisdom and sophisticated knowledge of the 21st century voter.  Just a short few months ago, Jamaica’s minister of transport and works for the (former) ruling JLP government in Jamaica, Mike Henry, had to resign his post for cost overruns and mismanagement of a $400 million road work construction program in Jamaica.  As the funds were the result of a loan extended by the People’s Republic of China, disgruntled taxpayers and the opposition PNP were obviously not pleased with how the funds were being squandered so negligently during a time when the economy was and still is in such a depressed state.  In hindsight, their discontent was clearly a prelude of things to come based upon the election results.  The JLP seemed to have been negligent as it related to addressing the economic needs of the Jamaican people which prompted their bosses – the voting population – to reward them by sending a clear message to the JLP of what they felt about the last five years of JLP governance.  Faced with a similar scenario, the Bahamian people may follow in like manner at the polls in 2012 after experiencing unprecedented high levels of crime that have unfortunately increased tremendously over the past five years, and continuous loss of jobs with no hope for new ones to be created.

As a result the estimated unemployment rate has climbed to more than 18 percent.  To make matters worse, we are experiencing an increase in the closure of small and medium sized businesses and have had to watch with great agony the foreclosures of a multitude of Bahamian homes and properties.  Moreover, there’s an increasing perception that negligent spending of the taxpayers’ funds has helped push the debt-to-GDP ratio to more than 40 percent and the deficit to more than $4 billion.  This added to an increase in social problems, no doubt stemming from the aforementioned issues, adds to a laundry list of items, including an alarming high school drop-out rate that continues to increase, a national grade point average of D, a rise in teenage pregnancy cases, domestic violence, child molestation, recidivism among former inmates, increased illegal immigration and gun and firearms trafficking – all of which this government seems to have little or no answers to.

What is being done?

The problems facing our nation are serious and should not be overshadowed by petty politics.  We are on a downward spiral that will lead us on a continuous path of destruction if an urgent intervention is not undertaken. We have witnessed over these past five years that the current government has been hard-pressed to find solutions to the myriad problems that our nation is faced with.  The government and its public relations machinery on the other hand is saying, “do you see this and do you see that”, pointing to the various capital projects and expenditure initiated by the government during the last five years.  Like the average Bahamian, I recognize the importance of capital projects such as the roads, the new straw market, the acquisitions of buildings for government agencies and multiple projects left on the table by the former PLP government between 2002 and 2007, such as the Nassau airport development, Baha Mar, Thomas A. Robinson Stadium and so on and so forth.  However, the question remains as to whether these individuals recognize the thousands of Bahamians struggling to make ends meet each day and whether they are sensitized to the amount of children unable to attend school because their parents cannot afford uniforms, lunch and/or supplies.

We must acknowledge that several Bahamian families are growing hungry each day due to the continuous increase in the cost of breadbasket items, as their purchasing power continues to decrease due to inflation alongside the reality of minimal or non-existent increases in salaries.  One only needs to look around to see the thousands of Bahamian businesses that are shutting down largely in part due to the negligent mismanagement of road works, high cost of energy and increased taxes to operate a business in an already depressed economy.

These plights are added to the many Bahamians who are going homeless each day as they lose their homes to foreclosures.  The economies of our Family Islands are depressed, as the government has failed to diversify our economy and effectively develop these islands – the biggest victim of this depression being the second capital city of Freeport in Grand Bahama, whose woes unfortunately seem to have no end.  The multiple downgrades of our nation’s economy in 2011 by international ratings agencies do not provide a positive outlook for our nation and offer a bleak picture for the future unless viable solutions are forthcoming.

In the final analysis, the Jamaicans rejected the PNP in 2007 just like the Bahamians rejected the PLP in 2007, but that’s the unique beauty of democracy that we in the English-speaking Caribbean are proud of which has significantly contributed to the progress of our nation.  The question remains however, will the Bahamian people just like their Jamaican counterparts vote the PLP back into power?  Time will tell.  The clock is ticking and the countdown has already begun.

 

Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law. Comments can be directed at: arinthia.komolafe@komolafelaw.com

Jan 05, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Today's union leaders in The Bahamas are a different breed... they have no interest in nation building

UNIONISTS WANT RIGHT TO BE LATE FOR WORK

tribune242 editorial



UNIONS seem to follow a pattern, they rattle their sabres at tourism's busiest time of the year, or when an election is nearing. The reasoning seems to be that these are the times when the boss is most vulnerable, so they toss him to the ground and pick his pockets.

True or false, that is the perception.

For several days now, there has been discontent at the airport. A strike for the busy new year's weekend was threatened. Although a strike did not materialise there was chaos at the airport yesterday. We know that at least one businessman cancelled plans to travel to the US over the weekend because of strike talk - union leaders refused to confirm or deny whether the strike was on or off. The businessman feared that if he left the country he might not be able to return for early morning meetings on Tuesday. There were probably others in the same situation. Of course, no one knows how many weekend visitors coming into the country might also have cancelled because of the uncertainty.

As one businessman close to the tourist industry commented yesterday: "Today's union leaders are a different breed, they have no interest in nation building."

It seems unconscionable that anyone would try to destroy new business coming into a country that has suffered such a long economic downturn. But that is just what all this "work-to-rule" and "strike" at the airport did over a weekend that promised good business for the country.

It is interesting to note that the union making the most noise, is a breakaway union, which as yet has no contract with the government. Union leaders are to meet with Labour Minister Dion Foulkes next week -- Tuesday, January 10 -- to negotiate their first contract.

When a Tribune reporter tried to get information on Friday as to whether the newly-formed Bahamas Customs, Immigration and Allied Workers Union (BCIAWU) intended to go through with its strike threat, all union vice-president Sloane Smith would say was: "I offer no information today on what may possibly be going on at the airport. I will not say there is a strike or there isn't a strike. Things are unfolding the way they should. That is all I am prepared to say."

In other words, the travelling public can go you-know-where as far as unionists are concerned. They forget that these are the tourists who put bread on their tables and when the tourists are gone so is the bread.

Members of the BCIAWU were once a part of John Pinder's Bahamas Public Services Union (BPSU), which does have a government contract. The BCIAWU is negotiating a contract for the first time.

They have listed several items that they want clarified and incorporated into their contract. "Employees are repeatedly being disciplined for lateness, although the contract states this should not occur more than four times per month," is one of their complaints. Obviously, they are referring to the BPSU contract, which the BCIAWU abandoned on breaking away from the BPSU. At the moment, they have no contract as a reference point.

We had to read this "lateness" demand several times, and still we cannot believe that persons interested in holding down a job are trying to negotiate slackness into their contract. It's an absolutely preposterous demand, which should be tossed out before any negotiations begin. Anyone interested in giving an honest day's work has no right to demand the right to be late for work.

Just imagine everyone in a department deciding to have a lie in on a Monday morning. There would be chaos in that department. The taxpayers of this country have the right to demand more. What man or woman in the private sector can arrive late on the job without a valid excuse, and when that so-called "valid excuse" starts to form a pattern, the man or woman is eventually written up, and if there is no improvement, he or she is fired.

That is the general problem with the public service -- there are many exceptions, of course-- but as a general rule too many are not serious. They are not serious about work and they are not serious about serving the public. However, they are very serious about their days off, their overtime, and being allowed to be late for work one day in every week of the year.

Four late days a month, translates into 48 late days a year. What private company would tolerate this? What taxpayer would expect to get away with such dumb shenanigans at his own place of business, yet he is expected to foot the bill for a public servant to have the right to do so. It's now time for the public to have a say in some of these contracts, after all they are the ones footing these bills.

We hope that the right to be late for work is removed completely from all contracts. The main trouble with the public service is that it lacks discipline. What we have found in our years in business is that what is granted as a generous consideration when built into a contract suddenly becomes a right. One can be certain that every week of each month a staff member will be late because it is now his right-- no reasons are needed for the lateness. How can a department head manage a department efficiently if he/she has to work with staff who have such "rights."

We still can't believe that union leaders would insult the public's intelligence by threatening to strike for such nonsense.

January 03, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International