There is nothing wrong with religious figures speaking at political events... ...They are citizens too ...and thus have the right to voice their concerns about the direction of their country

Reasonableness, family and politics

thenassauguardian

Retired Archbishop Drexel Gomez’s appearance at a Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) rally on Friday in North Andros has caused some controversy.  He is the former head of the Anglican Church in the West Indies.

Bishop Gomez appeared at the rally and spoke in support of his brother Dr. Perry Gomez, the PLP’s candidate for North Andros and the Berry Islands.  Dr. Gomez has led the fight in The Bahamas against HIV/AIDS as long-time director of the National AIDS Programme.

Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham raised the question about the appropriateness of Bishop Gomez addressing the political event while he addressed Free National Movement (FNM) supporters in Long Island on Monday night.

“And I saw the former archbishop of The Bahamas, Bishop Gomez, who was down there in his bishop's collar.  I do call upon Perry Christie to apologize for that.  He knows better,” said Ingraham.

“Many of you Anglicans who celebrate Lent time do not do such things.  In fact, I saw Father Sebastian Campbell in the newspaper complaining about us holding meetings during Lent.  Well what [do] you think about a bishop on the political podium during Lent?”

Bishop Gomez on Tuesday dismissed Ingraham’s call for Christie to apologize for allowing him to address the rally.

“I was there simply because I was invited by my brother, who was having the formal opening of his headquarters in Nicholl’s Town,” Bishop Gomez told The Nassau Guardian after being contacted for a comment.

He pointed out that he stayed clear of political statements when he addressed PLP supporters.

“I felt I was the most appropriate person to make the presentation, as the older member of the family and the person who has been in the public domain,” Bishop Gomez said.

“I chose my comments very carefully.  I only spoke about my brother and our family.  I made no reference whatsoever to political issues or to political parties.  My intention was simply to introduce him to the people at the formal opening of his headquarters.”

Bishop Gomez said he exercised two rights when he spoke at the political event.  The first being his constitutional right to speak in the public domain on public issues and the second being his religious right to comment on matters of justice and truth.

Now as we proceed through the election cycle, there will be many questions raised about many things in the effort to advance political causes.  While it is good for us to have robust debates, we must be reasonable.

There is nothing wrong with religious figures speaking at political events.  They are citizens too and have the right to voice their concerns about the direction of the country.  We think, however, that it would be irresponsible for religious figures to go as far as ‘anointing’ a political party or candidate as ‘God’s choice’, consequently suggesting that opponents stand against divine will.

Reverend Frederick McAlpine is a FNM senator and in the past he regularly spoke at FNM rallies.  He is a charismatic speaker and is good at firing up the crowd.  There is nothing wrong with him doing this, just as there is nothing wrong with Bishop Gomez speaking in support of his younger brother.

Similarly, there is nothing wrong with Delores Ingraham, wife of the prime minister, attending political events and standing on stage with her husband.  She is a public servant and is principal of C.C. Sweeting High School.  There is a prohibition against public servants being involved in frontline politics, but commonsense must be used in evaluating that standard.

We hope that as the political crossfire continues the combatants don’t reach for any old thing to bludgeon their opponents with.  Reasonableness should guide the process.

Mar 08, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

...four years after the ‘Great Recession’ commenced, the Bahamian economy continues to struggle... ...the government is challenged with reduced revenues, soaring energy and food prices, high unemployment, rising crime levels and social ills... ...with unemployment at its highest in years and individuals on reduced pay... it seems fair to state that the mortgage sector and housing market in The Bahamas are in a crisis...

Confronting the Bahamian debt crisis pt. 1

By Arinthia S. Komolafe

In the aftermath of the worst recession since the Great Depression, the government is challenged with reduced revenues, soaring energy and food prices, high unemployment, rising crime levels and social ills.  In response to these challenges and in order to stay afloat, the government has resorted to borrowing.  The reality is that imprudent borrowing practices prior to and during the economic downtown have exacerbated the economic soundness of our government.

The story of the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the lessons learned are well documented.  However, four years after the ‘Great Recession’ commenced, the Bahamian economy continues to struggle.  It was reported that the Bahamian banking system was resilient to the crisis and to some extent the economic downturn because of our credit policies as administered by the Central Bank of The Bahamas (CBB).  However, was this assertion truth or fallacy?  One wonders if based upon the facts and looking back in hindsight whether the current mortgage and ultimately debt crisis was an accident waiting to happen.  Could it be that the economic downturn exposed flaws in our monetary policy and credit risk management framework?

Background

A journey down memory lane and history, will show that the CBB in August 2004 in an attempt to ensure that credit expansion was consistent with economic growth, advised banks to monitor borrowers’ creditworthiness by limiting the debt service ratio (DSR) on loans to a range of 40 percent to 45 percent of ordinary income and require a minimum of 15 percent equity contribution on all personal loans with exceptions to those secured with mortgage indemnity insurance.  A short one month later, the CBB temporarily relaxed those policies by eliminating the 15 percent equity requirement and raised the DSR threshold to 55 percent.  It is noteworthy to state that the reason given for this change was to aid in relief due to the effects of Hurricane Frances.  It is unclear, however, how many banks took advantage of this flexibility, the immediate impact on the economy and how long these policies actually remained in effect.

However, some four months later, the CBB reduced its discount rate (DR) from 5.75 percent to 5.25 percent and the prime rate (PR) was consequently reduced by 50 basis points to 5.5 percent.  It is imperative that we examine the aforementioned policy decisions made by the CBB in the context of the Bahamian economy which is primarily consumer driven.

In the absence of an established credit bureau, it is difficult to assess the creditworthiness of Bahamian consumers and almost impossible to assess whether a consumer’s DSR truly falls within the 40 percent to 45 percent range.  Taking a conservative hypothetical approach (and I must emphasize that this may be extremely conservative) and assuming that a majority of consumers had a ‘real’ maximum DSR of 55 percent as opposed to the required maximum 45 percent, it follows that an increase of the DSR to 55 percent would increase the ‘real’ DSR to 65 percent, leaving the consumer with an ultimate disposable income rate of only 35 percent.

In addition to the scenario painted above, a decrease in the DR and PR all things being equal, should further encourage borrowing and expand credit.  This brings into question whether the objective of ensuring that credit expansion was consistent with economic growth was achieved.  In 2004, with the CBB’s policy to restrict credit expansion, the amount of mortgages for new construction of single dwelling homes stood at a mere 894.  To highlight the effect the aforementioned policy change had on the mortgage market, in 2005 and 2006 government revenue on stamp tax for mortgages almost doubled in 2005 compared to 2004 and increased significantly in 2006.

Further, residential mortgages for new construction of single dwelling homes stood at 1,428 and 1,137 in 2005 and 2006 respectively.  The total processed value amounted to approximately $300 million for these years.  It is uncertain how many persons painted a true picture of their DSR and the real question is whether the majority of persons who obtained mortgages during this period should have actually qualified for those mortgages. This is bearing in mind that as at December 31, 2011 mortgage delinquencies stood at approximately $650 million.

Mortgage sector and housing market in crisis

Today with unemployment at its highest in years and individuals on reduced pay, it seems fair to state that the mortgage sector and housing market are in a crisis.  It is not surprising that many Bahamians have defaulted on their mortgage obligations with mortgage delinquencies standing at approximately $650 million in arrears for the entire Bahamas.  In order to appreciate the extent of this debacle, a look in the newspapers will reveal a fraction of the number of foreclosed properties advertised for sale.  It has been argued that the reduction of the DR and PR by 75 basis points in June 2011, although welcomed came too late and that the reduction was inadequate.

The government is being called upon to provide mortgage assistance for those who are losing their homes.  Proponents of this relief effort cite the millions of dollars expended on capital infrastructure by the government in justifying this move as the right action required.  They submit that if the government could spend such exorbitant amounts on infrastructure and the purchase of shares, it is only fair that the government would provide relief to struggling homeowners.  Opponents of any form of mortgage relief efforts by the government argue that in a capitalistic society, the government should not interfere with private enterprise.  After all, opponents submit the free market economy is designed to have minimal government intervention and market forces must be left to control the market.

In the final analysis, there is enough blame to go around; starting with the government, the lending institutions and the consumer.  In the years leading up to the financial and economic downturn, the government benefitted from the credit expansion as a result of monetary policy in the form of increased stamp tax revenue, the lending institutions turned over record profits and consumers benefitted from unprecedented access to credit facilities.

It is only fitting, therefore, that the aforementioned benefactors should come together to bring resolution to this crisis.  In order to avoid further deepening of this crisis, the government on its part, should explore establishing a fund to assist eligible homeowners in retaining their homes.  Adjustments to the DR and PR by the CBB should be stalled until a credit bureau and robust consumer protection agency as a matter of urgency have been established.  The lending institutions should take significant steps to refinance mortgages on more favorable terms for consumers and more importantly consumers should exercise increased prudence in the management of their finances.

 

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

Confronting the Bahamian debt crisis pt. 2

Mar 09, 2012

thenassauguardian

caribbean Blog International

A National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme would only work efficiently if, and only if, there are proper checks and balances in place ...especially to ensure that the pool of money goes in to a segregated fund for health and health alone...

The National Health Insurance debate

CFAL Economic view

We read recently in a local daily that Dr. Perry Gomez, the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) candidate for North Andros and the Berry Islands said that under a PLP government National Health Insurance (NHI) would be implemented within the first year of coming to office.  While we are in the so-called ‘silly season’ and everyone and their brother are making promises, we would hope that some of the promises would be well reasoned outlining the attended cost and consequences for the wider community; the usual rhetoric is just not acceptable this time around.  We believe that members of the Bahamian electorate are a bit more discerning than most politicians give them credit for.

What is NHI?

The issue of a National Health Insurance was first raised back in August 2002, when then Prime Minister Perry Christie appointed a 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission to review the feasibility of a National Health Insurance Plan.  The committee was also mandated to determine the best way to make affordable healthcare available to all residents.  The appointment of the committee was a step towards the fulfillment of the then government’s promise to ensure that all patients receive the same access to healthcare regardless of their personal wealth or circumstances as outlined in the PLP’s manifesto, ‘Our Plan’.  In 2004, the final report was released.  It was the view of the committee that The Bahamas cannot afford to not have a National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme.  The committee also stated that NHI had to be mandatory and would only work if the government had adequate funding.   We have no difficulty agreeing with those observations but would urge the authorities and the public to take a closer and more objective look at the proposal.

What is National Health Insurance?  National Health Insurance is a form of social health insurance, which uses the principles of fund pooling and risk sharing to provide equity in access to care.  Individuals pay an ‘affordable’ amount on a consistent basis and in return are able to have their healthcare needs provided for, regardless of cost.

It is envisioned that this ‘cradle to the grave’ national healthcare coverage will cover persons who are currently excluded from private insurance plans such as individuals with pre-existing illnesses, newborn babies and those over 65.

The 125-page NHI report outlined the following eight specific recommendations for the Cabinet’s consideration:

1. National Health Insurance should be universal.

2. Legislation should stipulate the health insurance is compulsory for all residents.

3. National Health Insurance should be administered by the National Insurance Board.

4. A comprehensive benefits package should be offered.

5. Contributions should be set at a rate which is affordable for the majority.

6. Public and private providers should be offered the opportunity to join the National Health Insurance system.

7. All provider payment mechanisms should be considered for use with capitation being the preferred option.  (Capitation is a provider payment mechanism in which providers are regularly paid a stipulated amount per person for whom they agree to provide services during a defined period of time.)

8. A percentage of revenues should be set aside for purposes that ensure the stability of National Health Insurance.

The present system in The Bahamas, which employed persons contribute to, is a form of social security.  Our health system includes tax-funded care through government hospitals and clinics, and private care funded by direct user fees or private insurers.  The incentives that exist include pension, invalidity assistance, medical incentives, maternity benefits, some income replacement, temporary and permanent disability benefits, and health coverage for occupational injuries.  Basically, social health insurance currently exists only through the industrial injury component of NIB.

Recently, the present government implemented the National Prescription Drug Plan to assist some Bahamian residents, particularly the elderly and children under the age of 18 years.  It is estimated that the cost of this program is currently running around $5 million; a figure which we expect to only increase in the future.

Healthcare costs are one of the more vexing and challenging issues facing countries today and according to the latest information on the subject, average cost in the last five years increased annually by more than 10 percent.  With rapidly aging populations and the rising costs of modern medical technology, governments everywhere are finding it increasingly difficult to provide the funds required to meet healthcare needs of their respective populations.  Given that position, we would hope that before any decision is made to move forward with universal health coverage, the authorities would prepare a detailed cost analysis to use as a guide.  To do otherwise, we run the risk of committing to something which could surely place The Bahamas on an irreversible path to economic poverty.

Prior to 2008, it was estimated that only 51 percent of Bahamians had private health insurance.  Today, given the challenging global economic environment, the impact on the local economy and increasing levels of unemployment, we estimate that number at around 40 percent based on the increasing payouts by insurance companies.  For some, private insurance has become too expensive; persons in the lower income bracket and those living on the Family Islands are now less likely to have insurance coverage.

There are a number of questions that need answers.  How much will this plan cost?  (Back in 2004 estimates were pegged around $200 million-plus, which we felt were too low at that time).  Who will pay for those who cannot afford to pay?  What will be the impact on the private insurance industry?  What impact will it have on the fiscal deficit?  (This should be of particular relevance to future generations).

Concerns remain

Historically, the Bahamian government has been a principal source of financing environmental and healthcare expenses for citizens of The Bahamas with an annual expenditure of over $267 million in the 2011/2012 budget or nearly 16 percent of total recurrent expenses which computes to almost four percent of the country revised GDP (another story for another day).

It is estimated that the private insurance companies spent nearly $230 million in 2011, which gives us a total healthcare expenditure bill of nearly $435 million or 5.4 percent of the revised GDP.  In the 2004/2005 fiscal budget, the government allocated approximately $187 million for health expenditure.  In 2004/2005 it was estimated that healthcare expenditure stood at approximately $340 million or 7.10 percent of GDP, of which $70 million was spent by the people, $102 million spent through private health insurance, and the rest by the government.  In comparison, in 1985, total public expenditure amounted to approximately $56 million or only 2.70 percent of GDP.

It is our view, based on historical cost data and future projections, that the cost of a national healthcare plan going forward would be in the region of $500 million to $750 million; equivalent to nearly half of our recurrent expenditure and as such, would not leave much room for other important infrastructure projects.

We generally agree with the conclusion of the commission’s report that a social health insurance system for The Bahamas would provide more equity in access to healthcare, more stable funding of public health costs, and fewer ‘free riders’, or people who benefit without contributing.  Setting up such a national healthcare system involves more than just taxing the people but will require legislation and the creation of responsible bodies.

Two critical issues are ensuring compliance and public accountability.  We are also mindful, however, that there are those who have little faith in governments operating such healthcare initiatives due to a propensity for such operations to become instruments of political patronage and the widely shared view that government institutions are relatively poorly managed.  In the last analysis, we believe that the scheme would only work efficiently if, and only if, there are proper checks and balances in place especially to ensure that the pool of money goes in to a segregated fund for health and health alone.

•CFAL is a sister company of The Nassau Guardian under the AF Holdings Ltd. umbrella. CFAL provides investment management, research, brokerage and pension services. For comments, please contact CFAL at: column@cfal.com

Mar 07, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Bahamian voters expect more from the mainline press in terms of the key issues in this election... ...Will the national press rise to the occasion in terms of better political journalism and creative reporting of the 2012 general election?

Press coverage of election 2012

Front Porch

By Simon

So far, much of the coverage of the lead-up to the 2012 general election has been formulaic and insipid.  Most of the coverage has focused on the speeches at the opening of various constituency headquarters.

The speeches contain the typical red meat and thrust and parry one expects to hear at political rallies.  The press dutifully report the back and forth inclusive of the main points of the speeches particularly those of the prime minister and the leader of the opposition.  Yet, there is something missing.

Both of the major parties have spoken of the critical issues of the economy and crime.  While voters often enjoy the polemics and pageantry of election time, most can distinguish between electioneering and what the outcome of the election will mean in terms of policy and governance.

There is a famous quote that notes that while politicians campaign in poetry, they must govern in prose.  Poetry involves the rhetorical flourish of a campaign.  Prose is concerned with the hard work of governance and getting things done.

While Perry Christie’s strong suit may be the art of rhetoric, it is Hubert Ingraham who has excelled at the art of governance.  Hence, the overriding theme of the election is leadership.  The question in the end for voters is, after comparing the leadership of Perry Christie and Hubert Ingraham, who they believe can best lead in terms of the economy, crime and a complex of policy issues.

Useful

On the issue of crime, the Ingraham administration introduced a comprehensive crime agenda over the past five years including an omnibus package of crime legislation.  It would be a useful public service for the print and broadcast media to assess the details of the current government’s anti-crime measures.

The PLP has produced a booklet of its anti-crime measures and is running ads on the same.  The press should assess the details of the opposition’s approach to crime.  The press should also assess the anti-crime measures the PLP promised in its 2002 manifesto as well as the measures put in place by the Christie administration from 2002 to 2007.

As elections are about comparisons and choices, the press can assist voters by reporting how the anti-crime measures of the FNM and the PLP compare and contrast.  And, what of the record of both parties in terms of legislation enacted and policies introduced.

The press can do the same kind of comparisons and contrasts on the economy and a host of issues from land policy and immigration to healthcare and education.  This journal has editorialized that the opposition’s promise to double the national education budget is far-fetched and near-impossible.

The Nassau Guardian has also shown that the PLP’s claim to have produced 22,000 jobs from 2002 to 2007 is insupportable in terms of employment numbers produced by the Department of Statistics.

This journal also opined in the context of various programs proposed by the PLP:  “Coherent and plausible plans on crime and the economy actually do not need quirky names.  They simply need to work and have the will of a competent government behind them.”

This paper further noted: “When a party announces multiple named programs at every speaking engagement, and it does not explain how they would be paid for, who would lead them and if they have been fully planned out, that party could come across as less than serious.”

Proposals

The prime minister has also announced a number of new proposals that the FNM will introduce if it wins re-election.  These include a Sports Tourism Encouragement Act and a Summer Institute for boys leaving primary school for junior high.  Some enterprising reporter might be dispatched to find out more details about these proposals.

There has been some clamor for debates during the course of the upcoming electoral contest.  Why can’t such debates take place between representatives of the major parties sponsored by a media house such as The Nassau Guardian in collaboration with Cable 12?

One debate topic may be the economy and compare the approach of the PLP and the FNM on the global economic downturn as well as the future of the Bahamian economy.  Perhaps the Minister of State for Finance Zhivargo Laing can present for the FNM with Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder, who has spoken repeatedly on economic issues, appearing for the PLP.

Independents and young voters tend to identify less with party labels and are not as interested in what might excite base voters.  The former voters are more influenced by the quality of leadership, a party’s record and realistic and creative proposals for the future.

Most voters have come to expect little from most talk radio shows and television chat shows in terms of in-depth and informed discussions of the issues.  Those programs are designed more to inflate and showcase the egos of their hosts.

Voters expect more from the mainline press in terms of the key issues in this election.  Will the national press rise to the occasion in terms of better political journalism and creative reporting of the 2012 general election?  Some attempts are being made in this direction.  Still, there is much work to be done.

 

• frontporchguardian@gmail.com

www.bahamapundit.com

Mar 06, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Money in Bahamian politics: ...There is no campaign finance legislation in The Bahamas ...and we submit that the time has come to consider changing this...

Financing political campaigns

Consider this

By Philip C. Galanis

Elections are more often bought than won.

– U.S. Rep. Lee Hamilton

 

As the general election in The Bahamas approaches, there has been considerable discussion about the sources of political campaign finance.  One of the local tabloids has suggested that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) is being funded by “unsavory characters”.  At one of the Free National Movement  (FNM) rallies, the prime minister is quoted as saying: “The PLP has plenty money!  And there is a reason they have plenty money.  The money they’ve got, we don’t want!  We’d rather be out than in if we have to use that kind of money!  Our hands are clean!”

Therefore this week, we would like to Consider This... should we be concerned where political parties receive their campaign contributions?

Campaign finance refers to funds that are raised and spent to promote candidates and political parties in election contests.  In modern democracies, such funds are not necessarily devoted exclusively to election campaigns. Political contributions are also used to finance issue campaigns in referenda, party activities and party organizations.

For the most part, however, in The Bahamas, political campaign finance is used to establish campaign headquarters at the constituency and national levels, to purchase party paraphernalia, including signage, pins, and flyers, to pay political consultants for polling and focus group activities, party manifestos, newspaper, radio and television commercials, constituency activities, travel to the Family Islands and for political rallies and concerts.

And, yes, political campaign finance is also used to purchase votes.  Although this is illegal, vote buying has been a feature of our political culture long before the establishment of the first political party in 1953.

Reasons for giving

There are many reasons why persons contribute to political campaigns.  The first and most obvious reason is that donors support the political positions, programs or personalities of one party over another and want to see that candidate and party win in order to implement those policies and programs.  In many cases, the donor’s intentions are noble and sincere and contribute to the strengthening of the democratic process.

Another reason for making a political contribution to a particular candidate or a party is to ingratiate oneself to both, in case the candidate or his party wins the election.  The donor then hopes to be able to obtain support for his personal, business or civic programs.

There is also wide public perception that some donors expect government favors in return, such as specific legislation being enacted or defeated, the awarding of significant government contracts or other benefits granted as a result of large campaign contributions; so some have come to equate campaign finance with political corruption and bribery.

Financial contributors

So then, does it really matter who finances political campaigns in The Bahamas?  The short answer is yes.  If political parties expect to be taken seriously, significant contributors must be closely scrutinized in order to determine whether the acceptance of their contributions will adversely affect the voters’ perceptions.  Let’s look at several examples.

Much has been made about lawyers who defend clients who are accused of criminal offenses.  The suggestion is that if a candidate is to be taken seriously by the voter, he should not represent persons so accused.  There is an even more pernicious suggestion that lawyers who do so are undesirable candidates for Parliament.  We totally disagree.

We are a country that is governed by the rule of law, whose primary precept is that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.  Therefore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a candidate representing such persons, even in cases where the accused are awaiting an extradition hearing. Let us remember that there was no similar public outcry when Eugene Dupuch and Sir Orville Turnquest successfully represented Robert Vesco, the internationally renowned financial fugitive, when the United States sought his extradition.  In fact, Sir Orville subsequently enjoyed an illustrious and distinguished career as a Cabinet minister and deputy prime minister and then ultimately as governor general of The Commonwealth of The Bahamas.

Even more has been made of candidates accepting donations from such individuals.  Keeping in mind the innocent until proven guilty concept, we see nothing untoward about taking donations from such accused individuals, nor do we see anything inappropriate about accepting donations from individuals who have been acquitted of the charges against them.  They were presumed innocent and proven to be innocent, therefore donations from such persons are just like those from people who have never had a brush with the law.  Of course, if the contributor was actually convicted of an offense, then it would be imprudent for such contributions to be accepted.  Far too often in this society we do not appreciate the difference.

A second example involves a completely legitimate, clinically-clean contributor who makes a substantial contribution with the clear understanding that, if elected, the winner would ensure that certain actions are taken or favors granted for the contributor’s benefit.  Notwithstanding that contributor being above reproach, such an arrangement is equivalent to bribery and corruption.

Accordingly, the real test of the appropriateness of the contribution must be the legal standing as well as the intention of the contributor and an understanding of the motivation of such contributions.

Campaign finance laws

Most countries that rely on private donations to fund campaigns require extensive disclosure, including the name, employer and address of donors.  This is intended to police undue donor influence, while preserving most of the benefits of private financing, including the right to make donations and to spend money to enhance political free speech, saving government the expense of funding campaigns and keeping government from funding partisan free speech, which some citizens would find odious.

Supporters of private financing systems believe that private financing fosters civic involvement, ensures that a diversity of views are heard, and prevents government from tilting the scales to favor those in power or with political influence.  They also encourage enhanced transparency in the funding of candidates and the political parties.

There is no campaign finance legislation in The Bahamas and we submit that the time has come to consider changing this.  We believe that the correct balance of political finance impacts a country’s ability to effectively maintain free and fair elections, effective governance, democratic government and the regulation of corruption.

Conclusion

Political campaign finance can affect various societal institutions.  We fully recognize that money is necessary for democratic politics, and that candidates and political parties must have access to funds to play their part in the political process.  Money is never an unproblematic part of the political system, and, therefore, regulation of this process is highly desirable.

We also believe that our political culture must be taken into account when devising strategies for controlling money in politics in Bahamian elections.  Ultimately, the effective regulation and disclosure of political campaign finance can help to control the adverse effects of the role of money in politics, but only if well-conceived and implemented.  Without those proper regulations, our democratic process is in danger, and the pirates might just have to be expelled once more.

 

•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

Mar 05, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Bahamas Agriculture News: ...The number of Bahamian farmers decreased by 90 per cent over the last 40 years... ...While Bahamians seem to become more supportive of locally grown products

BAHAMAS SUFFERS 90% FARMER DROP OVER 40 YEARS


By NATARIO McKENZIE
Tribune Business Reporter
nmckenzie@tribunemedia.net


THERE has been a 90 per cent decrease in Bahamian farmer numbers over the last 40 years, it was disclosed yesterday, with insurance said to be one of the "major concerns" for the industry locally.

Sekani Nash, production manager at Lucayan Tropical, in an interview with Tribune Business yesterday, said the Bahamas was often impacted by hurricanes and, while farmers spend a lot of money in the ground, there was not always a guaranteed return.

Mr Nash told Tribune Business: "Farmers spend a lot of money in the ground, and it's not always a guaranteed return on that. To have even minimal insurance, that would cover at least the cost of seeds if something goes wrong. Here, if you put something in the ground, you give a good prayer to God and hope for the best. It's definitely a major challenge.

"The industry is just not at the level where that is a necessity now, even though it should be. The industry itself is still too small for insurers to say they can see a profit in it for them; that is the unfortunate part. Only until we grow the industry will anything change. Right now we are just under 1,000 farms in the Bahamas compared to the 1960s, when there were about 10,000. Over the last 40 years there has been a 90 per cent decrease in the industry itself."

In a recent interview with Tribune Business, Minister of Agriculture and Marine Resources, Larry Cartwright, said the Government was still moving forward with plans for a contributory disaster relief insurance programme for farmers, with the assistance of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

Mr Nash questioned whether the Government was truly committed to reducing agricultural imports. "The unfortunate reality is how far will the Government go to increase agricultural imports when they make money off the imports," he said.

"No matter how much lip service they spend, it's only lip service. It seems like they are only going to do enough to keep it where it is. Imports is where the Government makes its money, and registered farms get tax breaks on bringing in certain equipment."

Mr Nash said that as a young farmer, land availability was also a great concern. "As a young farmer, one of the greatest concerns is land availability," he added.

"The Government has made land available, but as a young farmer even if I was to get land from the Government, then I have to find money, someone who would believe in my idea for me to run a farm.

"There is no lease to own. Land is the one collateral that is like gold in any business. To have someone lease you land and you still don't have any collateral makes it difficult for you as a farmer starting out."

Mr Nash noted that distribution was a major challenge for farmers in the Family Islands, as products usually take days to get to stores and, ultimately, loose their freshness.

He said that over the last five years, Bahamians seem to become more supportive of locally grown products, but admitted that "it's still not where it should be".

March 02, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) seeks all Bahamian votes in the 2012 general election

by The Official Democratic National Alliance


Today’s headline by the Tribune, “Now DNA Seeks Haitian Votes” is very misleading to the Bahamian public, as it suggests an erroneous statement that the Party is underhandedly courting “the Haitian vote.” It would be wise to note that Haitians can only vote in Haiti. Bahamians vote in the Bahamas.

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA), with no other political party present, met with some Bahamian leaders of Haitian descent recently and we discussed the DNA’s policy on immigration, which was not altered from what was presented last year at a public DNA town meeting on immigration, on the Party’s website (www.mydnaparty.org) or as was presented recently at the DNA’s People’s Summit 2012.

It was a fruitful meeting and the DNA believes that it successfully explained to all in attendance that a DNA-government intends to adhere to the law, present a referendum to modernize the country’s regularization laws and remove political hindrances and corruption from the Department of Immigration. At no time did the meeting transform into a plea for votes. Our only focus was to reiterate to the group that the DNA would enforce the laws of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. In addition to:

· Use the most sophisticated technology to ensure that our borders are effectively patrolled.

· Bring the vexing illegal immigration problem in The Bahamas under control through intergovernmental cooperation and in accordance with international Human Rights Laws.

· Review the status of immigrants that have been in The Bahamas for long periods of time and are productive members of society with a view to regularization in accordance with current laws.

· Move with haste to consider the applications of persons entitled to apply for residency/citizenship.

· Move to regularize the status of children born abroad to Bahamian women by way for referendum.

We stand by our decision to denounce President Michel Martelly’s comments during his visit to the Bahamas as divisive and explosive, mainly because all voters are Bahamians and therefore their interests should reflect this country and not that of another. Further, the Free National Movement (FNM) should not have allowed President Martelly to make a state visit to the Bahamas during this charged political season. We feel that his visit was an election ploy engineered by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and the FNM, which backfired.

The DNA recognizes the vast contribution that Bahamians of Haitian origin continue to make to the Bahamian economy. We will work hand in hand with all Bahamians, no matter their origin, but we believe that a government has the unassailable responsibility to enforce the laws of the country.

February 29, 2012

mydnaparty.org

Caribbean Blog International