Thursday, March 22, 2012

...the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has tried to gain political mileage by stirring up a controversy over oil exploration in The Bahamas

Oil drilling in the Bahamas - the facts behind the scares

 

By LARRY SMITH:

 

 

IN RECENT weeks, the Democratic National Alliance has tried to gain political mileage by stirring up a controversy over oil exploration. But rather than focus on the very real substantive issues in a constructive way, they chose to launch a series of personal attacks and conspiracy charges.

In view of the enormous international pressures and revenues that can be expected, together with the dramatic changes to our way of life that are implicit in future oil production, not to mention the incredible pollution risks, it is worth taking a closer look at this issue - particularly in the context of the accusations of cover-ups and carve-ups.

Our original petroleum act was passed in 1945 to facilitate exploration by Gulf Oil, Standard Oil, Superior Oil and Shell. It was replaced by legislation enacted by the Pindling government in 1971, which came into effect seven years later and remains in force today.

The last exploratory well was drilled here in 1986 by a company called Tenneco, and while no commercial production followed from those early explorations, there were oil shows and most experts are convinced that large quantities of petroleum lie beneath our seabed.

The Christie government awarded a British group (later constituted as the Bahamas Petroleum Company) five new exploration licenses for just under four million acres in 2006. The licenses became effective just before the last general election in April 2007, when they were signed by the governor-general. And for the past several years, BPC has been conducting geophysical research in the Bahamas.

Now BPC says it is preparing to conduct appraisal drilling south of Andros, and the DNA thinks this amounts to a conspiracy involving secret deals. The party has set up a Facebook petition on oil exploration, asking Bahamians to sign "If you think we should control our resources to benefit all Bahamians, so we can demand answers before it's too late".

From the commentary it has made, the DNA is clearly not opposed to drilling, but is simply trying to stir the pot. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it depends on how it is done. Accuracy and honesty are important when making public statements on complex issues. Publishing false statements and facilitating wild allegations will lead to a rapid loss of credibility.

For example, according to the DNA, "this government negotiated a 12.5 per cent (royalty), one of the worst in any country". In fact, it was the Pindling government - back in 1971 - that set a then industry-standard minimum royalty rate of 12.5 per cent "of the selling value at the well-head of the petroleum won and saved from the licensed or leased area".

And, contrary to what the DNA now alleges, the licenses awarded to the Isle of Man-based Bahamas Petroleum Company in 2007, set a sliding scale of 12.5 to 25 per cent of production value, a fact which BPC clearly shows on its website.

Those licenses were never renewed, because the government imposed a moratorium on oil exploration in 2008, while efforts were made to pin down precise maritime boundaries with Cuba, the US and the UK/Turks & Caicos Islands. The boundary with Cuba - where four of the BPC licenses are located - was finalised last October.

In 2010 - following the catastrophic Gulf of Mexico oil spill - the government decided to step back and review the entire petroleum policy framework before allowing exploration to resume. The Ministry of the Environment also required all license holders and new applicants to produce environmental impact assessments for the areas they wished to explore.

There are currently seven approved licenses for oil exploration in Bahamian waters, and 10 applications for new licenses have been submitted since 2008. Five of the approved licenses are held by BPC. The other two are held by Liberty Oil, but were suspended because of the company's failure to remove a sunken vessel from an Abaco reef.

A US company called NPT Oil has applied for seven licenses covering more than six million acres north of Grand Bahama. NPT's Bahamian data and assets were recently acquired by Pennine Petroleum Corporation, an emerging oil and gas exploration and development company active in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

A Canadian geophysicist named Allan Spector has applied for an onshore license near Seymours on north Long Island. And a partnership between BPC and the Norwegian company Statoil has applied for three licenses covering more than 2.3 million acres near the Cay Sal bank.

DNA Montagu candidate Ben Albury - who has led the party's campaign on this issue - says he is simply demanding transparency and information. But he has also accused Environment Minister Earl Deveaux of gross malfeasance, without any evidence, and has succeeded in making the issue more opaque, rather than clearer, for the average Bahamian.

"My main issue," he told me over the weekend, "is the dodging of the questions by Deveaux. If you listen to his comments, he makes it sound as if there is a moratorium on oil exploration, (but) BPC is telling the media that they intend to drill in the coming months."

Albury cites a Miami Herald article published last October, in which Dr Paul Gucwa, BPC's chief operating officer, refers to plans for an exploratory well by the end of this year. "The Bahamian government has a moratorium on granting new exploration licenses," the Herald reported, "but... that could change following the country's May general elections. BPC has contacted 10 major international oil companies about partnering in its oil exploration operations."

A review of Deveaux's statements on this matter over many months, if not years, shows an entirely consistent position. He has repeatedly stated that the exploration freeze will remain in effect until an updated regulatory system has been put in place. He has also said that the present government is committed to the widest possible public consultation on the issue of oil production.

However, if you listen to the talk shows, some Bahamians are already gearing up to stop work and collect their "black gold" dividend cheques, while others are worried about secret backroom deals in which the well-connected carve up the country's seabed for their personal benefit.

Interestingly, there may be some truth to this. As mentioned earlier, experts have believed for decades that large quantities of oil and gas lie beneath the Bahamian seabed, and now that drilling technologies and market prices have reached the point where exploitation is not only feasible but profitable, we can reasonably project a massive influx of petroleum revenues in the near future.

But that is precisely why the government is seeking to overhaul our regulatory, legislative, environmental and financial regimes, in order to lay the groundwork for the orderly development of this industry (whether you like it or not). As Deveaux told me over the weekend: "Without detailing all the issues inherent in something so materially significant, it is a clear responsibility of the government to prepare the country for oil and its likely consequences."

The DNA appears to be confused because, under existing Bahamian law, licensees are required to drill an exploratory well within a certain timeframe - which in BPC's case is prior to April 2013 - or risk forfeiting their rights. The company says it has completed the required environmental impact assessment for this test well and is already working on a management plan.

Meanwhile, Environment Ministry officials have met with their counterparts in Norway to discuss revisions to the existing act and regulations, and consultants have produced working drafts for the government to review, after which they will go to the attorney-general. Deveaux says the proposed regulatory system will be included in his hand-over notes for the next government.

"Our visit to Norway in December was very useful and the government has agreed in principle to use that country's policies as a guide in developing a Bahamian petroleum industry," Deveaux said.

Norway began offshore petroleum production in 1971 and is now the world's seventh largest oil exporter and second largest gas exporter, with some 600 licenses awarded to a variety of companies. Norwegian officials have advised the Bahamas to have all the essential elements of oil and gas governance in place before any drilling begins. These include environmental, safety, tax, revenue, training and employment policies; contingency plans; and insurance requirements.

Norway's national petroleum policy seeks "to ensure long term management of, and value-creation from, the country's petroleum resources". Oil and gas activities are restricted to offshore waters, and all subsea resources are vested in the state, which is charged with managing them for the benefit of Norwegian society as a whole.

As we said, under the current Bahamian act, an exploration license includes an obligation to drill, and a bond must be posted to that effect as a way of precluding speculators. Exploration licenses are awarded for an initial term of three years, renewable for two successive three-year periods, but the 2008 moratorium meant that BPC's original license was put on hold and never technically renewed.

Similarly, if BPC's exploration is successful, current law says it is "entitled" to a renewable 30-year lease to begin commercial production. The royalty rate for production of oil and gas is based on a sliding scale of 12.5 to 25 per cent (from which the lease fee is deducted), with no other taxes or fees required. Equipment can also be imported duty-free.

On its website, BPC says that its license expires on April 26, and it has applied for renewal. The company notes that if it meets its obligations, "the governor-general shall renew the licences for another three years provided the company commits to drill an exploration well and (starts) the well before the end of the first renewal year, ie, by April 26, 2013".

So there is clearly some tension between the positions of the government and BPC, which claims to have invested $50 million so far to explore. Appraisal drilling is projected to cost several hundred million more, and obviously the company expects to benefit from this investment. But the petroleum act was written 40 years ago, and is silent on many of the complex issues the Bahamas would face as an oil producer.

Meanwhile, the DNA has rightly argued that oil drilling threatens two of the country's biggest industries - tourism and fishing. "(We) demand to know if Mr. Deveaux and the FNM government have ensured the protection of Bahamian interests," Ben Albury says. Well, the short answer is that Deveaux has repeatedly talked of the need to train Bahamians to manage a new regulatory environment.

"We have to come to the public with full information," Deveaux told me. "We want a standard of management similar to that of Norway. We need a petroleum directorate that is fully staffed with a range of expertise, including financial. If oil is produced we will be dealing with billions of dollars, changing the whole culture of the country and the way the government deals with money. It is no small thing."

In Norway, for example, surplus oil revenue is deposited in a $600 billion sovereign wealth fund so that the country's non-renewable resources can benefit future generations. The fund is managed by the central bank, under rules developed by the Ministry of Finance, and is responsible to parliament, with the interest used to cover government pension obligations.

Consultants have also advised the Bahamas to increase royalties and adopt profit sharing with oil companies in order to compensate for the absence of a corporate income tax.

As noted earlier, BPC's licenses were awarded by the Christie administration in 2006, and signed by former Governor-General Arthur Hanna in April, 2007. It is noteworthy that PLP candidate Jerome Gomez is the company's resident manager, former PLP cabinet minister Sean McWeeney is its senior counsel, and PLP deputy leader Brave Davis' law firm is the company's onshore legal advisor.

What is even more noteworthy is that the PLP has so far ignored this important public debate. The FNM's position is that "nothing can happen until the government approves and nothing will happen until there is public consultation". The DNA says it will hold a national referendum on oil exploration and production. The PLP is heavily conflicted in this matter and has said nothing.

Did someone mention carve-up and cover-up?

* What do you think? Send comments to larry@tribunemedia.net or visit www.bahamapundit.com.

March 21, 2012

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

We remember when Mr. Dennis Dames first started writing letters for publication in The Tribune... and so we guess that he is too young to remember the elections of the sixties and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) "goon squads" where election violence all started

Protect our Constitutional rights

tribune242 editorial




OUR CONSTITUTION guarantees every resident of this country the right of free speech, conscience and assembly. No one - election or no election - has the right to interfere with these basic freedoms. Those who do should be severely punished.

Freedom of conscience assures each and everyone of us the right to our beliefs, regardless of how others might disagree. Freedom of expression gives us the right to express those beliefs as we see fit, as long as we respect the rights of others to do the same. In other words we all agree to disagree, but in a friendly manner, one respecting the right of the other to have his turn on the floor. We also have the right to free association with persons of like mind, including political parties. Under our Constitution, no one has the right to interfere.

These inalienable rights should be ingrained in each of us from childhood. To be devoid of them on reaching adulthood means that such persons have been lost on the fringes of civilisation. They live in a democracy, but they neither belong nor appreciate that democracy. The only time that there is a squeak out of them is if someone retaliates by stepping on their toes -- it is only then that they become aware and quickly demand their constitutional protection.

In a letter to The Tribune today, Dennis Dames commends Killarney MP Dr Hubert Minnis (FNM) for calling for "calm heads to prevail" during this election season.

"We must remember," said Dr Minnis, "that we are all Bahamians and when the election is over, we must all still live together in this Bahamaland. It is not unusual for one home to have individuals who support different political parties but what is unusual for us, is for family members not to support each other, instead allowing political persuasions to affect our family bond.

"We must continue to respect an individual's right to speak, support and vote for the party of their choice, as this is the fundamentals of the democratic process at its best. We must bring out the best in each other; we should practice patience, hospitality and love. We should abstain from mud-slinging and personal attacks on each other because at the end of the day, we all want one thing, a better Bahamas. No one wants to live in a violent, unfriendly environment."

Dr Minnis called for peace and respect one for the other on learning that the daughter of one of Grand Bahamas' FNM candidates, and three other supporters were sprayed in their faces with a fire extinguisher by a PLP supporter.

Why would anyone carry a fire extinguisher to a political rally? This case should be thoroughly investigated and, if found to be true, the culprit or culprits should be severely punished.
In commenting on Dr Minnis' call for calm, Mr Dames wrote that he had "never experienced such touchiness, itchiness, and angriness among Bahamians of different political perspectives in the Bahamas until now".

He said that if things continue on this course, "we could be in for something violently new in our electoral process and it will be a direct reflection of our 21st century political leadership in the Bahamas".

We remember when Mr Dames first started writing letters for publication in The Tribune, and so we guess that he is too young to remember the elections of the sixties and the PLP "goon squads" where election violence all started.

Today we are only reaping the seeds that were sown then -- violence, disrespect for law and order, disrespect for our elders and ourselves, satanic worship at the altar of materialism - on and on into today's pit of degradation. Today in almost every aspect of our decadent social behaviour we are reaping the evil seeds that were sown then.

In those days, the PLP's goon squads, with their loud clackers, were so violent that public rallies could not be held. We recall one night covering a political meeting in Fox Hill's school house when the building was stoned. The foreign journalist with us, sent to cover the election, was so frightened that he crawled under one of the classroom benches for protection. People were injured, people were sent to hospital. Their pictures made the front page of The Tribune.

Bahamians were frightened to write letters to The Tribune, and those who did never attached their names. One night a woman's home was stoned because it was believed that she had written a letter critical of the PLP to The Tribune. Properties were burned, a policeman was sent to The Tribune to try to force us to reveal the identity of a Freeport letter writer. The police officer disliked his assignment as much as we did, and so we had a friendly chat, wished him well and sent a stinging message back to the PLP Cabinet minister who had sent him. By the seventies, we were into the drug years --fast boats, retaliatory killings, and a general breakdown of all the rules that had held a Christian society together. Fast money was a badge of success.

And so do not "send to know for whom the bell tolls," it tolls for each and every one of us. Now is the time for zero tolerance -- either that or surrender our society to the refuse born and bred in the sixties.

March 21, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

...delighted today to have read the message of peace in this election season and beyond ...by the Free National Movement’s candidate for Killarney; the Hon. Hubert Minnis

By Dennis Dames

I was delighted today to have read the message of peace by the Free National Movement’s candidate for Killarney; the Hon. Hubert Minnis. He wrote about allowing calm heads to prevail this election season and beyond.

It’s a point worth repeating by all responsible politicians in the land, as the temperature is truly rising among the people across the political divide. I have never experienced such touchiness, itchiness, and angriness among Bahamians of different political perspectives in The Bahamas until now.

If things continue on this course, we could be in for something violently new in our electoral process; and it will be a direct reflection of our 21st century political leadership in The Bahamas.

Respect should always be our password; and with it – comes responsibility and love for one another. The political disrespect that seems to be out of control in our country today is a part of the wider disrespectful culture that’s slowly tearing us apart.

We cannot be serious about a prosperous future as one people, if we hate one another because - we support different political parties, or we see things differently.

If the invasive contempt for one another continues through the upcoming general election, then - what kind of results do we expect at the end of the day brothers and sisters?

Yes, the assault incident in Grand Bahama this weekend involving a candidate’s daughter, is one worthy of serious note and action. Nip it now or be sorry later.

I have noticed that so called responsible politicians and political leaders in our country are first concerned about winning by hook or crook. Well, Mr. and Ms. politicians, you all better change that outlook before you don’t become a victim of your distorted philosophy.

Let’s all watch and see who will follow Doctor Minnis of Killarney, and denounce all forms of violence in this election season and onwards; because only real leaders will do so.

Step up to the plate brothers and sisters who seek our vote.

Caribbean Blog International

Monday, March 19, 2012

As Bahamians, let’s continue to build a better Bahamas; a nation where at the end of this upcoming electoral process - FNMs, PLPs, DNAs and Independents would work together to forge a brighter future for our young people

Let Calm Heads Prevail

by Hon. Dr. Hubert A. Minnis


Hon. Dr. Hubert A. MinnisThe Bahamas is approaching the election season, with numerous events, rallies and even family gatherings. I implore you, to let calm heads prevail during this season. We must remember, that we are all Bahamians and when the election is over, we must all still live together in this Bahamaland. It is not unusual for one home to have individuals who support different political parties but what is unusual for us, is for family members not to support each other, instead allowing political persuasions to affect our family bond.

We must continue to respect an individual’s right to speak, support and vote for the party of their choice, as this is the fundamentals of the democratic process at its best. We must bring out the best in each other; we should practice patience, hospitality and love. We should abstain from mud-slinging and personal attacks on each other because at the end of the day, we all want one thing, a better Bahamas. No one wants to live in a violent, unfriendly environment.

I was saddened by the news of one of Grand Bahama’s FNM candidates, Peter Turnquest’s daughter being attacked presumably by political opponents yesterday. This most unfortunate incident should not happen in our country and I wish her a speedy recovery. It is also my wish that in this Christian society, we would not encounter this type of event again as the election fever heats up.

As Bahamians, let’s continue to build a better Bahamas, a Bahamas where at the end of this electoral process, FNMs, PLPs, DNAs and Independents would work together to forge a brighter future for our young people.

Killarney does not support violence and personal attacks, and I ask all Bahamians to refrain from this destructive behavior.

Mar 18, 2012

Sunday, March 18, 2012

In light of the challenges that our economy faces and the general consensus that we must revisit our economic model... it is disturbing to see that little is being said about the proposed fiscal policies of political parties as we enter the heart of the 2012 general election campaign

Confronting the debt crisis pt. 2


by Arinthia S. Komolafe



Last week we explored the effects that monetary policy at the turn of the millennium may have had upon the current mortgage and overall debt crisis.  As several individuals are calling for a further reduction of the discount and prime rates (DR and PR), it is important to note the impact such a move will have on individuals’ credit positions and financial wellbeing.

There is no doubt that the reduction of the DR and PR proved beneficial to the government in that it provided the government with an opportunity to service its debt at a lower interest rate, even though the overall benefits to consumers appears to be minimal.  On the other hand, the reduction of the DR and PR would have negatively impacted some organizations, Financial Institutions (FIs) and the National Insurance Board, as they would have lost millions of dollars in investment income.

In the final analysis, FIs usually win and are rarely dealt the bad hand of the stick in any situation within a credit-driven and consumer society like The Bahamas.  Financial Institutions in response to the aforementioned reduction imposed charges in other strategic areas, increased some of their fees and maintained their rates for consumer loans.  We have witnessed quiet increases in FIs’ fees for transactions such as ATM or passbook withdrawals – service charges on accounts and additional fees were applied to loans in the aftermath of the rate reductions.  A well-known fact is that the ultimate and main loser is usually the consumer who on the one hand receives a ‘supposed’ break on his debt servicing due to the DR and PR reduction, but pays hidden fees and charges on the other hand.

The net effect on the consumer is that he/she ends up paying the same amount and in some cases more to the FIs, which may result in non-performing loans or lost property to foreclosure.  This reinforces the point that an active Consumer Protection Commission ought to be in place to provide checks and balance on behalf of consumers relating to financial transactions among other things.

In addition to providing debt-servicing relief, it is expected that further reduction in the DR and PR should have also provided access to credit at a cheaper rate for individual and business consumers. The positive effect for business owners is that it creates the opportunity for expansion of the business and/or maintenance of inventory levels.  However, it is estimated that approximately one third of commercial banking loans extended to Bahamian companies are in arrears.  If businesses are faced with increased energy and gas costs combined with tax increases in National Insurance, business license fees and other diverse areas, it becomes less possible for businesses to be sustained during the current economic climate and more importantly create jobs that will help stem the growing unemployment rate.

The likelihood of FIs extending credit under already constrained circumstances is lower than normal and the underwriting of new loans is being done with extreme caution – a prudent course of action.  This further emphasizes and highlights the importance of and the urgent need for a functional and effective credit bureau.  It is noted that the Central Bank of The Bahamas had obtained assistance from the Caribbean Regional Technical Assistance Center (CARTAC) with the aim of establishing a credit bureau, albeit the process has been ongoing for a few years.  Considering the history of adjustments to the DR and PR, these rates are normally revised (downwards for the most part) not more frequently than in five-year intervals.  Whereas this does not suggest that monetary policy should be stalled or be predictable, the historical trends suggest that there is ample time to establish a credit bureau prior to any potential adjustments to the DR and PR.

What are the fiscal policies of the political parties?

In light of the challenges that our economy faces and the general consensus that we must revisit our economic model, it is disturbing to see that little is being said about the proposed fiscal policies of political parties as we enter the heart of the general election campaign.  It is a well-known fact that during the election campaign seasons in the past, we have heard politicians produce their grand ideas of what they intend to do for the Bahamian people.  The important part of the equation is, however, often omitted and very rarely if ever do we hear about how they propose to ‘foot the bill’ for their grand but necessary ideas.

It seems inevitable that the next government post the 2012 general election will have to continue this spate of borrowing at least during year one of governance to ensure the government is able to meet its obligations.  Fortunately, government debt servicing has been aided by one-off payments in 2011 from the sale of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company and capital inflows from Baha Mar. However, the likelihood of similar capital injections for 2012 is slim.  A part from a significant turnaround and increase in tourism numbers and the government’s ability to constrain its spending habits, it is difficult to see how we will get ourselves up out of this national disaster.

Our politicians seem to have mastered the art of avoiding reality and failing to inform us that hard decisions will have to be made.  In essence, austerity measures are not unforeseeable and it could be argued that these measures are unavoidable.  Of course such declarations are unpopular (albeit they would be truthful) and politicians fear the potential backlash of such honesty.  The government has continued to borrow in the midst of declining revenues and increased taxes that placed a heavy burden on the Bahamian people.  It would not be surprising, therefore, if the current tax levels are maintained or increased to meet budget requirements.  Unfortunately, the persons most affected by these tax burdens form part of the working and shrinking middle classes.  In the absence of foreign direct investment or new sources of revenue, any reduction in taxes will most certainly require the government to carry out extreme measures to cut its spending, increase the efficiency of state-owned enterprises to stop wastage and implement efficient tax collection policies.

The national debt crisis constitutes an unwanted and unsolicited gift to future generations of Bahamians that threaten their opportunity for economic prosperity.  This crisis and prevailing macroeconomic indicators makes it difficult to see any significant economic growth in the near future.  Our leaders and all of us must rise above the partisan politics and make a concerted effort to place our economy back on track.

 

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

Confronting the Bahamian debt crisis pt. 1

Mar 15, 2012

thenassauguardian

Saturday, March 17, 2012

The most likely result of the 2012 general election is that either the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) or the Free National Movement (FNM) will win and form the next government of The Bahamas... and the other major party will be the official opposition

The reaction of the election loser


By Brent Dean



There are two 'unconventional' scenarios that could result in the next general election if the third party the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) wins a few seats. There could be a minority government if no party wins a majority, but one is able to convince the governor general that it could govern. The other option is a coalition government could result. We say unconventional because those types of governments do not occur frequently in The Bahamas.

The most likely scenario, though, is that either the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) or the Free National Movement (FNM) will win and form the government, and the other major party will be the official opposition.

It will be interesting to witness the reaction of the leader of the losing major party. Perry Christie appears determined to be prime minister again to prove he is good enough to serve multiple terms, just as Sir Lynden Pindling and Hubert Ingraham have.

If the PLP loses the election, with the FNM winning 20 seats and it securing a close number like 18 seats, it is unclear if the 68-year-old Christie would go anywhere. Such a majority is unstable. As we have seen this parliamentary term with the resignation of Malcolm Adderley from the House of Assembly and Kenyatta Gibson crossing over from the PLP to the FNM, margins of one are unlikely to lead to longevity for a government.

Consequently, Christie is likely to fight on and attempt to negotiate his way to the fall of the Ingraham government, or to his own majority by luring away marginal FNMs.

If the PLP loses decisively and the FNM secures a strong majority, Christie would have been twice defeated and by an increased margin. No PLP could force him to leave, but the party elite would pressure him to go. Whether he would go or not is up to Christie. He has appointed a ring of protectors (stalwarts) to ensure he cannot be beaten in a leadership race.

Ingraham is a more complicated character. If he loses 20 seats to 18 seats, he too might make an attempt to lure several PLPs to secure a majority. If such an effort is unsuccessful, he would likely leave. If the FNM is beaten soundly by the PLP, we think he would go graciously and quickly.

The difference in this regard is that Ingraham appears to be more content with his legacy. He defeated Sir Lynden; he won back-to-back terms; he won reelection after his party lost an election. Politically, there is not much else for him to do.

The reaction of the losing leader will be significant for the losing party. If a party loses and is able to transition quickly to new energetic younger leadership, the eyes of the country would be on the new leader of the opposition. He or she would have a fair chance at being the next prime minister if the time in opposition is used to demonstrate that the party has a new, bold vision for the country.

However, if the losing leader fights a divisive battle to stay after being rejected in his mid to late '60s, the party and leader might miss the message the electorate conveyed and suffer a worse fate the next time around.

We won't have to speculate on the future for too much longer. Voting time is near.

Mar 17, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Friday, March 16, 2012

Bishop Drexel Gomez’s participation at a recent Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) rally raised important issues of the involvement of clerics in Bahamian politics... and the relationship between church and state

Clerics in politics


Front Porch

By Simon



The recent brouhaha over Bishop Drexel Gomez’s participation at a recent Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) rally raised important issues of the involvement of clerics in politics, and the relationship between church and state, more of which at a later date.

Unfortunately, these and related issues were obscured by all manner of uncritical thinking.  This included slipshod editorializing by this journal in its March 8 edition entitled, “Reasonableness, family and politics”.

The editorial weighed into the debate with rushed judgement and little historical context seemingly making judgements based on a simplistic reading of the daily headlines rather than a closer reading of history.

The editorial was a textbook example of making poor analogies.  It attempted to support its sloppy conclusion by equating and forcing a false equivalence between the involvement of Rev. Frederick McAlpine in politics and the attendance of Delores Ingraham at political events on the one hand, with Bishop Gomez’s participation at the PLP rally on the other.

Regulated

Mrs. Ingraham’s attendance at such events is regulated by General Orders and long-held customs.  Moreover, she is not a cleric or a religious leader.  Further, this column has previously argued that clerics such as McAlpine should not be engaged in partisan politics for reasons similar for arguing that Bishop Gomez’s rally attendance was an error of judgement.

This newspaper reported that Bishop Gomez stated of his participation at the political event: “I was there simply because I was invited by my brother, who was having the formal opening of his headquarters in Nicholl’s [sic] Town.”

The Nassau Guardian reported, “He [Bishop Gomez] pointed out that he stayed clear of political statements when he addressed PLP supporters.”  The paper quoted the bishop: “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 continued: “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.”

The Guardian further reported:  “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.”

It is not the bishop’s exercise of his right of freedom of speech that is being questioned.  The concern is the poor exercise of his judgement in speaking at a partisan political event.  Good judgement requires that one choose not only one’s words carefully, but also one’s appearances in both senses of the word.

Bishop Gomez also has a right to run for the House of Assembly, a right he is unlikely to exercise.  Anglican priest Fr. Addison Turnquest once ran for the FNM.  Though it was his constitutional right to do so, it was a poor exercise of judgement.

Duties

Constitutional rights come with duties.   This is captured in the adage that though a citizen has the right to speak, he or she does not have free reign to bogusly shout fire in a crowded theater.  Moreover, our rights are exercised within the context of other obligations and the demands of prudence and restraint.

A priest has the right to go out dressed in clerical garb to nightclubs, drinking and dancing into the wee hours.  But that priest risks giving confusion to the faithful and undermining his or her moral authority and the credibility of the wider communion he or she represents.

What The Guardian reported as Bishop Gomez’s defense of his two rights, “his right to speak in the public domain on public issues” and “his religious right to comment on matters of justice and truth” begs for clarity.

What exactly was the religious right exercised by Bishop Gomez at the PLP rally?  What matters of truth and justice did he address at the rally in light of his statement, “I only spoke about my brother and our family.  I made no reference whatsoever to political issues or to political parties.”

In pressing that he exercised his right to speak to matters of truth and justice, Bishop Gomez appears to be making an inference.  Is the inference that his brother’s candidacy as a member of the PLP will better advance the cause of truth and justice?  Is this not an endorsement of his brother and the PLP?

Is it Bishop Gomez’s contention that he in no way imagined that his remarks at the rally dressed as he was in clerical garb would carry any influence with voters in North Andros or The Bahamas in general?  Is it his contention that his appearance would be seen as nonpartisan, even neutral, amidst a general election campaign?

All of this adds more holy confusion than blessed assurance for the faithful and observers seeking to understand Bishop Gomez’s post-rally defense.  The bishop’s appearance at the rally in clerical garb added to the confusion for many.

Former Commissioner of Police Reginald Ferguson also had a brother in politics, Johnley Ferguson, who ran for the House of Assembly as a Free National Movement (FNM) candidate.  Assuming that the former commissioner was in that post when his brother was running, would it have been appropriate for the former, dressed in his police uniform, to address a FNM rally to speak about his brother?

Of course, there is a prohibition against such a thing in General Orders.  The reasons behind the prohibition are compelling.  Among them, the risk of undermining one’s authority and that of the institution one represents by giving the appearance of partisanship.

Doubtful

Would Bishop Gomez have spoken on behalf of his brother were he still the head of the Anglican Church in The Bahamas?  It is extremely doubtful that even as the retired head of the Anglican Church that the late Bishop Michael Eldon would have spoken at a political rally to introduce a family member.

Suppose current Anglican head Bishop Laish Boyd had a sibling running for office.  Would it be prudent for him to mount a partisan political platform in an election season to speak about that sibling and their family?

Bishop Gomez pleaded: “My intention was simply to introduce him to the people at the formal opening of his headquarters.”  In moral theology, as in normative ethics, one is judged by one’s intentions and actions either of which or both of which may be flawed depending on the case at hand.

The four cardinal virtues in the Christian tradition are prudence, justice, temperance and courage.   Prudence is the virtue which helps to guide or balance the other virtues.  A classic definition of prudence is the ability to “judge between actions with regard to appropriate actions at a given time”.  Restraint or temperance refers to “practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation”.

For many, Bishop Gomez exercised neither prudence nor restraint by speaking at a partisan political rally.  Before acting, a cleric must ask whether his or her actions will be an occasion of confusion for the faithful.

With the benefit of centuries of historical hindsight and chastened by its blurring of the lines between church and state, the Roman Catholic Church is clear about the restrictions on clerics and bishops involving themselves in the political process.

The likelihood of Archbishop Patrick Pinder even attending a political rally as the ordinary or as a retired archbishop of Nassau is next to nil.  Any Catholic priest who went on a political platform with or without his clerical collar to speak about his sibling would make that mistake only once, if ever.

Adding to the confusion, were Bishop Gomez’s comments after Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham suggested that Opposition Leader Perry Christie apologize for the attendance of the bishop at the rally.  Though the prime minister’s comments were not addressed to him, it was the bishop who responded in language that can only be described as bellicose.

As other religious leaders are calling for more civil dialogue and restraint, Bishop Gomez blustered that the prime minister would lose a fight with him.  Is that the appropriate language and tone for the former head of the Anglican Diocese or for any religious leader?

In this entire matter Bishop Gomez has acquitted himself as a political partisan and combatant instead of as a moral leader.  Many Anglicans are alarmed at his conduct.  So too are many other people of good will and Christian faith.

frontporchguardian@gmail

bahamapundit.com

Mar 13, 2012

thenassauguardian