If we want to encourage the best and the brightest citizens to enter into the elective political arena... we should seek to eliminate the observation of U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton that: “Elections are more often bought than won”

Campaign financing: A better way

Consider this

By Philip C. Galanis

“We need real campaign finance reform to loosen the grip of special interests on politics." - Tom Daschle

 

Every five years around election time, incessant lip service is paid to campaign financing.  It can only be lip service because after the ballots have been cast, counted and catalogued, the notion of campaign finance reform retires to hibernation – that is, until the next general election.  Therefore, this week, we would like to Consider This…what practical approaches can we realistically take regarding how we finance political campaigns in The Bahamas?

Unquestionably, politics has become an extremely expensive exercise.  When one considers the cost of political rallies, paraphernalia, including T-shirts and other garments now available, flags, posters, signage, printing of flyers, advertisements, including newspaper, radio and television broadcasts and commercials, the cost is staggering.  Let’s not forget the direct cost of personnel employed by political parties; the cost of constituency offices, sometimes four or five, particularly in the Family Islands; the cost of electricity, water, and telephones; the cost of food and beverages; of political consultants; and the printing of party platforms.  When these and other costs are considered, the real cost of staging a general election could very easily cost $250,000 per constituency or nearly $10 million per party.  So how are political parties expected to finance such a mammoth undertaking?

Using the public purse

It has become commonplace for the government of the day to use the power of the public purse to significantly finance its party’s political campaign.  We observed this practice when the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) was in power; we witnessed it in the by-election in Elizabeth two years ago; and we are seeing it again in the current general election.  While this has been a common practice, the Free National Movement (FNM) government seems to have taken this phenomenon to new heights.

Shortly after announcing the general election of 2012, the government launched a record contract signing marathon.  The $12 million contract for the construction of a new clinic in North Abaco and a multimillion-dollar contract for a new hospital in Exuma are a few examples of this.

Last weekend, amidst great public fanfare at police headquarters, the prime minister awarded $1 million to charitable organizations.  Ironically, this is the same government that – only one year earlier – reduced the government’s subvention to such organizations during the annual budget debate in the House of Assembly.  This is the same government that discontinued the extremely effective YEAST program that provided a positive prototype for young Bahamian men at risk and the same government that canceled the effective and internationally celebrated urban renewal program established by the PLP.

No matter which party is in power, an intelligent and discerning public should look askance at the government of the day exploiting and abusing the public purse in order to win votes after elections have been called.

Campaign contributions

In The Bahamas, political campaigns are predominantly financed by contributions from persons, companies, and organizations that believe in the democratic process and want to ensure that the message of the political party that they support is widely and successfully disseminated.

In the absence of campaign finance laws, there are no restrictions on who can contribute to a political party and how much they can donate.  Accordingly, anyone -- Bahamians and foreigners – can contribute any amount to anyone at any time without any accountability whatsoever.  The real question that we must address for the future health of our democracy is whether this is a desirable practice?

It has become customary for political contributions to be made in private, sometimes on the condition of confidentiality and often in secrecy with only a select few members of the party knowledgeable regarding the source of the funds.

Campaign 2012 has seen a new development in political funding.  During the last few mass rallies, the prime minister has publicly appealed from the podium for campaign contributions, describing it as a further deepening of our democracy by allowing the public to become investors in his party.  While there is absolutely nothing wrong with this, it is unprecedented and uncharacteristic.  We have never before seen this prime minister – or any other for that matter – beg for money from a public podium.

It therefore begs the question: why has he done so now, during what he says is his last campaign?  He alluded to the answer to this question on Thursday past at a mass rally on R. M. Bailey Park when he said that he will not tolerate anyone in his Cabinet who has financially benefited from conflicts of interest.

We believe that he made this appeal for financial contributions because, while the FNM is still well-funded by those wealthy interest groups who support him in order to continue reaping his government’s largess, some of his traditional sources of funding are less generous than they have been in the past.  This is possibly because he has cut some of his more financially well-connected candidates for reasons already stated and reiterated again from that podium last Thursday in a purposefully vague but very revealing way.

Campaign finance reform

Clearly, as the prime minister is opening party funding up to the masses in ways never seen before, the time has come to enact campaign financing legislation.  There are several things that can be done in order to impose strict controls for campaign fund-raising, primarily to level the playing field and to minimize disparate levels of funding campaigns by the various political parties.  Campaign financing legislation should also establish disclosure requirements with respect to funding and spending in elections.

Such a law could introduce statutory limits on contributions by individuals, organizations and companies, which would remove the influence of big money from politics and should also prohibit foreign influences from invading the local political process.

There should also be limits on large potential donors to prevent them from gaining extraordinary political access or favorable legislation or other concessions in return for their contributions.  Campaign finance laws should also provide for the capping of such funding and for the disclosure of sources of campaign contributions and expenditures.  It should also limit or prohibit government contractors from making contributions with respect to such elections.

Campaign financing legislation could even provide for matching funds by the government for all the candidates in order to ensure that the playing field truly is level and to enhance clean elections.

Finally, in order to more vigilantly protect the public purse, the law should strictly prohibit a government from signing any new contracts after general or by-elections are called.

Conclusion

Campaigns will become more expensive as time progresses.  As we mature politically, we should seek to ensure that political parties operate on a level playing field and remove the barriers to participation in the democratic process because of a lack of funding.  If we want to encourage the best and the brightest citizens to enter into the elective political arena, we should seek to eliminate the observation of U.S. Representative Lee Hamilton that: “Elections are more often bought than won”.

 

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

Apr 23, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The most pressing issue in The Bahamas today is crime and the fear of crime... highlighted by the fact that the murder rate is going in the wrong direction - up

Party By Party: Where The Candidates Stand On Crime


 

By LAMECH JOHNSON
Tribune Staff Reporter
ljohnson@tribunemedia.net



THE Bahamas put the world on alert in early 2010 after a country which is noted for its sun, sand and sea racked up 87 murders the year before.

Crimewave is a word too easily used by politicians and the media, but statistics showed crime was on the up, and for a nation of just 350,000, dependent on tourism, it was a worrying trend.

By the end of 2010, the country surpassed the previous record with an extra seven murders.

Bahamians at every level in society were puzzled as to what was going on, what 2011's numbers would be and what the government was going to do about it. The murder figure reached 127 for 2011.

The most pressing issue in the Bahamas today is crime and the fear of crime, highlighted by the fact that the murder rate is going in the wrong direction - up.

Democratic National Alliance leader Branville McCartney couldn't have worded it better during his party's anti-crime and violence march in Bay Street last Wednesday. He said things would get worse if there was not an immediate intervention.

The sentiments from the man who wants to be the country's next Prime Minister are not new. His rivals, current Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and opposition leader Perry Christie, have already said the same thing.

Mr Ingraham and Mr Christie have blamed each other for the rise in crime levels. The DNA leader has blamed both of them - branding them "failures".

Behind the rhetoric, angry faces and gesticulations, claim, counter claim and overused insults like "abysmal failure", what is their answer to beating crime?

What has caused this spike in crime? Do the politicians even have an answer?

Crime exists in every part of the world where there is civilisation, the same way that certain weak drinks are present at almost every party adults go to. If those drinks get spiked, there's chaos.

At the rate the country is going and with the world watching through their TVs, computer screens and smart phones, it is only a matter of time before this rising crime leads to the wrong kind of tourist being held up during a nature tour, robbed on Cable Beach or attacked with a cutlass in their hotel room on a Family Island. A celebrity or a police chief from another country.

Crime is one of, if not the biggest, concern for the voters going into the May 7 elections and the three leaders and their respective teams know it.

In 14 days, more than 170,000 voters will go to the polls to select a new member of parliament for the 38 constituencies up for grabs.

Marking an X next to the name of an DNA, FNM, PLP or independent candidate will ultimately decide which party will be the next government for the next five years.

How will the three leaders and their parties, DNA, FNM and PLP, match up and overcome the Goliath that is crime?

The FNM and the DNA have revealed their manifestos for public viewing so far and looking at both documents, crime is the top priority. The PLP has been very vocal about their plans for fighting crime.

The FNM, hoping to regain the trust of Bahamians, has released its full manifesto and addresses crime as a part of its "National Security Strategic Plan", Tough on Crime and Tough on the Causes of Crime.

The FNM before outlining its plan, stated what it had done and what it thinks is the root cause of the crime surge: "Trade and abuse" of illegal narcotics over the past several decades.

The party, according to its manifesto said it had "modernized and better equipped the Royal Bahamas Police Force, passed and implemented tough anti-crime legislation and improved conditions in our legal, judicial and prison systems."

The party, in its document goes on: "To complement these efforts, we have also worked with educators, social workers and other citizens to implement new prevention programmes"

Going forward, the FNM's goal is to have a "modern, efficient crime fighting machine," through a "properly manned, trained and equipped" police force "to prevent crime where possible, detect crime when it occurs and bring those responsible to account before the courts."

The FNM proposes to hire an extra 250 officers; specifically train officers from remote Family Islands to serve their communities; combine technology with community policing to strengthen crime prevention; ensure continued funding for police; create more police patrols and increase presence in neighbourhoods.

The party proposes "continued and adequate funding" of the judiciary, to complete the construction of the judicial complex and Supreme Court, and the appointment of a resident magistrate in Andros.

They are also seeking to empower magistrates, "in appropriate cases", to use their power to implement "alternative sentencing and restorative programmes to reduce the amount of non-violent juveniles returning to prison."

The FNM plans to "accelerate prison reform initiatives" to rehabilitate non-violent offenders so they are able to be reintegrated into society.

Weekly drug testing will be introduced, and a remand centre will be constructed in Grand Bahama.

The Defence Force is also a part of the FNM's plan to fight crime. It wants to increase manpower on the force by 180 and introduce a reserves list similar to that of the police force.

The Defence Force is also expected to receive additional equipment in the form of sea and aircraft to help in the fight against illegal migration, poaching and drug smuggling.

While not as detailed at the governing party, the DNA's The Vision 2012 and Beyond manifesto lists crime as the first issue to be tackled after the election.

The party will focus on six areas:

■Enforce laws without political interference.

■Support the development and strengthening of a Bahamian criminal justice system that works.

■Develop a comprehensive and research-proven system to rehabilitate offenders, including academic programmes, and work readiness and skill building programmes.

■Commit necessary finance and people to the Royal Bahamas Police Force and the Royal Bahamas Defence Force to ensure "they are in the best position to be effective in their roles".

■Ensure the enforcement of capital punishment and that bail is not granted for accused murderers.

There are some similarities between the FNM and the DNA's plans.

Both parties are looking to strengthen the capacity of the judiciary and the various law enforcement agencies. They also recognise the importance of reforming and educating prisoners to reduce the number of repeat offenders.

The similarities end there.

The DNA has publicly stated its intention to carry out the death penalty. There is no mention of capital punishment in the FNM's manifesto.

The FNM government removed the Magistrates Courts' discretion to grant bail for murder and other serious offences. However, persons eligible who can prove they should to be granted bail can be given a bond by the Supreme Court.

Is the DNA proposing to support this move? Regarding the death penalty, how will the DNA get past the ruling of the Privy Council, based in the UK?

Mr McCartney answered this question last Wednesday.

"We're making sure that if it goes to the Privy Council, we'll have the laws in place that will force their hands when there is a conviction on murder, that the death penalty will be enforced."

What is the PLP's stance on capital punishment?

The country will find out when the party releases its manifesto for the country's 170,000 voters to see.

People will then be better placed to cast their votes in the ongoing fight against this particular Goliath.

April 23, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

Many younger voters are hungry for change and may take a chance on Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA).... ...Many older voters don’t have the confidence in the party

A vision for The Bahamas

By Erica Wells
Guardian Managing Editor
erica@nasguard.com

In the opening pages of the Democratic National Alliance’s (DNA) document outlining its plans for The Bahamas, the party’s leader, Branville McCartney, promises that his DNA will recast the “national vision” for the country.

This vision, he said, is the vision that was first cast in 1967 and 1973.  It was a vision that “included all Bahamians”.

According to McCartney, “44 years after majority rule and 38 years after independence, our nation has lost sight of this vision to create a Bahamian society based on equality of opportunity and a collective effort to ensure that our people get the best that the country and the world has to offer.  The vision has been derailed and we have been led off course.”

The DNA, said McCartney, is able to recast that vision because it is steeped in an understanding of the past and is focused on the opportunities of the future.  The document meant to convince voters of this – Vision 2012 and Beyond – was the result of collaboration between the DNA and the Bahamian public “at large”, said McCartney.

“It reflects what you care about deeply: the economy and diversification of the economy, crime, education, youth development and other issues which are plaguing the country,” he said.  “It also reflects the notion that these issues, when addressed with thoughtful ingenuity and skill, have the potential to revolutionize the country.”

Like all written plans, the proof is in the execution of what is outlined.  And whether the DNA will get the chance to execute those plans after the May 7 general election remains to be seen.

While the DNA was the first to release its plan for the country and promise to voters, (the Free National Movement released its plan shortly after and the Progressive Liberal Party is expected to release its document this week) voters have little time to digest the DNA’s or the other parties’ agendas before the election.

The vision

The DNA’s vision touches on key areas of national importance: crime, healthcare, jobs and the economy, education, immigration, youth, sports and culture, Grand Bahama, Family Island development, good governance, tourism, labor and industrial relations, and energy and the environment.

The promises are not expanded upon and there is no detail provided on how the plan will meet its objectives, which has been typical of these types of political publications.

Some political observers give McCartney’s DNA credit for having some of the best ideas for national development of the three major parties.  Others dismiss some of the ideas as unrealistic and in some cases unmanageable.

For example, under the heading of crime, the DNA’s idea to develop a comprehensive and research proven system to rehabilitate offenders, inclusive of academic programs and work readiness and skills building programs, is a commendable one.

But the DNA also promises to enforce capital punishment and ensure that bail is not granted for accused murderers.  Given the Privy Council’s rulings that directly impact the capacity for any government to carry out capital punishment, and the right to a fair and speedy trial afforded to all Bahamians under the constitution, it will be extremely difficult for a DNA or any other government to enforce and ensure such actions.

Other promises hinge greatly on available finances, at a time when it’s difficult for many to see where the money will come from.  The deficit is at $4.2 billion and the economy is still struggling to regain ground from a worldwide recession.

Take for example, the promise to reduce class sizes by “building modern school facilities and enhancing existing school facilities”; and to increase infrastructure funding for the redevelopment and expansion of road networks, healthcare facilities and airports in the Family Islands.

The party also promises to balance the budget within five years.

While the DNA is ambitious in its plans for the country and it should be commended for its aspirations, it must be careful not to play to the gallery and risk losing the trust of more sober minds and eventually the public at large.

Perhaps the most progressive portion of the DNA’s Vision is under the heading of Good Governance, where the party promises to:

• Amend the constitution to limit the powers of the prime minister.

• Enact legislation to limit the length of service of the prime minister to two terms.

• Enact legislation to cause the recall of members of Parliament if a majority of their constituents are dissatisfied with their performance.

• Establish fixed constituencies, which can only be changed according to international criteria.

• Establish the Office of the Ombudsman to serve as the watchdog of the government for the people.

The DNA has also promised to create a much needed code of conduct for public officials.

Among its other major promises are a focus on economic diversification, to establish a basic healthcare plan, to hold a referendum on whether children born in The Bahamas to illegal immigrants should have the right to apply for citizenship, and to regularize generation property.

A young party

The DNA is a young party.  On Election Day, it will be five days short of its one-year anniversary.  It has attempted to brand itself as a party that is making a bold statement.  A party made up of a new breed of young Bahamian politicians, entrepreneurs, professionals and blue-collar workers.

Its leader has relatively little experience in frontline politics.  Most Bahamians first heard of him in 2007 when he ran under the Free National Movement’s banner for Bamboo Town.  Less than three years later he would resign from Hubert Ingraham’s Cabinet, where he sat as a junior minister.

His decision to leave the party left many baffled; however, others gave him credit for “standing up” to Ingraham.

McCartney has been heavily criticized on some of his positions taken on immigration, and more recently the marital rape law.  His statement that a Marital Rape Bill would not be passed under his administration was seen as a major misstep in his campaign, and it could have put off potential female voters.  The party was forced into damage control mode at a time when its efforts should have been focused on the election campaign.

The party will field a candidate in every one of the 38 constituencies, and while many political observers seriously doubt the party leader’s prediction that the DNA will win the May 7 general election, the party does have some support.

A Public Domain/Nassau Guardian poll conducted in March indicated that the DNA had a total support base of 21.7 percent.  According to the poll, the FNM and PLP were in a virtual dead heat.  The FNM with 34.2 percent and the PLP with 30.3 percent.

The 2007 general election results show just how close the race this time around could be.  Although the FNM captured 23 of the 41 seats, with 49.86 percent it did not capture the popular vote.  The PLP captured 18 seats and 47.02 percent of the vote.  The number of votes between the PLP and FNM was just 3,905.

This sets up a potentially interesting scenario if the DNA manages to win a few seats in the general election, and manages to upset the balance of power on Election Day.

What is attractive about the DNA is the simple fact that it is an alternative to what have been mainstays in Bahamian politics for so long — Hubert Ingraham and PLP Leader Perry Christie.  Its weakness mainly centers on the lack of experience of its leader and the party’s candidates.

Many younger voters are hungry for change and may take a chance on McCartney and his DNA.  Many older voters don’t have the confidence in the party.

But whatever the result on May 7, McCartney and his DNA have shown that a third party can get support.  The question is, can it get enough support?

Apr 23, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham says: ...Bain and Grants Town MP Dr. Bernard Nottage failed to use more than half of the $100,000 allowance Members of Parliament were given access to for constituency projects... ...In Centreville and Farm Road, during the height of the global recession ...their MP Perry Gladstone Christie couldn’t get around to spending his full allocation of money

Ingraham says Nottage failed to access full constituency allowance

By Krystel Rolle
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com

Bain and Grants Town MP Dr. Bernard Nottage failed to use more than half of the $100,000 allowance members of Parliament were given access to for constituency projects, according to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.

Ingraham previously made a similar revelation about Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Perry Christie.

The prime minister reiterated that claim at a Free National Movement (FNM) rally on Wednesday.

“When we made available $100,000 to each MP to spend to improve their constituency, most MPs got to work for their people,” Ingraham said.

“In Centreville and Farm Road, during the height of the global recession, their MP Perry Gladstone Christie couldn’t get around to spending his full allocation of money.

“He left more than one half of that money unspent. His sad excuse is he was still planning a whole year after the money was made available. I tell you he’s never ready.”

Ingraham added: “The same thing could be said for B.J. Nottage. He couldn’t figure out what to spend his money on either so he left more than half of his money unspent. It seems Bain Town and Grants Town don’t need any small capital project.”

Christie acknowledged in 2010 that he had some difficulty with his constituency allowance.

He explained that after consultation with his constituents he was determining how best to spend the funds.

He said he had plans to expand three parks in the constituency and construct bathrooms at two of the parks.

Calls to Nottage were not answered up to press time last night.

Apr 21, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The very same Perry Christie who failed to fulfill his first duty as Prime Minister in 2002 ...can't condemn violence by his supporters ...or even get out his party's election platform in 2012," says Hubert Ingraham

'Late-Again Plp Criticised For Lacking A Manifesto

By CELESTE NIXON

Tribune Staff Reporter

cnixon@tribunemedia.net

#DESPITE continuing to talk and make promises, opposition leader Perry Christie has still not released his five-year platform, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham pointed out.

DESPITE continuing to talk and make promises, opposition leader Perry Christie has still not released his five-year platform, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham pointed out.

The FNM, by contrast, has already produced a hefty 2012-2017 manifesto, and the DNA has issued a 20-page preview version of its plan.

Speaking at an FNM rally in North Eleuthera Wednesday night, Mr Ingraham said: "The whole election campaign is only four weeks. With a quarter of the campaign behind us, the late-again PLP leader has yet to inform the Bahamian electorate on the details of his election platform.

"His campaign speeches and those of his candidates up to now have been filled with just one thing: Ingraham, Ingraham, Ingraham," the Prime Minister said.

The rally came one day after photographs surfaced of PLP supporters driving over an effigy of an FNM supporter, and Mr Ingraham asked why no one in the PLP has come forward to condemn the act.

He said: "They keep talking about their new plan to address crime. Have you heard anyone in the PLP condemn the symbolic killing of an FNM supporter yesterday?

"They plastered the effigy of an FNM supporter being rolled over by PLP adorned-vehicles in Golden Gates. Now that is an invitation to violence; not a call for peace and respect of the law."

Mr Ingraham said the lack of condemnation by Mr Christie proves nothing has changed in the PLP and that the opposition would only bring "disorganisation and dysfunction" if elected as the government.

"The very same man who failed to fulfill his first duty as Prime Minister in 2002 can't condemn violence by his supporters, or even get out his party's election platform in 2012," said Mr Ingraham.

"Doesn't that sound like nothing has changed?"

April 20, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

The Bahamian electorate ought to be mindful of the following words of President Thomas Jefferson: ...“To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt ...We must make our election between economy and liberty ...or profusion and servitude”

Economic and fiscal prudence: Ingraham vs. Christie

By Arinthia S. Komolafe

There is ongoing debate on the leadership attributes of the prime minister and leader of the Free National Movement (FNM), Hubert A. Ingraham, and the leader of the official opposition and Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), Perry G. Christie.  Leadership was the dominant theme of the FNM’s 2007 campaign and it is not surprising that the FNM has adopted the same modus operandi for its 2012 campaign.

The general position of the 21st century Bahamian electorate is one that rejects a leadership campaign in favor of a campaign that promotes plans to create jobs, reduce crime, address the immigration debacle and place the country on the path to economic prosperity.

Against this backdrop, it is imperative to state that a leader will be judged by and for successive generations based on his/her ability to, among other things, manage the economy in a manner that balances economic prudence, socio-economic expectations and infrastructural development.  A review of the budget communications for fiscal years 2002-2012 and comparative analysis of the stewardship of our economy by the Christie and Ingraham administrations is important as we go into the 2012 general election.

Christie administration (2002–2007)

Upon assuming office in May 2002 following a landslide victory at the polls, the Christie administration was faced with multiple challenges.  In the aftermath of two consecutive Ingraham-led terms from 1992-2002, The Bahamas was in recovery mode following a blacklisting by the Financial Action Task Force and the backlash of the 9/11 terrorists attacks in the United States which had weakened our main industries of tourism and financial services.

These realities coupled with a burgeoning national debt in excess of $2.1 billion, a debt-to-GDP ratio of 37 percent and a growing deficit of 3.7 percent, would ultimately limit the Christie administration’s ability to implement many of its proposed policies and programs, least among them National Health Insurance.  The administration would proceed to execute austere measures and engineer an aggressive economic policy to improve the economy of the country and maintain deficit levels.

At the onset, the Christie administration recalled a US$125 million loan incurred by the previous Ingraham-led administration that had a four-year term and imposed heavy servicing costs.  As a result, a US$200 million bond attracting a lower interest rate and extending the life of the loan was issued.

Over its five-year period in office, the administration borrowed approximately $640 million to meet is annual budget requirements and aid in its revenue shortfall.  The administration invested in social programs, such as urban renewal, carried out what is arguably the most ambitious housing program in Bahamian history with the building of more than 1,400 homes and allocated funds to the consistent repatriation of illegal immigrants.  Further, the administration chose not to increase taxes, thereby saving Bahamians additional hardship in a depressed economy and implemented austere measures in budget allocations to ministries.

This policy decision as expected, negatively impacted government revenue and curbed expenditure.  However, the administration turned the economy around by securing multiple anchor projects for improvements in infrastructure and job opportunities resulting in an increase in foreign direct investments (FDI) of approximately $240 million in 2002 to an excess of $880 million in 2007.

This enabled The Bahamas under the Christie administration to increase external reserves to a record in excess of $690 million from $370 million in 2002.  Unemployment figures fell from 9.1 percent in 2002 to 7.9 percent in 2007, accounting for approximately 20,000 jobs created.

Ultimately, the Christie administration was able to achieve social, economic and infrastructural development in challenging times that called for austerity.

Ingraham administration (2007–2012)

The Ingraham administration was greeted with multiple FDIs, a national debt of approximately $2.4 billion, a reduced deficit and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 35 percent when it took office in 2007.  In its Manifesto 2007 promise, the administration had committed to deficit reduction and hoped to achieve this feat and reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio to a low of 30 percent by 2012.

Faced with favorable economic conditions and a projected growth rate of 4.5 percent, the Ingraham administration’s first and second budgets were generous.  Allocations to most ministries were increased significantly over and above allocations in previous fiscal years.  However, The Bahamas’ tourism and financial services industries would become negatively impacted by the global economic downturn.

Over the ensuing fiscal years, the Ingraham administration witnessed a decline in revenues and consequently relied upon the headroom it met when entering office to significantly increase its borrowing and make up for revenue shortfalls.  In addition, the administration carried out perhaps the most aggressive and controversial fiscal policy in Bahamian history.  Tax increases by the administration adversely impacted lower and middle income earners and Bahamian businesses.  Private schools, charitable and College of The Bahamas subsidies were reduced in an already depressed economy.

Confronted with reduced revenue and only remnants of FDIs negotiated by the Christie administration, the administration seemed to pay the price for its “Stop, Review and Cancel” policy for FDI projects left on the table by the Christie administration, which Standard & Poor’s noted affected investor confidence in The Bahamas.  The administration would later seek to address its revenue shortfall with the controversial sale of the state-owned telecommunications company, Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to British firm Cable & Wireless and the reduction of the prime and discount rates lowered the administration’s debt servicing cost.

The challenges faced by the Ingraham administration were great and as such required prudent fiscal and economic planning.  Caught off-guard by the global recession and with no real or robust economic policy, the Bahamian economy has suffered a great deal.  Unemployment levels have risen to more than 15 percent, foreclosures are at record levels and the government had oversight of more than $100 million in cost overruns for the road improvement project.  The national debt has doubled in excess of $4 billion, deficit levels exceed eight percent and the debt-to-GDP ratio exceeds 60 percent (more than the recommended rate of less than 40 percent).

Conclusion

In the final analysis, a review of both administrations’ performance in managing the economy suggests that the Ingraham administration lacked a plan to improve economic conditions in the country as evidenced by its reactionary fiscal policy.  The Christie administration, on the other hand, despite being faced with multiple challenges throughout its term charted a course that set The Bahamas on the road to economic recovery.

It is difficult to see how another Ingraham administration would differ from the current one being faced with the same challenge and appearing to wait on a slowly recovering United States economy.  It is fair to state that a similar strategy will be deployed.  The Christie-led PLP has indicated that it will adopt similar policies (as deployed between 2002 and 2007) to restore economic prosperity to The Bahamas if elected.

The Bahamian people ought to be mindful of the following words of President Thomas Jefferson: “To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.  We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude”.

The facts do not lie and we must choose economy and liberty over profusion and servitude.  The choice is ours to make.

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

Apr 19, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

In the 50th year of women's suffrage in The Bahamas, Bahamian women will hold the power at the polls in this 2012 general election season ...as There are 20,000 more of them registered to vote than men

Woman Power At The Polls

By NOELLE NICOLLS and JEFFARAH GIBSON

Tribune Features

IN THE 50th year of women's suffrage, Bahamian women will hold the power at the polls.

"There are 20,000 more women registered to vote than men. Women are going to decide this election," said Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham at the 'Red Splash' Free National Movement rally on Easter weekend.

The right political pitch could make the difference, according to some observers, who claim women voters tend to have community-based concerns when it comes to politics, and are more interested in "collaboration and consensus building" in government, as opposed to the highly partisan emphasis that exists during campaign cycles.

"I found that the female voters across party lines were first and foremost concerned about how one as a candidate would impact the community.

"They were always concerned about the quality of community life and the kind of leadership one was going to offer as a partner in the development of outreach programmes to improve the quality of life of the community," said former member of parliament for Fort Charlotte, Alfred Sears, who recently retired from front-line politics.

"I found that women were prepared to cross party lines if they were convinced of your sincerity in being a reliable community partner. I find they were more willing to cross party lines and support you," said Mr Sears.

That women are outpacing men in voter registration appears consistent with trends in education, where women outpace men at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels.

Minister of the Environment Earl Deveaux, former member of parliament for Marathon, said women are advancing in many professional categories, particularly in service industries. Although the progress has not translated into broad penetration in traditionally male-dominated industries like construction, commercial fishing, and manufacturing, he said there is a "subliminal suggestion amongst some males, particularly unskilled males, that women are taking over".

Without statistical evidence to consider, he said the emerging gender dynamics hold "potential risks for the society", and the trend is worth serious consideration by private citizens and leaders.

"What happens as people look for spouses and lifetime relationships and there is not parity of experience, education and points of view? What happens to that society if you have imbalance.

My suggestion is that if you are aware of a growing trend and it suggests from other experiences that there is a potential for conflict, then it is likely that the same result will emerge if you do not seek to address it," said Mr Deveaux.

He said women have made "remarkable achievements" in society, considering just 50 years ago they voted for the first time. That some people feel threatened by this progress is cause for contemplation, he said.

As a candidate in New Providence, Mr Deveaux said he found women articulated a greater focus on the unemployed, and opportunities for their children.

"Women were looking for opportunities for their children, most particularly their male children who they did not want to fall prey to unemployment and gangs. I encountered that repeatedly, so they wanted to hear what I had to say about what would happen to their son," said Mr Deveaux.

When he was a candidate in North Andros and the Berry Islands, he said it was clear that the empowerment of women resulted in the empowerment of the community.

"I found that amongst the unemployed, women represented a significant percentage, but I also found that where I could help the women, the penetration of the efforts were far greater.

"If a women got a job you immediately saw an impact in the community; there was an improvement in children's nutrition, home repairs.

"That was a visible manifestation of the impact of helping women," said Mr Deveaux.

April 17, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International